I appreciate the encouragement and I do think there was some tonal confusion at some point between your keyboard and my eyes. Apologies for the overreaction.

But I still feel like you're overreacting towards me, even in your latest comments.

Like, this is the BBV thread. This is precisely the place to complain about variance with no expectation that anybody will be impressed or interested, much less respond. At least, that's what I remember 2p2 BBV culture as being like from years ago. (As I alluded to above, I spent a long time away from poker, so maybe that's changed around here; I honestly don't know.)

To take a complaint like mine as an invitation to generally criticize someone's entire game (based on one hand from outside of BBV) just feels super inappropriate to me.

It felt especially out of line to me because the tone of my original complaint was really not that emotional, and by no means did I blame 100% of my results on this one statistical quirk of how the deck has been treating me.

If anything, I think I have the right to be more viscerally frustrated about it than I acted previously, because of how crucial flushes are in PLO. If I'm not even getting 80% of the way to a flush as often as I "should" be, it's going to be harder to win at showdown.

And at PLO25 in particular (where I'm currently playing, with my bankroll tantalizingly close to PLO50 territory... making any downswing extra agitating), showing down nut flushes is going to be a big part of a player's winnings, no?

Against the 70+ VPIP 35+ WTSD players I've had the good fortune to sit with so often, you're going to be getting a lot of action from second-best flushes.

So yes, it IS most definitely hurting my winrate, even if I spewed in that hand where I got super pot-happy and even if I'm still figuring out my 3bet vs flat range on the button and even if I'm still figuring out how best to size river value bets and so on and so forth.

And I never suggested my winrate would be positive WITH these flush draws. Maybe that's the confusion here. I don't think a "winrate" needs to be positive to be called a winrate. -5 bb/100 is still a winrate, to me (even if it's obviously more of a "loserate"). (BBV note: I'd kill for -5 bb/100 the way things have gone for me in my first 8.5k hands.)

But maybe you don't think the word "winrate" should be used that way and maybe that's the source of all of this.

And maybe BBV threads are now way less "low content" (so to speak) than they were ~ten years ago.

My latest comments were quite positive in regards to the fact that you're doing the right things. If you fail to see the fact that I was checking to make sure that you focus your attention on things that you can control (even if you were making a partial joke), then you're always going to feel that I'm being unfair and overreacting.

I still call a negative BB/100 a winrate FWIW.

Like a true BAWS.

Would have been nice if the dealer hadn't laid that K.

Winning with high card only in a 4 card game is always very satisfying lol.

I think we would get along in real life and we're having some communication problems in this thread.

Now, as not to neglect the BBV content: I'm in a very good mood because I had a ~7 BI upswing today.

That may sound super standard for PLO vets, but—as I've been saying—I'm new to the PLO grind and I really needed a session like this (confidence-wise far more than bankroll-wise... thankfully I started grinding PLO with very conservative bankroll management).

Like, turns out there are upswings in this game, too! Who knew?!

I hadn't upswung even 4 BIs in a session up to this point, and today ends a long string of mostly 2-5 BI loss sessions. Super frustrating times.

Today was a nice change of pace: I didn't always run into the tip-top of folks' ranges and I actually made some super strong hands... hands that held up all the way to showdown, if you can believe it!

Guys please, this is BBV

it's 2018. this is what we have to settle for now

We need more Michael Angelo. At least that morons posts are entertaining.

I originally put this in the quick checkup thread but it's really more BBV I think:

BTN ($27.29) [VPIP: 26.2% | PFR: 13.8% | AGG: 29.7% | 3-Bet: 3.6% | Hands: 65]

Dealt to Hero: 5 3 T A

BTN Raises To $0.50, SB Folds, HERO Raises To $1.60, BTN Calls $1.10

A light 3bet, but we're shorthanded and it's very playable. Just need to be careful around spades.

Hero SPR on Flop: [7.61 effective]
Flop ($3.30): 4 A K
HERO Checks, BTN Checks

ProPokerTools Omaha Hi Simulation

600,000 trials (Randomized)

board: K4A

Hand	Pot equity	Wins	Ties
5s3sAhTh	55.41%	328,408	8,078
14%6H	44.59%	263,514	8,078

I obviously have a lot of equity here, but I'm valuetowning myself pretty often if I bet against BTN's range. So I checked.


Turn ($3.30): 4 A K 2

Oh word?

ProPokerTools Omaha Hi Simulation

620,560 trials (Exhaustive)

board: K4A2

Hand	Pot equity	Wins	Ties
5s3sAhTh	79.40%	489,991	5,506
14%6H	20.60%	125,063	5,506

HERO Bets $3.30 (Rem. Stack: 21.80), BTN Calls $3.30 (Rem. Stack: 22.39)

River ($9.90): 4 A K 2 K

Unghhhhhhhhh. No longer have the nuts. But is AK playing this passively to this point? I decide to check/call in order to let BTN bluff whiffed spades or, even more likely, clubs. Even if they don't, my hand is weak enough on this paired board that a free showdown doesn't sound horrible to me.

ProPokerTools Omaha Hi Simulation

8,218 trials (Exhaustive)

board: K4A2K

Hand	Pot equity	Wins	Ties
5s3sAhTh	73.50%	6,029	22
(AK, ss, cc):14%6H	26.50%	2,167	22

HERO Checks, BTN Bets $4.95 (Rem. Stack: 17.44), HERO Calls $4.95 (Rem. Stack: 16.85)

My plan worked perfectly!

BTN shows: 8 A K Q

BTN wins: $18.81

Erm... I guess I was half right.

These NOOBS just can't seem to understand that I SNIFF OUT THEIR BLUFFS LIKE A FAT MAN SNIFFS OUT BACON.

well played Shocked, u can't let these guys push u around

Villain is Russian, I guess

I hear you!

The old pair of jacks call. Gotta love HL and villains who don't like cbetting boards that miss their low draws.

There is more, where that came from. This hand really happened, we don't fold Jacks, no Sir!



Look at this, isn't that a reason to start playing PLO8 in an instant?

Your hand is pretty garbage in HL without a suit or low draw protection, but it was only a min raise so YIPPEE!!!!

Fun times at low stakes HL. I like your "F**k it, we only have a couple bucks left call on the river. You basically beat nothing a capable player ever shows up with. Fortunately villain was not capable lol. Keep sitting at tables with players like this and the game is a lot of fun

You captured the essence of this hand perfectly.

I mean, if there is players like me and players like him, wtf are you all waiting for?
Maybe I should have asked, who played it worse?

* The fish bluffraising without outs (YOU WILL STOP MINRAISING MY BLIND WITH 80% OF HANDS, I WILL SHOW YOU WHAT IT MEANS TO PLAY OUT OF POSITION, RRRRAISEEEEEE!)
* The guy donk-bet-calling with the 4 high flushdraw (turn loads of equity lol)(I DONT CARE IF YOU HAVE THE NUTS, I WILL BET THE POT UNTIL YOU FOLD, BECAUSE THAT'S HOW I WON THE LAST 18 HANDS... NOW, **** IT, FOLD ALREDY!)

PLO8 has always been my favourite game, its just a shame that there is hardly any traffic anymore.

Back when the US was still playing on FT, you could find 50+ people playing Rush (FT equivalent of Zoom) at $50 PLO8.

I built a bankroll 8 tabling $25 PLO8 back in the day. Not that way anymore

I wish, I had been there.
I can say, that I'm creating a lot of action at whichever stake I'm playing, because I'm kind of the only reg, that plays HU. So, if we wait 5 years, you will be able to take my money, too.

Stopping to derail the PLO BBV thread now.

Long live the King

That's a terrible play.

But my opponent was German!

Optimal play

Quick tip: his pfr may be 14% but it's much higher than that on the BTN. His range is likely at least top 30%.