late night crazy game, there is a 100 button straddle, two limps to hero who overlimps 9987hhdd, one more limper, button makes it 400, all call.

hero starts hand with ~5000 and most of the other stacks are in the 3k-5k range.

flop (2000) 3d3hJh checks around

turn 8h completing the flush

checks to hero. the limper behind me is a pretty tough, sticky reg who covers me, and the button is a good LAG who started with around 3k.

What's the question? Pray and hope we get to see a free river.

Check fold.

Start by checking, probably continue by folding

Ya I mean we're going 4-5 way here with a big pot in the middle to start - no value to be had betting, we're not turning our hand into a bluff, so checking/praying you can showdown at this point is the way to go.

Check, probably calling the LAG if he stabs, obv setting my cards on fire if facing river bet.

lol sorry guys i posted this and forgot to complete the turn action. i checked, LAG bet 600, folded to me

Sure we have the best hand sometimes, but calling and hoping he doesn't shove river isn't a good plan. When it's 5 ways you don't have to defend very wide since all other players are sharing a defending range if that makes any sense.

Very nice concept rarely mentioned.

Is that concept in practice or theory any different from 'you're up against more players therefore more cards therefore more likely you're beat therefore play tighter the more players there are and the loosest when headsup'?

CardiffGiant can speak for himself, but I took his, ‘sharing a defending range” to mean what I am posting below.

A player can be playing offensively and defensively at the same time. And even within that a player can be playing defensively in different ways. I took Cardiff to not be talking about worrying about the cards in other players hands, which is a simultaneous issue, but that Cardiff was only mentioning the concept of sharing the defensive responsibility during a hand.

I can give a simplified online 6 max preflop example of defense sharing. As a super simple example, the EP player open raises. There are 5 players left to act. Those 5 players are responsible to defend enough so that the EP player cannot open raise with any 4 cards. It isn’t solely the job of the big blind to do all the defending. The MP shares some of the defense responsibility, but is out of position to the CU and BU and therefore doesn’t do too much of the defending so maybe like 5%. The CU is only out of position to the BU and therefore defends a little bit more than MP at something like 7%. The BU has absolute position postflop but doesn’t close the action preflop and defends something like 16%. The SB has it bad preflop and postflop and therefore defends a tiny percent like 2%. And the BB at least gets the opportunity to close the action coupled with having already put in the most blind money will defends about 19%. Not a single player in this example defended even 20%, but if you add up the combined defend percentages, then you end with enough defending that EP can’t just open raise any 4 cards.

During a hand there are multiple concepts happening simultaneously. One slice of that pie when the hand has many players in it is that it is not your sole responsibility to do all the defending against a villain’s bet.

Yes, I see how that works, and it's a concept I'm familiar with. But isn't that just the workings behind the scene, and the cashout of the concept is simply: play tighter multiway? Is there some other cash value to that concept I'm not considering?

Math

Your original question was about other player's cards. Regardless of the other player’s cards it is still a math decision. With my example, someone open raises, then everyone left has to defend enough to stop the open raiser from being able to successfully open with any four cards. The more defenders the less each individual has to defend. It is that simple.

CardiffGiant said, "when it's 5 ways you don't have to defend very wide since all other players are sharing a defending range..." This is elegantly stated but rarely stated this way on this forum. Bravo CardiffGiant.

I'm not sure he needs a second round of hurrahs

Maybe I'm not making myself clear, but I'm not sure exactly how to restate my question. How is this functionally different from 'play tighter against more opponents'?

You are a dick.

Someone else recently said you make this forum worse and they were spot on. I'm done engaging a jackass like you that makes this forum worse.

What

I'm asking a simple question. Don't know if this is my ASD showing, I didn't mean that in a harsh way, was it taken to be a harsh comment? If you ignore my perhaps ill-judged offhand comment about celebrating him, can you answer my question? I'm not trying to have a go at you or undermine you. I'm genuinely curious as to whether there's more to this than I see. Is there a better way I should have put that?

Can anyone not so easily upset by my antics lmk if there's something I'm missing about this concept please?

Wazz, here is your response to another thread when someone laughed their ass at you saying something as stupid as “position is his ace.” You got butthurt and didn’t like the other person's tone and you posted the below.

“Dude wtf, if I am guilty of giving bad advice then your job is to explain why rather than just attack me like that, there's absolutely no call for this sort of tone, you're not being threatened just because you disagree with me, where this place is a debate it's a super low stakes debate that you don't need to win at all costs.”

One day you are complaining about someone else’s tone and then over multiple days you're in here acting up and even admitting to your antics.

You were gone from 2+2 for an extending period of time. When you returned you posted it was because of your issues. Since you posted you had an issue, that therefore means it is fair game for discussion. So what was it? Did you have an illegal drug problem? Or were you just a basic alcoholic? Or was it an impulse problem and you lost all your money? Or did you not listen to your doctor and you did not take your meds?

I think this forum deserves to know what your issues were so that when you decide you want to act up again with your antics the rest of us in the Omaha forum which is already an extremely small base of posters without your antics can say, “oh it is just wazz off the wagon again on his drug problem.”

Oh man, I got more than I bargained for here, didn't I.

If you can't answer my question, that's fine, there's no need to get quite that personal. If you want to hear about my mental health and family issues, PM me. But I'm still looking for something beyond just 'math' as an answer to my question: does the concept of sharing responsibility for calling someone mean anything substantively different from the concept of playing tighter against multiple opponents?

That’s a bit much bro, no one is entitled to know anything about anyone.

Wazz just has a few sharp corners, he’s not purposefully trying to wind you up.

Perhaps you’ve become a little hyper sensitive to it.

How about we all group hug and chill the FO. ❤️

#1 Don't bring your personal issues onto 2+2. If you act like a dick around here, it will come back at you. Don't start none, there won't be none.

#2 LMAO


I quoted wazz whining about someone directing some sharp corners at him. I guess that makes wazz a hypocrite. And today he took it into a multiple day act up.

I must have missed the message about never talking personal stuff on an internet forum.

Do you not know the math? LMAO isn't an argument. If you want to keep on behaving like a pissy incel, you keep on doing that, but we're here to talk poker, so talk poker or shut up.

Wazz don't mix your meds with alcohol. I'm just sayin' That is a hell of a one two teddy that you clearly can't handle. You are already spirally out of control saying don't insult while you insult. Yep, I figured it was a meds issue with you.

Which is it? You want the math or you want magic bunnies to describe poker? I know the math and will gladly post it. You are the one constantly saying some version of "play tighter." Like the average person has any idea what "tighter" means. To them they would likely reply to you asking is "tighter" 20%, 15%, 10%, 5% or something else. I'm the only one in this thread that has mentioned percentages.

Wazz, I tell you what, if you tell us if it was alcohol or opioids that started your mental issues, then I will reward you with a quadratic equation !!!

De-escalating a situation is difficult if it's hard to grasp how it escalated in the first place. I'm genuinely sorry if I upset you. I didn't mean to. I don't understand why my offhand comment about cardiff not requiring a second round of hurrahs deserved a 'you are a dick' and I also don't understand why me posting 'position is his ace' deserved the other guy basically accusing me of intentionally posting wrong stuff. But I stick by that post, and I stick by my question here. In terms of their effects on our strategy, what is the difference between the concept of playing tighter against more opponents because there are more cards out there that can beat you, and having less responsibility to call someone down because that responsibility is shared amongst the rest of the opponents left to act? Anyone?

I guess that as an apology. I'll guess I will post a quadratic equation. Give me a moment.

You are still saying, "playing tighter" but "tighter" is not specific as to where I could give a mathematically specific range of

3bet value
cold calls
3bet bluff

that will take care of the facts that there are "more players and you play tighter" but it is based on math. Give me a moment to write it up.