Still relatively new to PLO and not too confident with my postflop decision making so was hoping for some opinions.

1) Do you ever raise flop vs a lead here (would you play it differently OOP vs a cbet?)

2) Turn you have to call right? We have 30% vs two pairs/sets, a bit less if he has a FD but have him potentially nutted any time he has just KQ or worse straight draws.

Very interested to hear how(and why) people would play this differently.

As rules of thumb I use: nut outs = implied odds. The more I have, the more I benefit from position and deep stacks. Bluffing or semibluffing: If it's a "fold equity board" (like 347r, 773, sss, etc), then I can bluff with hands that are not good enough to call a bet. If it's a normal board, then I need to represent a hand that has villain beat and my line needs to be in a way, that makes it easy for villain to "put me" on that hand.

1) I see no reason to raise in position. Villain leading here is often either a made hand he wants to protect (like he has), but usually not sets (players often will try to x/r those) or weak draws. By raising I represent mostly top two with redraws and sets, which villain (at this limit) often doesn't realize. I will fold out most of the weak draws (which I very much like to keep in), while villain is unlikely to let go of top two. If we get-in on the flop as a result of my raise, I have my equity, but make it easier for him to play his hand without mistakes (like the one he did on the river). The way he plays it, he will have no idea, where he is at on many turns, which he probably should check, but given his line, he may pot regardless. Seems to be a very beneficial situation.

oop the situation is quite different and I find it hard to answer the question without additional information. For example, if I was in the SB with this hand, I would 3bet against a BTN or CO open (CO, if BTN has folded). It's also very different, if we called in the BB with this hand against an UTG open or if we opened UTG and the BTN called, etc etc. But generally, if we are not the preflop aggressor and out of position, then it is kind of hard to actually have any calling hands against potsized cbets on the flop. This hand however can comfortably call, because it has its equity and its visibility, very precious things oop.

*micro stakes rambling inc*

It's kind of interesting, the question we should probably ask ourself before anything is: Which hands do we think our opponent is going to bet/fold, if we raise here? (We are not raising for value here, as the dominated draws often would fold to a raise).
Some villains pot any flop, if they are the PF-aggressor, so that bluff-raising with all of our jank becomes pretty profitable. Some villains only pot with superstrong hands, which they will never fold. From my experience at this limit, I would say that most villains cbet very little on most flops and also fold very little, if they get raised. Because of this, I'd mostly raise for value and actually lead with my bluffs.
Theoretically we should be bluffraising with hands that are too weak to call a bet and that have decent equity against villains bet/calling range. Since if we bluffraise, we need to barrel turn so often (villains call flopraises fairly light, probably just to "see if you are serious") our hand should probably sport some kind of backdoordraw. But honestly, since we get called so much, I'd much rather not make those light calls "better" by bluffing in this spot.

2) I have no idea. I think both folding and calling are fine. Reason for folding is that there is very little money left behind. If we were deeper it's a no brainer call imo (we can rep hearts sometimes on the river, too).

Thanks for taking the time to go through all this!

Sent from my SM-A305N using Tapatalk

I'd pot the flop in position and happily get it all in. There's some other meta that the first reply doesn't discuss, which is what you show up with when you raise/pot in position - you're showing down a very strong hand, even if you lose...which will be remembered next time you pot it.

If he calls your raise on the flop instead of shoving, he's not going to fold on the turn, and the river gives him the opportunity to bluff..an unlucky runout but not a good enough reason to not pot the flop.

Interesting thought. I like it, however:

this is 6 max zoom on stars. It has something between 75-150 players in the pool and the worst rake structure imaginable. I doubt this "show off" is worth cranking up the variance and paying a ton of rake in the process, when we aren't even that likely to get into the same spot with this player (or anyone sticking around watching the hand) in the next - I don't know say ~400 hands.

Got it - didn't know about the max thing. Agreed, then.

Grunching.

Hide those results for us, friend. Helps us be more objective.

I'm completely fine with this line. There might be an argument for folding OTT, but eh.

Can't fold OTR for the price when we have Th.

To Q1: there are definitely combos we can raise here, but I take villain's range to be too strong for our combo to be one of them. This combo does play much better as a x/r to a cbet because a cbetting range is generally weaker than a lead (especially a BB lead vs UTG on JT3r), giving us much more fold equity.

Great post.

Question-what do you mean when you say that this wrap has visibility, which is precious when oop?

thanks

Visibility means that you will always know, how strong your hand is, even if the board changes a lot. Visibility comes from nutdraws.

Imagine you had A289 instead. You may have very good equity, but you may also be totally crushed. It's invisible to you and there is no way of knowing.
Every player is going to make incorrect folds and calls with those type of hands.

This difficulty is amplified out of position, because in position you have the additional information of what your opp did, before you have to take an action and you can control the potsize. Meaning, that when you hit the 2nd best straight you may still get to extract value, because your opp check indicates that he rarely if ever has the nuts. Etc. etc. Out of position we are bound to lose more, when we make the 2nd best hand and win less, when we have opp beat.

Granted I think position isn't as crucial at this limit than I imagine it to be higher up. That is because a lot of players play very passively and faceup. They don't barrel a turn with air, just because you checked twice or bluffraise you with nutblockers and a gutshot (they may actually call down with nutblockers and a pair, because "you can't have the nuts"). So hands with less vibility may appear stronger than they actually are, because V. lets us realize equity more than he should and also pays off way more than he should.

Edit: Long story short. We can't do many wrong things with nutdraws, while everything else is difficult to play.

Thanks for the explanation!

This hand is pretty standard, you could argue for a turn fold because the flush draw kills some of your outs.