Hi NiceguysFT – Welcome to the forums.
Quote:
I enjoy the articles, I appreciate the analytical approach.
Thanks.
Quote:
I do have a question, which arose immediately after reading this most recent article about turn betting. Simply put...what if small blind or button has trips????
As I use the terms:
• “A set” means three of a kind with a pair in the hand and a single card on the board.
• “Trips” means three of a kind with a single card in the hand and a pair on the board.
Thus with no pair on the board, nobody can have “trips.” But an opponent could have a “set” (three of a kind).
But I understand what you mean, which I’ll paraphrase as
“what if small blind or button has "three of a kind"????”
It’s a good question.
From Hero’s perspective, with top two pairs, it’s more or less a disaster if an opponent flops a set. But it doesn’t happen often, with only a probability of ~ 0.0286 per opponent who sees the flop with
random cards. (But a real opponent doesn't have "random" cards, making a set even less likely, as we'll see below). And since Hero has one king and one ten, the probability an opponent with random cards who sees the flop will have a set of deuces is about 0.0173, or ~three fifths of the 0.0286.
But usually an opponent would need an ace or a three plus four or three plus five to see the flop with a hand having a pair of deuces. In other words, an opponent probably doesn’t see the flop with 22YZ unless as 223Z, 224Z, AA22, or A22Z (or maybe 2233 or 22KK). At any rate, an opponent probably sees the flop with less than 40% of the 22YZ hands he could have been dealt.
Five of you seeing the flop may seem like a rather loose game, but at a full table that means four or five are
not seeing the flop. Thus there’s some starting hand selection involved.
Bottom line: When we put it all together, when Hero has flopped top two pairs, there’s only about a 1.3% chance per opponent who sees the flop that an opponent has flopped a set, and most of that is a set of deuces, which is very hard to play correctly.
Quote:
Toward the beginning, of the article you did mention trips as possible hands to put the opponents on. I know i would consider it very likely my 2 pair not to be best because of the possibilities of trips.
With four real opponents seeing the flop, when hero flops top two pairs, probably none of these real opponents will actually flop a set roughly nineteen times in twenty.
Thus after a flop of
K[diamond], T[spade], 2[spade],
When Hero has top two pairs with the stipulated boards, Hero’s prime concerns should be the flush draws and the straight draws because that's what he's most likely to encounter.
Quote:
Given all the possible scenarios omaha h/l presents, I understand the need to limit discussions to specific scenerios, however i felt the article really implied that you were advocating given Hero's hand as a winner in the long-run,--- therefore if you are given this hand in a game,--- its a winner, you should raise! But what about if one or both of the opponents have trips??
You do best to be most concerned about the dangers that are most real. It’s
much more likely to be a winner if you give it protection (by raising)
Quote:
For example, A J T T the ace and a ten being suited would be a hand someone would see a flop with. Or A 3 T T, since we were disscussing 2-way hands. Instead of the 5 4 3 2 double suited, pair the five or pair the 2, people play this sorta hand, even if not a premium or well advised hand.
Probably true,
if someone gets dealt AJTT or A3TTwith a suited ace but when there’s a ten on the flop and Hero has a ten in his hand, that probability is greatly reduced.
Quote:
Plugging these hands into a omaha calculator, it seems to me that hero's hand is certainly an underdog.
Agreed. It’s not even worth making the calculation. Clearly a set on the turn is ahead of two pairs on the turn. But when Hero has top two pairs, a set is not the prime concern (because of its unliklihood compared to a straight or flush).
Quote:
Does it become an underdog rather than a hand to raise with when trips are added to the discussion?
Yes. Top two pairs would an under-dog on the turn if an opponent had three of a kind. (Of course it would).
I’m going to occasionally get burned by a straight flush when I value bet an ace high flush into a board that enables a straight flush. I’m going to occasionally bet burned by quad eights when I value bet kings full of eights. These are things that happen. But if I stop betting ace high flushes into an unpaired board when a straight flush is possible, I’m going to miss a lot of good bets. Same with kings full when quad eights are possible. – And same, more or less, with top two pairs in a fixed-limit game when three of a kind is possible.
Quote:
Forgive me if i've rambled.
No problem. Being concerned about the danger of a set when you have top two pairs is something that should be put into perspective. I hope I’ve done that for you in this response.
Quote:
And, like the entire previous thread..lol..I only found the forum recently, so I don't have Post Flop parts I, II, or III and would really enjoy copies.
Personal message your e-mail address to me and I’ll send you copies of those articles (as attachments). As long as understanding an on-line article is partially dependent on having read earlier articles of the series, I’ll send you (or anyone else who requests them) e-mail attachments of the earlier articles of that series.
Quote:
I look forward to the future articles.
Thanks.
Buzz
