Live small stakes opponents often see PLO (or NHLE for that matter) as a lottery: Get in as cheap as possible, flop something great, play for stacks against someone with something slightly less great, profit. It's a good exercise to think about why this won't beat the game (hint: think zero-sum minus rake).

The following is one of my favorite ways to exploit this tendency. I'm adding it to my arsenal, but I probably overuse it.


PLAYER READS AND STACKS

"Techie" (UTG, $275): Young to middle aged male, appears South Asian, wearing gear suggesting he might work for Microsoft.* Has been playing about an hour, and I've seen him before. My impression is that he doesn't get out of line much.

UTG+1 ($200): Straightforward

UTG+2 ($2500): Moved from the other game with a monster stack and has added to it. Appears straightforward.

CO ($250): Loose-passive

HJ ($200): Loose-passive

Population reads: This game has been running all afternoon and it's now early evening. It has gotten much looser in the past hour and many new players have joined. More passive than usual. Most players have the "lottery mentality" discussed above and will call up to about $40 preflop---they think in absolute dollar amounts---with a wide range of speculative hands. Virtually no one ever 3-bets (not counting raising a straddle as a 3-bet) without AA, and it's not really even that common to see an open that's not AA or good KK.

THE HAND
Live $1-3 PLO, max buyin $300
Technically $300 max spread limit
9 dealt in
I button straddle to $6

SB F
BB C
Techie R to $25
UTG+1, +2, CO, and HJ all C $25
Hero ????


I can pot to $182. I expect that at least 75% of the time Techie has AAxx and shoves; 75% of that 75% all four cold-callers fold. How would you play these hands?

1. Q Q J T
   
   
2. Q J T 7
   
   
3. 9 8 7 6
   
   
4. Q J 9 2
   
   
5. T 9 7 2

*In Seattle this is a read unto itself. Note that virtually no one wears gear from Microsoft except people who work for Microsoft.

After quickly doing some math, it looks like your assumptions, if taken literally (and with "at least 75%"* being just 75%), make all of those a jam.

*For "at least 75%", it definitely matters whether that is exactly 75%, or 80%. And card removal is a factor too, assigning "75% of that 75% all cold-callers fold" to all hands equally wouldn't be realistic.

So since it seems like you are looking for verbal analysis rather than pure numbers, and the pure numbers wouldn't be easy to pin down based on what is given in the OP anyway...

#1: Blows for card removal, and should do better than "very marginally +EV" by flatting. Flat.
#2: I'm not sure how well this does flatting (our FDs are pretty meh six-way and with nut suits being out there a bunch) but should be slightly +EV to 3-bet. Jam.
#3: Card removal and equity are amazing. (You don't block any of the non-AA hands, since we're presumably assuming that Techie is folding great non-AA hands like JT98ds and KKQQds too, which seems very unrealistic and probably invalidates any conclusions. The opening range being 75% AA also means it's like top-3.4%, which strikes me as pretty weird too, and given how tight that opening range is, "unrealistic non-AA folds" definitely would skew things a bunch.) Anyway, 9876ds prints from jamming given these assumptions, and I doubt calling does as well. Jam.
#4: Not a good call. I'd guess it's a roughly 0 EV shove. Fold.
#5: Not a good call either. Card removal and equity are noticeably better than with QJ92ds though. Jam.

Thanks for the thoughts on these hands. Yeah, it's true we can all plug in my assumptions to PPT and see our equity. I sort of meant this both for discussion (would you play these this way? even though you may not have played in this game, do you think my assumptions are reasonable?) and as a pedagogical exercise (can you guess which of these have enough equity to continue?).

I don't expect Techie to fold JT98ds or KKQQds, although he probably knows to fold bad KKxx which is a coup for me even if I do get called elsewhere. But card removal is an interesting point. You're evaluating whether I'm removing cards in the ten through king range?

1. I agree, awesome multiway hand and barely has enough equity to be OK if everyone else folds. Surprisingly if someone else calls all-in this not as bad as I would have thought because of the pair. E.g. 31.2% three ways against any AA and 12%.

2. This is fine multiway or HU. I don't love the non nut FD but I can easily get a nut straight or wrap with flush redraw. Just over the 41.4% I need HU to justify shoving full stop.

3. Yeah, this would be the classic hand that's just fine no matter what happens. HU it's a small dog. 3 handed (against a 12% caller) it becomes a money favorite, and 5-handed it surpasses the AA! So really I'd jam and hope for callers, although a smaller reraise to something like $125 could be awesome too just in case he doesn't have AA and the pot can become huge and multiway.

4. This was my actual hand. I jammed which isn't terrible. I didn't quite have the equity I needed against AA but (1) he could have some non-AA hand where I'm less behind, although the AKQJ types have me equally behind (1a) Perhaps I have some fold equity on the flop if he calls with some middle rundown? (2) once in a blue moon he might fold KK.

That said, I could also get called in another spot and be laying RIO on my flush draws without the compensating rundownness. I don't hate my jam but I wouldn't do it again. (If I make this play all the time I'll have less FE.)

5. Yeah, equity is marginally too little but with the FE arguments from (4) I think it's +EV and a better choice than (4)