5-10-20 Big O. V in bb is very loose and spewy pre but plays decent post. About 3k eff.

Hero on btn with AKT47ds no spades.

Pre: Hero limps (yes raise I know), sb bb str call

Flop (80) : KT5r both bdfd
Check, bb pot, hero and sb call

Turn (320) : 3ss
Check bb 300 hero calls, fold behind

River (920) : 4x
Bb checks

It's a very good hand to knock people out pre and can easily call a 3bet. Even if I had a limping range for some reason I'd never limp this hand.

Flop+turn fine, now I think both plays have some merit. It's actually nice that you are never splitting against a raise (because you can't call anyway) so I think I'm leaning towards a bluff. If he is good enough to have a straight here then so be it. Sizing maybe around two thirds?

It is super unlikely OOP has a better high and low and you have a decent shot at bluffing this one. Go for it

This is not true. V can easily have something like KT76x with x being some high card or pair. If he's tricky he will often checkraise Hero off of half the pot. Bet-folding this spot is bad unless V is known to be straightforward.

Notice that H is blocking V's sets, so he's moch more often getting 3/4 than chopping against V's check-fold range. This makes bet-folding even worse.

He needs to have top two and the exact bd-straight you don't want him to have. He needs to check-raise it instead of betting it. And then there is blockers (to hands villain never has, sets). Yes bet-folding must be very bad!

I am sorry but what you say is just completely braindead. How often would you estimate villain to have KT76x after he checks the river? More or less than 0,1% of the time?

If I were Villain, I'd be checking range on this river. Hero is a nit, and Villain must know this if they've played together long enough for Hero to say he "plays decent post." A nit's open-limping range in any form of O8 is heavily weighted to A2 hands. A player as aggressive as Villain rarely has A2 in a limped pot. He is not an idiot if his postflop play is okay, so you have to assume he's thinking along these lines.

The 76 combo is not necessary, 62 works almost as well. And the large fraction of V's range that he's just giving up on because his high draw bricked is basically irrelevant. When V expects H to have a wheel and will play accordingly, it's really dumb for H to turn a 2-way hand, that is usually getting at least 3/4 of the pot, into a bluff.

A million (bizarre) assumptions.

Against 26 it doesn't matter if we bet-fold, because we are scooped anyway. That was the point that I already made in my last post but you either didn't understand it or forgot it already.

Your poker thinking is totally bananas. Villain should not expect hero to have A2 or bet the river often. You are just making up weird ****.

Let me explain it once more, slowly.

If villain has a hand that he is check-folding, it doesn't matter if he is getting 1/4, 1/2 or 3/4 of the pot if checked. By betting we win the whole pot. It is a great result.

If villain is check-calling with a split, it doesn't matter. If he is calling with 1/4 it's good that we got more money in. If he is calling with 3/4 it's bad that we got more money in.

If villain is check-raising as value, it doesn't matter much because hero can just fold, but of course I understand hero loses the bet. Villain should not for any rational reason be check-raising a lot here. If you think he should, you are seeing monsters under your bed.

The only downside of betting that I can see is if villain is check-raising as a bluff, since then we lose the pot plus our bet. However, it's so random to c/r here as a bluff that I think we can just ignore it. Even 67 (the only demi-bluff that doesn't scoop us) is extremely rare. I wasn't kidding about 0,1%. Would you seriously c/r bare 67 here and why?

If "Hero" is a generic online player I agree. But he's open-limping the button in a high-stakes live Big O game. People who do this are either obvious donators, or nits with (usually) A2 trying to trap the blind players with hands they would have folded to a raise. It's easy to tell who is who after a few hours of play. Do you think Villain is oblivious to this?

In a 4-card PLO8 game you're right that Hero will have A2 much less often on the river after calling the flop bet. But the extra card makes it much easier for him to get a decent piece of a HHL flop and still have backdoor nut low draws. More important is V's perception of him as "the guy who always has A2." Non-idiots rarely bet into nits on 345 boards. Particularly unpaired and unflushed 345 boards.

Given V's profile we should expect him to have 76 much more often here than you believe. This type of player will very often stab at high flops and continue barreling on favorable turns. He could've easily had little of the flop and picked up a wrap on the turn.

The presence of 62 in V's range is only irrrelevant if you assume that H should be bet-folding the river regardless. I don't make that assumption, only see that it strengthens V's range and might force H to fold to a raise after betting a hand he should've checked.

Again, a million assumptions in your head. I'd assume Hero is a slight winner based on his posts. Hero did not limp A2. Maybe villain is not oblivious to how Hero plays, but is that very relevant? Is villain clairvoyant?

Villain pots KT5 4-way, then pots KT53 3-way and he has lots of 67. What the **** are you smoking? And then he need to check-raise bare 67 when he hits it. You are delusional. I am going to stop this conversation because I'm saying the same obvious things over and over again. GL.

Based on my 20 years of playing plo8 for a living I think the highest EV line on the river is bet-fold. This is true not only to Hero's exact holding but to many other hands as well. I am not saying that it's the best line in theory or that it can not be exploited. I can live with the fact that someone doesn't agree with me. But I dislike delusional arguments.

I am a nit and V knows this. I think he assumes I would limp btn with A2 a lot and I could easily get to the river with it.

I bet 500 and he snap folded what he said was a set.