AKJ5 - Small Stakes Pot Limit Omaha - Small Stakes PL Omaha Forum

Two Plus Two Forums Poker Strategy Omaha

AKJ5

Post Reply Subscribe

...

06-10-2023 , 01:26 AM

OmahaDonk

Pooh-Bah

Join Date: Apr 2011 Posts: 4,936

1-2-5 at Wynn. 1k eff. Villain seems aggro and button clicky but we haven’t been here long.

AxKdJd5x on btn

Utg limp 5, co iso 20, we call utg calls

Flop (60) : QT4ddd
Check he cbets 20 we call

Turn (100) : 9x
He bets 60 we call

River (220) : 7x
He checks

Quote

06-10-2023 , 08:35 AM

pokerfan655

old hand

Join Date: Jun 2012 Posts: 1,387

I think this is debatable even calling preflop - I guess since we're OTB and deep it works but marginal not having a nut suit. Not sure what the question is - you get to the river with the second nuts and he checks to you. I would think his calling range is weakish flushes, QQ/TT - maybe bet something like 140.

Quote

06-10-2023 , 10:42 AM

wazz

Carpal \'Tunnel

Join Date: Jun 2006 Posts: 14,755

Preflop is not at all marginal. Please don't fold this, not 200bb deep, not even 100bb deep. Would prefer a 3b over a fold.

River is difficult, particularly having the J blocker, meaning the best flush he can call with is 98. I. E. We have to be capable of being 3 streets for value with an 8 high flush before he can include worse hands than his for value. Thus be likely (should) fold worse hands than yours. On top of that, there are lots of 2p / set + Ad blocker combos he can have against which we win by checking and lose by betting. Assuming your plan is to bet fold, which it shoukd be without a solid read. So checking is probably best.

Quote

06-10-2023 , 03:39 PM

monikrazy

Carpal \'Tunnel

Join Date: Sep 2009 Posts: 28,056

Maybe bet small to induce a bluff-raise, I have a hard time thinking villain checks nut flush given his description and sizing on prior streets.

We do block both worse flushes and nut straight that can call though, so disciplined check is totally fine.

Quote

06-10-2023 , 06:45 PM

Round of 6

journeyman

Join Date: Oct 2022 Posts: 374

Wait why are we checking? We have number 2 right?

I find it highly unlikely villain has nuts here so I'm betting. I can get on board betting small to induce a check-raise. Or betting tiny to get a call by something worse than flush.

I'm just never checking here

Quote

06-12-2023 , 10:41 AM

answer20

Carpal \'Tunnel

Join Date: Feb 2013 Posts: 10,857

Why do you call it an 'iso' PF .. it's just an open?

Yes, .. Please don't fold this OTB and/or consider your own iso/squeeze amount.

I like a bet, but what's the right number to 'make sure' that we don't get raise-bluffed by AA or even the A blocker .. IE .. worse hand? If we bet 80 then a pot bet becomes 460 and we have to call off 380 to win 760 .. is he bluffing 33% of the time or more against when he just flats the 80 with set/straight?

If I've just sat down I don't mind showing this hand to set a 'can't be too careful' image. GL

Quote

06-13-2023 , 01:13 AM

franklymydearirais

journeyman

Join Date: Mar 2023 Posts: 213

fold pre, with the nut suit it would be fine. clear river bet.

"Why do you call it an 'iso' PF .. it's just an open?"

it's not an open because of the limper. open means to be the first player to voluntarily put money into the pot, and is short for open raise. hence the proper term for raising a limper is 'iso' for 'isolation raise', although this does not imply anything about the quality of hand we are raising with.

Quote

06-13-2023 , 09:09 AM

answer20

Carpal \'Tunnel

Join Date: Feb 2013 Posts: 10,857

OK .. semantics .. I've never considered a limp an open and by your own definition the word 'raise' is there. A limp in PLO is not a raise in my mind, but I can be aware of the nomenclature going forward. A limp in NL is not a raise either.

I've been to lots of auctions and while poker has blinds (or minimum bids) the auctioneer always asks for an opening bid.

So if you have 2-5 limpers which one of them are you isolating when you raise? Or don't you care as long as you get some folds? I've never thought of isolating limpers, only 'raisers'.

Not a big deal, just a different application of the words to me. GL

Quote

06-13-2023 , 09:12 AM

OmahaDonk

Pooh-Bah

Join Date: Apr 2011 Posts: 4,936

Quote:

Originally Posted by answer20

By definition an iso is when you raise after 1 or more limpers.

Your definition is a 3b.

Quote

06-13-2023 , 09:56 AM

#10

wazz

Carpal \'Tunnel

Join Date: Jun 2006 Posts: 14,755

Yeah, I've noticed some creeping of definitions whereby someone opens and someone else calls 3betting an iso, and thinks that's what an iso is, but that's not what it was to begin with, because you isolate the limper by raising.

Quote

06-13-2023 , 11:10 AM

#11

answer20

Carpal \'Tunnel

Join Date: Feb 2013 Posts: 10,857

Well .. then how do I punish a limper(s)? I've been punishing them by opening at a high frequency .. lol.

Could be the 'uneducated' stream announcers are leading us down the wrong terminology path.

I don't think we should use the term 'squeeze' unless there's at least one caller behind a raise/bet .. but one could also be isolating via a cold raise.

We typically say we are not in the intent business, but I think some of these terms are dependent on the goal of the Player at the time.

We'll get Bart Hansen on it with a 'non-hand' call-in discussion. GL

Quote

06-16-2023 , 09:52 AM

#12

Mench

Pooh-Bah

Join Date: Mar 2006 Posts: 4,037

Check back, let him show first, establish tight image, exploit said image later on.

Quote

Post Reply Subscribe

...