So, we have a 3 handed game against two fish that are both straddling almost every hand. BB is super fishy and will easily stack off with top pair + on almost any board (not a 3 flush). SB is also very aggressive and will bet draws hard. He does not need a set to lead out like this.

Not sure why I got frisky with my pre-flop open here as this hand happened a couple of weeks ago. I think this is a mistake, but not sure how big since it is double-suited with some decent connectivity. Once it comes back to me I think the call is correct since it was such a small 3 bet.

Ok, onto the action...

GG Poker - $0.50 PL Hi (6 max) - Omaha Hi - 3 players
Hand converted by PokerTracker 4

Hero (BTN): 173.54 BB
SB: 137.66 BB
BB: 100 BB

SB posts SB 0.5 BB, BB posts BB 1 BB, SB straddles 1.5 BB, BB straddles 3 BB

Pre Flop: (pot: 6 BB) Hero has 9 4 J T

Hero raises to 14 BB, SB calls 12 BB, BB raises to 27.86 BB, Hero calls 13.86 BB, SB calls 13.86 BB

Flop: (83.58 BB, 3 players) T 6 3
SB bets 83.58 BB, BB calls 72.14 BB and is all-in, Hero ??

Basically, what would we estimate hero's equity to be here and is it enough to peel. SB has about 26BB behind after betting.

If opening JT94ds otb is a mistake then stop poker, I want to get off

Postflop I would guess you have the best hand something like 10-20% of the time. And that you have enough equity against their ranges what with your 2 bdfds and bdsd.

You are right, and I was right; this should be a raise 100% of the time pre-flop.

edit: I thought this hand/spot was slightly more interesting than some of the hands I've seen posted recently. Maybe not, though, it did not feel trivial at the table.

Pre standard. On flop I find a snug fold 3 ways but seems close.

Open smaller? We're playing 30-40bb stacks.

Agreed with rfi, less sure about defending this combo vs cc and 3bet, despite being ip, but that's probably just me.

Flop seems like a fold. Despite 25% equity being very close to peel and see the turn, there's so little left I'm not sure we can make meaningful choices thereafter other than "call it off."

A weak top pair & some sketchy backdoor draws .. it's a fold.

Especially against players like you describe. Why run the math trying to get a few % EV when you're sure they're inevitably going to put it all in bad later.

Exactly this. No reason to get involved if you feel confident enough that you will be able to stack off with them in a 70/30-80/20+ hand in the near future. Wait for a better spot imo.

I never considered that and I think there is definitely merit to this. I pot pre-flop all for my entire range in all spots and just robotically did the same here.


I also like my rfi and the 3-bet was pretty small so I think it's close but I'm fine with calling here IP aginst these two guys. If this is a solid player in SB and another solid 3-betting from bb I'm going to dump it here.


Not sure about this, hence the thread.

Good thoughts though - thank you.

Really? I think it's much closer than you give it credit for as all of those draws can add up to a lot of equity.

Because this is poker and it's a statistical game based on math and EV? +EV is +EV, I don't know when the next spot is going to come or if it is going to come, but I have this spot in front of me and poker edge is based on making the right decisions and if this spot is +EV I want to play it.

Also, this is how I get better at poker. I go through these marginal situations and I second guess my first instincts and hopefully in the future, I have a better feel for my equity in various spots having worked through it.

I think waiting for them to "put it all in bad later" is really bad poker, although, if I was under rolled for this situation and wanted to minimize variance I can understand your point as this is surely a high variance low ev situation, but that doesn't automatically make it a fold. If this was the situation, and I was under rolled, I probably should leave the game when they continually straddle it up like this.

See my other response - I think this is a really bad way to play poker. Maybe this is because I used to play Limit Holdem where you are basically always pushing small edges for small bets and need to maximize all situations. You have to push small edges and I learned that to be solid poker. I should have switched to big bet poker back in the boom but I was resistant, but I still believe an edge is an edge and if this is +EV and I have the right bankroll then I should play on.

Pre is not an open. Everyone stop poker, Wazz wants to get off

The reason its not an open is because, as Munga points out, its 30bb poker. And this hand is not a good 30bb hand. Its the kind of hand that prefers deep stacks IP. It has no blockers to a 3b range and at 30bb getting 3b sucks. Luckily this donk doesnt 3b full pot so when he does its easy call given good price.

I might actually LIMP the hand pre (depending on villains tendencies). Limp to keep SPR deeper which this hand really wants.

As played, I would stack flop vs 1 all in but 2 im folding this combo. Will be choosing hands that are pair+gutter rather than a hand like this

Whether it prefers deeper stacks is irrelevant. AAKQds prefers deeper stacks too. I like an argument for raising smaller with range. We don't need it to be a good 30bb hand, we need it to be good enough, which given we're on the button vs fools, it is.

Disagree. I think stack size is extremely relevant. The fool 3bets and we're your playing a bloated pot multiway with a hand that doesn't like it so we've become the fools.

Limping in is way higher EV

I'm of course not saying stack sizes are irrelevant. The number of situations in which stack sizes are irrelevant to a decision in poker is basically {empty set}. That we can sometimes be 3b and have our SPR and therefore positional advantage reduced is a downside, but the extra EV we pick up when they call and then fold to our flop bet or call and then call it off drawing thin or even fold raggy crap that would beat us more than makes up for the benefits we get when we sometimes get to play a slightly deeper pot in position. You want people to make mistakes in big pots, not small ones. That's a large part of the reason for being aggressive in poker.

This is kind of like a rule of thumb which certainly has plenty of value. But ultimately the real driver of poker decisions is EV and sometimes people can lose more EV in smaller pots.

I'm actually second guessing my decision to limp in. I got a bit confused thinking it was only 1bb to limp. If its 30bb stacks and limping only cost 1bb then I still think limping is best play.

On second thoughts, I actually think folding is the play. We are in a game where people are straddling from the blinds - it's a lucrative game. I don't think the highest EV in this game is attacking those straddles with marginal holdings. I think the best response is to simply pot stronger hands that push a clear equity advantage.

I often wonder, when I see a 20/18 r/c what I consider to be a garbage hand oop, what on earth they're folding to have those stats and still play that hand in that spot, and I guess I have my answer

Getting involved in basic coin flips against weak players is a bad way to play PLO. Comparing LHE, where you are essentially risking one or two more BBs when pushing small edges, to PLO where your next decision may be for your entire stack when pushing a small edge is a bad way to play poker. I played fairly high limit LHE as well for many years, so I understand the thought process there and agree 100%. However, unless you are multi-tabling online for 8 hours a day, you will never get in enough hands to even out the variance of tiny edges against bad players.

Avoiding coin flips because you think you can get a bigger edge later is a recipe for a slow leak disaster. Doesn't matter whether you're playing 1M hands a month or 5 hands a year, unless you're on a short roll, EV is all that matters.

I'm completely fine raising smaller, but I can't imagine ever folding this on the button, let alone 3 handed. If you're not going to play this on the button, I feel like you should find a better table to play.

On the flop, I'm not folding given the stack sizes and the pot size, but I think it's a reasonable discussion; maybe I over-adjust to extremely short-handed tables.

Is this a private game and if not, how long do you expect it to stay 3 handed? There's no way it's not +ev to play this hand be it for a limp or a small raise (depending on if it has any fold equity for the SB to get it HU)

If the game can easily fill up soon then we're losing a lot of ev already there.

There's obviously other benefits of giving more action to recreational players.

Seems like a pretty standard GII spot against 2 players described as fishy in all-ready bloated pot.

Against some players it would be close, since sb will lead some hands that dominate our top pair and hero is probably underdog in the sidepot.

I think it's hard to advocate for a fold here without showing some work/assumptions, as i think calling tends to be a small mistake at worst where folding can be a gigantic error.

Re: pre, agree its a clear open and not sure on optimal sizing - 8-9 bb seems on point and leaves Hero a favorable SPR to defend in 3! pots

But even a min-raise would be way better than a limp or fold

I don't think I agree with this. if my marginally +EV is going to reopen the action and create a situation that can become -EV then yes I agree, and this is very much a leak I need to work on controlling, but the situation in the original hand is not that. It's a single decision that will basically end the hand and it has an answer and if that answer is +EV we should take it.

Very much on my mind, and also on my mind is to train my mind to be willing to accept these situations. I notice that I definitely make different decisions when I move to a new limit for shot taking and I hate it.

The bolded part I feel very strongly about. Folding can very easily become a MUCH larger mistake than calling.

I'd definitely open this, but I do agree that we have options other than pot.

Regarding the "wait for a better spot" argument, this isn't a tournament in 2008 where we have to worry about "our tournament life". If anything the fact that the chips (if we lose) will be going to someone we have a large edge over should make us more keen to get the money in (and run it once only).

I agree this is a fold, but you're leaving out the biggest reason: RAKE. Probably an ok open at PLO200 but not PLO100 or below.

Folding flop wouldn't be a huge mistake, but it would be a mistake.

Ok, how much equity? how this hand faces up against a top-pair-or-better + open-ended-or-better hands. (as you suggest are the minimum villains would play for stacks)

Run it through the calculator. I would be genuinely curious to know our equity.

It seems the point of observing player tendencies is to take advantage of them.

Based on your description of villains, they are willing to stack off really light, without heed for how dominated they should expect to be. Thanks to the magic of 6 combos every hand, you should not really have to wait long to get them to shovel money in against you when you have an unambiguously huge edge.

If you were playing against a larger pool of generically thoughtful players, then sure, I agree with pushing the marginal edges when they arrive.

But against villains as you described, why risk the variance? It is easy to be on the wrong side of enough 52% / 48% flips to exhaust your bankroll for the session. But if you show a little patience, it seems inevitable you could take all their money on the 65% / 35% or better flips.