Two Plus Two Publishing LLC
Two Plus Two Publishing LLC
 

Go Back   Two Plus Two Poker Forums > >

Notices

Small Stakes PL Omaha Discussion of 1/2 and below pot-limit Omaha poker

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 05-07-2021, 01:57 PM   #1
DumbosTrunk
Pooh-Bah
 
DumbosTrunk's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2017
Posts: 4,048
Maniac table

Hi all,

I am at a 1/2 PLO5 table last night and V clearly came to gamble. He is probably on winner's tilt (looks like he won at 2/5 before joining us) and is repotting way too much, including backraising hands like KTJ63ss. There is another gamooly/tilty V to his left who is isolating too wide - he 3! me out of BB previously with A88T3ss and he blind jammed flop, we GII on J87r (I had JJ776ds) and he went runner runner flush. He has also 3! hero IP with QJT22ss. Hero then backraised/GII once three ways $450 eff. against these two clowns with KKQ42ds and lost to whale's aforementioned K-high garbage.

This hand, hero overlimps AsTc8s6c5d (ds) OTB and as expected whale 1 pots SB, but now a good V in BB (other maniac was sitting out this hand) repots to $85, we are $600 eff. and hero calls three ways IP. My thinking behind calling: want to play a pot IP against the whale, want to dilute good V's equity advantage HU, I cannot be in terrible shape three ways with an A-high ds rundown, and it is very -EV for this V in particular to double up through the whale and I would rather take the risk and try to do so myself so I can play deeper against him ($700 cap, whale has $2.5k). Anyway, whale repots, good V jams, we GII three ways. I would like thoughts on my thinking this hand. Please tell me if you think I was just on tilt trying to get unstuck and was rationalizing a bad/marginal call.

Hero later overlimps AcKcQcQd8d (ds) expecting fireworks and GII three ways against the two firecrackers again and lose again.

I'm just at a complete loss at this point, going on a few weeks-long BE stretch (+/- $5k a couple times) and worried I may be heading into a bad downswing if I don't turn things around. I guess I need to just tighten up? Take higher variance spots less? Sigh.

Thanks,
DT

Last edited by DumbosTrunk; 05-07-2021 at 02:16 PM.
DumbosTrunk is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-07-2021, 03:32 PM   #2
InkyPoker
adept
 
InkyPoker's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2020
Location: Streaming PLO on Twitch: Inky_Poker
Posts: 806
Re: Maniac table

How many times do I have to tell people to stop overlimping if you're not super confident. Like I don't want to be a hypocrite because I also overlimp, but if you want to reduce the number of difficult and uncertain spots, just stop doing it. It's not going to give you big EV. The spots that are big EV you'd do fine/better just isolating.

Quote:
we GII on J87r (I had JJ776ds) and he went runner runner flush
This is a seemingly unrelated point but to me it always strikes me as entitlement tilt when people tell a hand and have to tell you the bad beat part of it when it doesn't add any info (it doesn't really matter that you had JJ77, although you have a pretty bad hand there too.

Your hand is way too gapped. A rundown ds are a lot weaker in 5 card compared to 4 card, you will need a much smoother version to play. If you wanna play this hand, why don't you raise instead of limping? You increase the chance of playing HU vs the whale.
InkyPoker is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-07-2021, 03:32 PM   #3
Jreven
centurion
 
Join Date: Jul 2020
Posts: 118
Re: Maniac table

There was a post I did earlier that Inky answered that had good tips. I finding playing more passive, stronger starting hands, in position, seems to help control variance against maniacs. I know it is not optimal for my win rate, but I think it is worth it to keep my sanity.

For example I doubled up against maniacs at two separate tables today and then went on to lose my whole stack a few pots later with pocket AAXX. Most of the money went in before the flop. To counter this I have started limping with garbage AAXX. The thing about maniacs is they are not thinking about what you might have and you really have no clue what they have. They just like to bet and know people seem to fold when they bet a lot. If you hit your trips aces or another good hand most likely you will get paid off without even having to bet.

Having to fold so much does get irritating, but it will pay off in the long run.

https://forumserver.twoplustwo.com/3...ayers-1789163/

Last edited by Jreven; 05-07-2021 at 03:41 PM.
Jreven is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-07-2021, 05:33 PM   #4
monikrazy
Carpal \'Tunnel
 
monikrazy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Posts: 26,712
Re: Maniac table

Hand 1, i think initial overlimp is okish, but once good villain 3! we are done.

Hand 2 is probably not good - should run some sims to check, as it might barely be ok with 2 wild opponents. 3rd club is minor downgrade. And 8 is mostly a wasted card. We can be more selective with our 3w giiis.
monikrazy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-07-2021, 08:49 PM   #5
illiterat
old hand
 
illiterat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Posts: 1,476
Re: Maniac table

5 card PLO (even hi/lo, which is mostly what I play) is the most insane variance ride ever, esp. pre. The game prints money if people are passive pre. and will get it in bad post, where you just fold 4x as much as the next person and always have the nuts ... but in both the hands you posted that isn't happening (and the JJ77 spot didn't seem like it either, even though it kind of worked out).

First hand looks like garbage to me, the only thing I'm wasn't sure about is if it's more garbage 5 card hi/lo or in hi only.

ProPokerTools 5-Card Omaha Hi Simulation
600,000 trials (Randomized)
Hand Pot equity Wins Ties
AsTc8s6c5d34.87% 196,75225,379
40%33.90% 193,01521,186
60%31.22% 177,02021,015

2nd hand I was surprised how good it seemed, as I figured you'd want at least KK+, and you'd be better with a Jd instead of the Qd (not true) ... but if you are getting $400 eff. in it's a +$11 spot (less than 3% of your stack) long term.

ProPokerTools 5-Card Omaha Hi Simulation
600,000 trials (Randomized)
Hand Pot equity Wins Ties
AcKcQcQd8d34.30% 196,85618,200
40%31.81% 183,66714,599
20%33.89% 193,92419,111

Of course if villains aren't this wide you are like 30%.
illiterat is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-08-2021, 03:53 AM   #6
derjan
old hand
 
Join Date: Dec 2015
Posts: 1,373
Re: Maniac table

still if we have nothing invested why would we play super big pots with 1% equity advantage?
derjan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-08-2021, 04:19 AM   #7
DumbosTrunk
Pooh-Bah
 
DumbosTrunk's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2017
Posts: 4,048
Re: Maniac table

I said I didn't want the good V to double up through the whale.
DumbosTrunk is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-08-2021, 04:26 AM   #8
.isolated
Carpal \'Tunnel
 
Join Date: May 2012
Posts: 21,289
Club Re: Maniac table

Quote:
Originally Posted by derjan View Post
still if we have nothing invested why would we play super big pots with 1% equity advantage?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Inky
it's a +$11 spot
What Inky said plus it's a spot that's going to come up a lot. Don't give away your equity (money). If you're a serious poker player (as Dumbo is), you're literally throwing thousands of $$$ away by not taking all the small edges you can.
.isolated is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-08-2021, 05:49 AM   #9
derjan
old hand
 
Join Date: Dec 2015
Posts: 1,373
Re: Maniac table

Ok so we take a gamble and we lose. that's part of gambling

Also as said ranges as calculated are wider than in reality so we don't have the 1% edge.

If we don't want these spots then don't get into them. Against whale there are probably spots with better chances.

Last edited by derjan; 05-08-2021 at 06:04 AM.
derjan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-08-2021, 06:21 AM   #10
.isolated
Carpal \'Tunnel
 
Join Date: May 2012
Posts: 21,289
Re: Maniac table

Quote:
Also as said ranges as calculated are wider than in reality so we don't have the 1% edge.

If we don't want these spots then don't get into them. Against whale there are probably spots with better chances.
Sure but you said that if we definitely have 1% that we shouldn't take it because "why would we play super big pots with 1% equity advantage?" which is just an absurd thing to say. If we have an edge, we take it. That's how serious players think.
.isolated is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-08-2021, 06:51 AM   #11
PokerPlayingGamble
Pooh-Bah
 
Join Date: Mar 2018
Posts: 3,862
Re: Maniac table

Quote:
Originally Posted by .isolated View Post
Sure but you said that if we definitely have 1% that we shouldn't take it because "why would we play super big pots with 1% equity advantage?" which is just an absurd thing to say. If we have an edge, we take it. That's how serious players think.

What if it is a 0.5% edge? 0.25%? Surely there is some point where it is not worth risking our stack for some minute amount of profit.
PokerPlayingGamble is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-08-2021, 07:24 AM   #12
derjan
old hand
 
Join Date: Dec 2015
Posts: 1,373
Re: Maniac table

Quote:
Originally Posted by .isolated View Post
Sure but you said that if we definitely have 1% that we shouldn't take it because "why would we play super big pots with 1% equity advantage?" which is just an absurd thing to say. If we have an edge, we take it. That's how serious players think.
We usually get better spots vs fish so don't mind letting this one go in 3bet pot with 1bb invested.

+ we don't even close the betting so sb might jam and we have to fold after 3bet without even seeing a flop or play preflop allin which we don't like with this hand
derjan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-08-2021, 09:59 AM   #13
illiterat
old hand
 
illiterat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Posts: 1,476
Re: Maniac table

Quote:
Originally Posted by .isolated View Post
Sure but you said that if we definitely have 1% that we shouldn't take it because "why would we play super big pots with 1% equity advantage?" which is just an absurd thing to say. If we have an edge, we take it. That's how serious players think.
Sure, ideally. But maybe not if you are in a break even stretch for a few weeks and worried you'll end up in a bad downswing. We are all human.

Also Kelly criterion says that, assuming the example ranges were correct, to stick $400 in here you should have $27.6k in cash adding ~$3.5k for every $50 more.
illiterat is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-08-2021, 11:28 AM   #14
derjan
old hand
 
Join Date: Dec 2015
Posts: 1,373
Re: Maniac table

Also we have to beat the rake which is more than 1%
derjan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-08-2021, 05:00 PM   #15
monikrazy
Carpal \'Tunnel
 
monikrazy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Posts: 26,712
Re: Maniac table

Re: akqq8 while i agree sims show that this can be narrowly profitable gii 3w against wild/bad players i would still want to see full hand history to evaluate the play and whether it could have been played better

I ran some sims of my own and got 35-36% equity in most best-case scenarios - sims also likely to slightly overestimate equity in this spot due to complexity of ranges vs for example ppt hand percentile ranking

And rarely below 30-31% even when dominated

But depending on the stack depth, especially as we get deeper, we may still tweak our hand selection here to include hands that perform better vs aa and kk

For example: akqq8 vs 3% and 35% is only 26% equity

Vs 5% and Any 5 cards, its only 29.5%

Last edited by monikrazy; 05-08-2021 at 05:07 PM.
monikrazy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-08-2021, 06:55 PM   #16
PokerPlayingGamble
Pooh-Bah
 
Join Date: Mar 2018
Posts: 3,862
Re: Maniac table

Quote:
Also Kelly criterion says that, assuming the example ranges were correct, to stick $400 in here you should have $27.6k in cash adding ~$3.5k for every $50 more.

Can we see your work on this one?
PokerPlayingGamble is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-08-2021, 07:00 PM   #17
prop_player
stranger
 
Join Date: Apr 2019
Posts: 7
Re: Maniac table

I think pushing to maximize pure dollar amount of EV makes less sense than maximizing Z-score, i.e. EV per unit of standard deviation.

Let's say $X is your life roll. Would you accept a pure coinflip where you either lose X or win X + 22? That's $11 of EV!

Sent from my SM-G975U using Tapatalk
prop_player is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-08-2021, 08:01 PM   #18
illiterat
old hand
 
illiterat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Posts: 1,476
Re: Maniac table

Quote:
Originally Posted by PokerPlayingGamble View Post
Can we see your work on this one?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kelly_criterion#Statement

f = p - ((1-p)/b)

f is the fraction of the current bankroll to wager
b is the net fractional odds received on the wager
p is the probability of a win

f = 0.343 - ((1-0.343) / 2) = 0.0145

roll = betsize / f

roll = 400 / 0.0145 = 27586.20
illiterat is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-08-2021, 10:28 PM   #19
PokerPlayingGamble
Pooh-Bah
 
Join Date: Mar 2018
Posts: 3,862
Re: Maniac table

thanks
PokerPlayingGamble is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-09-2021, 03:26 AM   #20
DumbosTrunk
Pooh-Bah
 
DumbosTrunk's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2017
Posts: 4,048
Re: Maniac table

Thanks for everyone's replies, I appreciate the support and sound advice. Back in the zone again and on the upswing. I am getting better exercise before sessions and listening to better music in game too (Bleach OST FTW!).
DumbosTrunk is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-09-2021, 06:50 AM   #21
derjan
old hand
 
Join Date: Dec 2015
Posts: 1,373
Re: Maniac table

ofc when we win these spots a couple of times in a row we might think we are better than we actually are and when we lose them we are not so bad after all

That's called variance.
derjan is offline   Reply With Quote

Reply
      

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off


Forum Jump


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 05:57 AM.


Powered by vBulletin®
Copyright ©2000 - 2021, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright 2008-2020, Two Plus Two Interactive