AQQJThhh 5-10-20 high only. Both villains are super loose and spewy. I have about 1200 and so does V1. V2 has heaps

Pre: V1 opens utg 75, V2 calls on button. Hero raises to 330 from sb and both call.

Flop (1020) : 665ddh
Hero..
Spr is a little under 1

Looks like a math problem for PPT - wonder what your equity looks like vs reasonable ranges. I would think you have enough to jam in the sense that they will fold their equity some % of the time and not realize it, but I'm curious what PPT says. Wish the free one was still available.

Preflop, how you plan to react to a 4-bet shove? Your 3! seems risky vs. unless we're comfortable stacking off with a pair below aces and an oversuit in our hand. The ace blocker somewhat mitigates the risk of getting agaisnt AA here but not entirely. They seem like they might overplay decent KKxxx.


I'd much rather 3! for balance with T9865 ds or something, not QQ.

I don't mind the 3! against villains as described, even though in theory V1 should be tighter opening utg. Can mix in some flats pre as well.

On the flop I prefer check evaluate, most Vs play paired boards pretty face up. Either of these donks could have 55/6x or diamonds+sd that have us in really bad shape. If flop checks through betting turn becomes more attractive however and I'd probably jam at that point.

In theory we are probably supposed to jam this flop since we can be called by fd/sd but I think in practice we are mainly getting called by better.

OK, fair enough. So I assume you're calling off if V1 all-but-shoves (sorry I called it a shove above) to 1140? Given reads I can see the logic; the drawback would be if V1 is a maniac for small amounts but more rational for stacks.

The problem for us is they are super loose so this board can easily hit their wide ranges. I am not thrilled getting it in versus a shove from either tbh, would be inclined to check fold. Heads up I am much more likely to go with it.

Sorry for my lack of clarity. I'm still asking about preflop. You call a PS4B from V1 (aka effectively a shove) right? While we're at it, what if V1 calls and V2 backraise pots?

This is a very bad hand to get it in with versus a normal 4! range. But once I 3! and put in over 1/3 of my stack it's going to be hard for me to fold however since we are priced in.

I don't understand why we are bloating this pot OOP pre with a hand like this to begin with? The support for that seems to be because the V's are 'loose and spewy', but if that is the case I would rather take advantage of that post flop when I have more control and playability, then with a hand like this preflop. This seems like a flat pre all day long imo. Now we have better options postflop and are not playing our hand face up with a 665 flop.

What range would you 3 bet here? I mean this has to be a top 8% hand I'd imagine - if villain is going to limp a wide range and call every 3 bet, I would think this is a great hand to 3b esp with how shallow stacks play postflop.

I must be missing something, because this seems like a great 3bet hand, even OOP, vs loose, spewy players.

Loose spewy players are even a little positionally aware and do wake up with big hands from time to time!

I think the 3! squeeze is totally standard as we are short stacked and vs spewtards. If we were like 200bb+ deep I'd say it starts to become dicey being single triple suited.

I'm surprised by this equity, thought it would be closer. Seems we are just wrecked here. I gave the button 60% as well and it didn't change much. Looks like it's just a x/f unless I input something wrong? In game I probably would have just jammed lol, but looking at this says could be a punt.



@pokerfan65 the PPT is still free until December, he updated the license. Also, you are right its about 8-9% top of range.

AAxxx and good to great hands without pairs. Obviously pat straights (rundowns) are premium, probably regardless of suitedness; many bottom-gapped rundowns are also good enough-- the more broken, then higher and/or higher suited it needs to be.

I don't know the math in PLO5 but I assume hands run closer than in classic Omaha. In PLO4 overplaying smaller pairs is one of the few ways to get yourself in trouble preflop against likely AAxx. Even something absurd with four live cards like T943r is 40% against AA72 with one nut suit, whereas KKQ2 ss is 31% (without the flush suit dominated, of course -- then it's 26%).

So even against an opponent who opens wide, but mostly only 4! aces, QQxx wouldn't be a good choice to 3!. You can get to any a LAGgy 3-bet frequency with unpaired hands and have little problem calling the 4-bet.

Maybe it's different in PLO5; teach me.

This all comes down to the type of V's here. I don't think you can rely as much on charts and other online tools to assess the best way to approach positions like this when playing against 'Loose and spewy' players like this as this can be very dependent on the game and players involved. Loose and spewy players can be vastly different as well, so it is hard to assess without knowing more about how they handle the later streets and different spots. Do these loose and spewy players splash around and just call down a lot, do they overplay draws, do they stab at pots a lot when they miss or don't have draws, do they have the ability to exploit some of your tendencies, etc.

With that said, I have almost no 3bet range here as I am flatting almost everything. Probably 3! top 2%-3% only. If they are truly 'loose and spewy', they are not folding a lot, so you are not moving them off of a lot of pots, and hence need to make hands to make money as there are not a lot of PLO5 hands that are completely dominated by the top 5%-10% of preflop holdings. Just like the example given, they are most likely not folding 78 with medium flush draw types of hands here and that can be problematic to play against OOP. There is no reason to bloat the pot OOP and get yourself in a lot of flipping situations when your skill level is so much better then theirs. Your edge comes from outplaying them post flop, getting them to commit with inferior draws, and getting them to commit when drawing dead sometimes in my experience, not by bloating the pot OOP and giving them the opportunity to essential flip with only small edges our way.

However, if they try to exploit that preflop strategy, then you definitely have to open up some. That usually gives you more of an advantage as they have more trouble readjusting their game once you make the adjustments to theirs. This is just my experience in the PLO5 games I play in, but again what I see as 'loose and spewy' may be different from what others see.

I think I agree with all this. However -- this is going to sound pedantic but really is a point of learning for me -- there's always one reason to bloat the pot OOP, namely reducing SPR, right?

My sense is this is more of a concern when the skill gap is narrower, so that a decent player (even if we're slightly better) will have an edge over us when they're IP. In this case though it sounds like the skill gap is immense and that we expect to have to show down to win, and we expect to get paid if we make a good hand. So that more strongly argues for a high SPR. This is especially true because the 3-bet SPR is going to be around 2, which pretty much closes the postflop skill gap since our opponents are probably right to chase stupid flushes and two pair and low sets and whatever.

Please correct this if wrong.

This hand is most standard 3b and standard x/f on flop.

Having no 3b range pre at all is just weak. It means you're scared to play OoP in big pots and you're not reducing your opponents EV. If I have people at my table who don't 3b OoP it means I get to open A LOT wider.

If you only 3b 2-3% you shouldn't 3b at all - that can't be the correct strategy. The point of 3bing is to build a pot against inferior holdings - if they're going to call a wide range and call every 3b, then we want to 3b wider to build the pot up. I don't mind bloating the pot OOP with hands like this - the idea is we're going to flop much better than them the majority of the time and they're going to be put in a tough spot playing for stacks with weak hands. Yes it increases variance but our EV increases as well - not 3bing will lower variance but also lower your winrate. I do think preflop in PLO is largely unsolved, especially in PLO5/6 - I don't think equities alone can dictate how to play preflop, but more so playability and ability to dominate inferior hands post.

There's a lot about this reasoning that is good. The flaw imo is -- now we've gotten called twice and engineered an SPR of under 1. (If we'd gotten a fold that would be terrific and should tip us toward 3! wide, but that seems fanciful vs. this lineup.)

How tough a spot can it be for them when there's only one more street to play?

We no doubt have a preflop equity advantage with superb QQ, but I'd imagine it's not that huge even against a wide range. We can forgo this small preflop edge for a huge postflop edge when we flop well.
Exactly, but this seems to argue against putting ourselves in an SPR=1 spot where raw equities are much more important.

I'm still agnostic between never/rarely 3! and adding good non-paired hands to our liberal 3! range. Either can work, I think. But I really want a possibility of five live cards if I have to call a 4 bet effectively all-in. (Maybe this matters less in PLO5, I dunno.)

This hand has so many good components it’s a slam dunk 3b.

Yeh I mean this spot isn't a great example as it's effectively 60 bb or so playing 10/20, so there's not much going on postflop. Even in this spot we decide to 3b which forces the villains to play for stacks on the flop - if we just call preflop our opponent makes smaller mistakes postflop. Granted this was a rough flop for us but overall we should flop better than our opponent thus they are more likley to make mistakes. Furthermore if we don't 3b hands like this then we might as well not 3b at all given we'll be too face up 3bing like 3%. Can't imagine that's a good strategy.

No it's not. In fact its a slamdunk call, especially in high rake environment