Flopping Non-Nut Hands and Draws in Omaha, byWilliam Jockusch discussion
08-01-2009
, 10:38 AM
as you know this is a book excerpt from "pot-limit omaha; an understanding of wiinning play" no doubt they will keep the double ii in the title eheh.
you find the link here
http://www.twoplustwo.com/magazine/i...ok-Excerpt.php
on the quick read of this excerpt it is clear that we are talking about stack to pot ratio, and how the weak hand structure leads to losing non nut hands.
this was examined in jeff hwang big pot omaha, and spr specifically in jeff hwang new omaha book.
however these concepts are not called these as this author is talking about these things in his own words so we end up is another quality work talking about the same things.
I guess that good flops section mentioned earlier in this excerpt would be the information on how good flops comes from good preflop hands but i am just guessing.
"The earlier material mostly related to evaluating nut holdings and draws. Of course, these are the kind of flops you want, and the recommended preflop hand selection is related to this"
with that quote in mind,, there will be of course those will instantly compare that section to jeff hwang earlier book.
but with any good book the basics must be covered so good preflop hands was in every omaha book ever written.
so the comparsions therefore are meaningless for an pair of aces is course a prenimum hand in hold them and so they would be in any hold them book,
so any monster starting hand in omaha like aces kings double suited, aces jack ten double suited therefore will be in any omaha hands.
The difference is how it is said and therefore taught.
so let us look at this article on its own merits for a while
I like the first hand example and it should be easy to know for people who have studied omaha books for a while, but then you see people at the micro betting these 67 diamonds draws quite a bit with 100 bbs, and that is a mistake in a long run
but here the money is quite deep and it is even more a mistake.
the second hand example of folding two and bottom pair on a draw heavy board is a bit harder for how many of us start feeling the pressure in a six max omaha game and say to ourselves "well maybe my top and bottom pair might be good this time especially if i make my full house".
and we let the pressure tilt us and we stack off.
I do got a question which is "8765[spider]" (what is spider ?)
let me fast forward a little
"1. The showdown is likely to be contested heads-up.
2. The money is not too deep. (A bet and a raise are fine. More than that is questionable.)
"
that sounds to me like we use our stack to pot ratio( jeff hwang) or stacksizing 40 bb (rolf ace) to decide to play these non nut hands
or we should be folding for
the contest isnt' likely to be contested head up for we will likely fold by the river ?(and if not we should be relooking at the earlier sections and learn from this mistake)
the money is not too deep , i got a question at your level is 100 bbs deep enough to be folding these none nut hands?
"What You Must Avoid
When playing non-nut holdings out of position, you must avoid getting caught in a big pot on the turn with a large amount of money left to bet. The problem is that on the turn you will generally have no idea if your hand is good or not, and will be out of position to boot. "
so you are saying we should be playing these non nut holdings in position, perhaps I personally like to fold the none nut holdings and move on to the next hand.
I would disagree with the on the turn we have no idea if our hands is good or not for we usally know that our hand isn't good!
take for examplethe board which gives us bottom and middle pair but it gives the villian a possible top two to beat us , or any possible sets if we are just playing bottom top pair.
there could be a straight plus flush draw on that turn and we should be folding for we are behind on the flop and even if we make our full house on the river it may not be the full house.
heads up section
"Our hero’s big mistake was checking the flop. He should have led out, planning to fold if raised."
this jump to heads up omaha is confusing to me , for I didnt' expect it though it is certainly possible on a six max table however I tend to leave when it get 3 handed. as a reader I would like the example it self to be six max perhaps short handed like 4 people but to jump into heads up when every example in this article to this point was six max confused me. and my confusion is
this works well in heads up perhaps to lead out/fold as opposed to checkfold, but will it work against five handed table where 2 or more saw the flop ?
will the book have a detailed heads up section? if not I would recommend that there be one where all the heads up examples can be gathered together.
fast forward down to the end of the article
"It is also interesting to note that the play of this hand strongly depended on stack size. If a raise to $1,000 would have been enough to put someone all-in, then our hero’s check-raise would have been absolutely correct. When the turn card arrived, there would have been little or no further betting to hurt him."
yes that is true , but didnt' the person get hurt in the first place by playing non nut hands preflop which is ok if the flop hits,, but the flop didnt' hit strongly enough to give him a good hand, let alone the nuts on the flop.
so his flop play and turn play hurt him enough cost him his stack.
when if the person isnt' skilled enough to play this deep he should go down in levels or at least to a table where there is a hundred max bb.
all in all I am looking forward to your book
I am just hoping that the heads up examples get gathered into a heads up section, and that it can be expanded upon in your book.
sure many pots in six max omaha are contested heads up but just as many are contested multiway two or more so we need the hand examples to reflect this.
and leading out in a multiway pot from the sb will hurt us in the long run when we should folding fro the sb.
it would of been differnt if you had said that it was folded to us on the button so we raise the bb from the sb trying to take down the blinds. or we call expecting the bb to raise.
my own confusion aside I can't wait for the first two plus two pot limit book.
you find the link here
http://www.twoplustwo.com/magazine/i...ok-Excerpt.php
on the quick read of this excerpt it is clear that we are talking about stack to pot ratio, and how the weak hand structure leads to losing non nut hands.
this was examined in jeff hwang big pot omaha, and spr specifically in jeff hwang new omaha book.
however these concepts are not called these as this author is talking about these things in his own words so we end up is another quality work talking about the same things.
I guess that good flops section mentioned earlier in this excerpt would be the information on how good flops comes from good preflop hands but i am just guessing.
"The earlier material mostly related to evaluating nut holdings and draws. Of course, these are the kind of flops you want, and the recommended preflop hand selection is related to this"
with that quote in mind,, there will be of course those will instantly compare that section to jeff hwang earlier book.
but with any good book the basics must be covered so good preflop hands was in every omaha book ever written.
so the comparsions therefore are meaningless for an pair of aces is course a prenimum hand in hold them and so they would be in any hold them book,
so any monster starting hand in omaha like aces kings double suited, aces jack ten double suited therefore will be in any omaha hands.
The difference is how it is said and therefore taught.
so let us look at this article on its own merits for a while
I like the first hand example and it should be easy to know for people who have studied omaha books for a while, but then you see people at the micro betting these 67 diamonds draws quite a bit with 100 bbs, and that is a mistake in a long run
but here the money is quite deep and it is even more a mistake.
the second hand example of folding two and bottom pair on a draw heavy board is a bit harder for how many of us start feeling the pressure in a six max omaha game and say to ourselves "well maybe my top and bottom pair might be good this time especially if i make my full house".
and we let the pressure tilt us and we stack off.
I do got a question which is "8765[spider]" (what is spider ?)
let me fast forward a little
"1. The showdown is likely to be contested heads-up.
2. The money is not too deep. (A bet and a raise are fine. More than that is questionable.)
"
that sounds to me like we use our stack to pot ratio( jeff hwang) or stacksizing 40 bb (rolf ace) to decide to play these non nut hands
or we should be folding for
the contest isnt' likely to be contested head up for we will likely fold by the river ?(and if not we should be relooking at the earlier sections and learn from this mistake)
the money is not too deep , i got a question at your level is 100 bbs deep enough to be folding these none nut hands?
"What You Must Avoid
When playing non-nut holdings out of position, you must avoid getting caught in a big pot on the turn with a large amount of money left to bet. The problem is that on the turn you will generally have no idea if your hand is good or not, and will be out of position to boot. "
so you are saying we should be playing these non nut holdings in position, perhaps I personally like to fold the none nut holdings and move on to the next hand.
I would disagree with the on the turn we have no idea if our hands is good or not for we usally know that our hand isn't good!
take for examplethe board which gives us bottom and middle pair but it gives the villian a possible top two to beat us , or any possible sets if we are just playing bottom top pair.
there could be a straight plus flush draw on that turn and we should be folding for we are behind on the flop and even if we make our full house on the river it may not be the full house.
heads up section
"Our hero’s big mistake was checking the flop. He should have led out, planning to fold if raised."
this jump to heads up omaha is confusing to me , for I didnt' expect it though it is certainly possible on a six max table however I tend to leave when it get 3 handed. as a reader I would like the example it self to be six max perhaps short handed like 4 people but to jump into heads up when every example in this article to this point was six max confused me. and my confusion is
this works well in heads up perhaps to lead out/fold as opposed to checkfold, but will it work against five handed table where 2 or more saw the flop ?
will the book have a detailed heads up section? if not I would recommend that there be one where all the heads up examples can be gathered together.
fast forward down to the end of the article
"It is also interesting to note that the play of this hand strongly depended on stack size. If a raise to $1,000 would have been enough to put someone all-in, then our hero’s check-raise would have been absolutely correct. When the turn card arrived, there would have been little or no further betting to hurt him."
yes that is true , but didnt' the person get hurt in the first place by playing non nut hands preflop which is ok if the flop hits,, but the flop didnt' hit strongly enough to give him a good hand, let alone the nuts on the flop.
so his flop play and turn play hurt him enough cost him his stack.
when if the person isnt' skilled enough to play this deep he should go down in levels or at least to a table where there is a hundred max bb.
all in all I am looking forward to your book
I am just hoping that the heads up examples get gathered into a heads up section, and that it can be expanded upon in your book.
sure many pots in six max omaha are contested heads up but just as many are contested multiway two or more so we need the hand examples to reflect this.
and leading out in a multiway pot from the sb will hurt us in the long run when we should folding fro the sb.
it would of been differnt if you had said that it was folded to us on the button so we raise the bb from the sb trying to take down the blinds. or we call expecting the bb to raise.
my own confusion aside I can't wait for the first two plus two pot limit book.
08-02-2009
, 01:02 AM
08-02-2009
, 02:56 AM
I think it's a very amusing typo. Either I made this mistake twice while editing this article and only corrected it once, or I made it once and forgot to save my correction.
When we format the Magazine, suit icons are typed as [club], [diamond], [heart], or [spade].
The "[spider]" was supposed to be "[spade]" and show up simply as a
.However, while editing this article, I was watching the third Harry Potter film on TV. There is a scene with a giant spider and I just happened to be at that point of the article and subconciously typed [spider] for the suit icon.
08-04-2009
, 06:26 AM
Error in the text:
"What if you have a weak made hand, combined with multiple non-nut draws? For instance, assume you have the 8
7
65 and the flop comes the K87. You have bottom two pair, the bottom end of an open-ended straight draw, a non-nut flush draw,and a non-nut backdoor flush draw"
With only one club in my hand there is no way I can ever make a club flush.
"What if you have a weak made hand, combined with multiple non-nut draws? For instance, assume you have the 8
765 and the flop comes the K87. You have bottom two pair, the bottom end of an open-ended straight draw, a non-nut flush draw,and a non-nut backdoor flush draw"With only one club in my hand there is no way I can ever make a club flush.