Forumites,

I was playing FLO8 a couple weeks ago and got roasted when I raised the river in a 4-way pot with only the nut low. It just so happened that 2 of the other 3 villains had the same nut low I did so I just built a pot for the guy who had the high.

I'm not convinced that raising the river in a multiway pot with a nut low is a mistake. Sure, if I had x-ray vision and could see that 2 other villains had the same hand I do it would be a mistake, but at this particular table villains were showing down all kinds of trash. In a 4-way pot, it was not outside the realm of possibility for the 4 hands to be nut low, 2nd nut low, 2nd nut high and nut high. I absolutely want to raise my nut low in those cases.

There were 5- and 6-handed showdowns at that table.

To me it seems like a no-brainer to play aggressively at those tables - the fraction of my bet I lose when someone else has the same low is more than made up for when someone calls to the river with a bad hand.

Am I missing something? If I am, I'm more than willing to entertain constructive criticism.

Thanks in advance,
DTXCF

I feel this is really board textured dependent.

If the nut low requires the player to have A2 in their hand I would rarely raise the River with the bare nut low. Most players play any A2 at that limit and continue even on flops that only offer a nut low backdoor draw. (ie 1 low card on flop)

Now, if a backdoor low comes in - especially with a river A, 2 or 3 where the player needs some two card combo in the 2-5 range (with the possible exception of exactly 2,3), I think raising the river is fine and if you are quartered or 1/6th’d it is only a small mistake relatively speaking.

Also, keep in mind raising may not conclude the betting. Flush and paired boards, ones in which in all probability there is only one nut high (as opposed to a straight where nut high can be shared), you should expect a three bet - or even a four bet if 2nd nut high gets too aggressive! - to be forthcoming, making a potentially small mistake even worse. I wouldn’t want to be putting in 4 bets with only an A2 low in a multi-way pot too often.

Then again, I may just be awful at FLO.

Cheers




Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Post the hand history.

I'll do my best, this was several weeks ago so the details may not be completely accurate:

4 limpers, I'm on the BTN with A2xx with a suited ace and I raise. BB and all limpers call.

Flop is QQ8r. BB checks, first limper bets, next limper calls, folds around to me, I call and the BB calls.

Turn is 5 putting 4 suits on the board. BB checks, first limper bets, next limper calls, I call.

River is a 6. BB checks, first limper bets, next limper calls, I ???

Now in THIS case, the first limper probably has a Q. The other two villains are acting like they both have lows, so most likely a raise would just build a pot for the first limper. They're also both very passive, so if they made a straight they would probably check-call out of fear someone has a full house on the paired board.

But the other two villains have been playing and showing down every kind of rag you can imagine all night - if there's ANY CHANCE AT ALL that one of them has A3 and the other has a worse queen or a straight they're afraid to bet or raise, a raise could be profitable.

If both of the other villains have A2:
I call, and I put in $8 and get $32/6 = $5 back.
I raise, and I put in $16 and get $64/6 = $10 back.

If one villain has A2 and the other A3:
I call, and I put in $8 and get $32/4 = $8 back.
I raise, and I put in $16 and get $64/4 = $16 back.

If one villain has A3 and the other a worse Q:
I call, and I put in $8 and get $32/2 = $16 back.
I raise, and I put in $16 and get $64/2 = $32 back.

I can't lose unless the other two vilains both have exactly A2, and even in that case I really don't lose that much. Raising seems like a no-brainer here, but I'm open to constructive criticism if I'm wrong.

Your thought process is correct here. I recommend Steve Badger's article on Omaha myths: http://www.stevebadger.com/poker/omaha/myths/. "Never raise with the low" is one of the myths he debunks, using a mathematical analysis identical to yours.

That said, you will get roasted for raising with the low when you're quartered. Sometimes this makes absolutely no sense. For example, there's a bet and two calls in front of me, I raise with the nut low, and everyone calls. It turns out one other player has the nut low, so we each get our money back. Had I just called, we would have each gotten our money back, so my raise made no difference whatsoever. I still might get berated by the other player with the nut low.

Once I raised on the river with 23 for the nut low when there were five people still in the hand. It turned out four of us had 23 and got only an eighth of the pot each. One of those other low winners was really furious and lit into me. I ignored him. Fortunately, getting only an eighth of the pot is rare; I think I've seen it happen three times in 15 years of playing 8-10 hours/week.

There are times when you want to be wary of raising with the nut low; for example, if someone raised preflop and bet every street on a 753KJ board, there's a good chance he has A2 too, so you probably wouldn't want to raise the river three-handed. But in the game you describe, with four people in at the river, your raise was not incorrect.

Fun fact: What's the smallest fraction of a pot you could theoretically win in Omaha?

While the reasoning can be fairly long, I believe calling is better than raise in this particular spot because the upside of raising seems narrow. A3 should be able to fold for one more bet given the action. Also important is heros very limited chance of repping a hi hand, or villains chopping with the same hi hand.

you raise and bb folds for 2 instead of calling for 1, limper-bettor 3bets--where if you had called and bb had called* or if you had called and bb had folded** he wouldn't be able to raise--, limper-caller calls the 2bets because he has A2 too, you opt to just call the 1 more.

9 river bets went into the pot, you put in 3 bets, split the low for a 1/4, 1/4 pot=2.25 you lose .75bet


*call, and bb calls
4 river bets went into the pot, you put in 1 bet, split the low for a 1/4, 1/4 pot=1 you lose/win 0

**call and bb folds

3 river bets went into the pot, you put in 1 bet, split the low for a 1/4, 1/4 pot=.75 you lose .25bet


to be clear, the point i'm making is that raising can lead to you losing more than if you call without you getting 1/6th. (in reference to what is quoted)

raising or not raising as has been noted is very situational and i have no opinion to share

If you never raise with the nut low, then when you do raise the river, observant opponents will know that you have the nut high hand and will be able to make correct folds based on that knowledge.

I agree that raising with the nut low is very situation-dependent. If I think—based on the previous action in the hand and my knowledge of my opponents—that I could be quartered in a three-handed or heads-up pot, I won't do it. But in a four-way or five-way hand, the downside is minimal.

As for the upside, a couple of weeks ago, I raised on the river with the nut low and won the high with AK (no pair) when I got two players behind me to fold. The initial bettor had the nut low and a worse kicker with his ace, and I suspected that no one had much of anything for high because the action had checked around on the turn. Had I been wrong, I would have looked very foolish, but I would have lost only two or three chips.

And if one of my opponents get tilted because, in his view, I cost him money by raising with the nut low when he also had it, that's not necessarily a bad thing.

In a four-or-five-way pot, it's rarely going to be a big mistake to raise the nut low. You'll get quartered a whole lot, but you don't lose any money on your raise in this situation. And I wouldn't worry that much about splitting the low three ways. It's combinatorially much less likely than getting quartered, and the amount you lose in that situation is quite small compared to the gain when you happen to win half the pot.

it seems like you raised before one of the villains had called (the bb). you might be potentially raising him off of an A3 or a non nutted hi in this case so that's one argument against raising.
Also given there was one low card only on the flop the likelihood of any player who was drawing to low having A2 too is very high (almost certain players will fold A3 xx on that flop) so its very likely another player has the low. That's another argument against raising.

now you ran into 2 other players with A2 which is very rare in O8 but in general raising with nut low last to act in a 4 way pot (with 2 players in between) is a good play as you are protected against quartering with 4 players putting money in the pot.

In this case it might have been a bad play as the player who has already called almost certainly has A2 and you don't want to raise out the BB and get quartered (Whether he has A2 or not).

As far as guidelines for whether raising the nut lo on the river in multiway pots is a good idea, hero should be more cautious raising the hand he posted because

1. It's a fairly dry board, so the hi hand leader is much less likely to have changed on the river.

2. The betting action was small and straightforward (with the same villain betting).

Combined the two factors suggest villains who called flop and turn should be more likely to have a2 and more likely to fold worse Los and non-premium his on the river.

Of course, if calling stations are in the hand, hero doesn't need to worry as much about the downside so much because they help compensate.

Is the flop peel close?

Cranky old live LO8 players hate getting quartered / one-sixthed / etc more than like anything in the world. They're mad because your ambitious raise cost them more money. They're most likely terrible at poker.

W/R/T whether raising the river is good or not, it depends on how bad your opponents are. In this case, a raise is probably going to be a break even long term play for you, so I don't hate it. Just be prepared to hear the complaining about how you cost them an extra 1/3rd of a bet by raising the river, because all the times they spewed away bets by limp/calling low trash from EP or peeling a non-nut high draw multiway on a 3 low card flop seems to just elude their memory.

I think it's bad. But maybe close to ok.

It's certainly close; the right decision probably depends on what the xx are.

An excellent question.

According to PokerProTools Odds Oracle, when one low card flops, A2 makes a low by the river about 20% of the time, so I've got a 1 in 5 chance of winning half the pot so I essentially have what amounts to 10% equity if I don't end up getting quartered.

Also according to PPTOO, with 3 other villains in the hand there's only about an 18% chance that another villain has A2. They're stations, so they could be finding just about any excuse to peel one on the flop.

The pot's laying me 14 to 1 and it's very unlikely the passive BB is planning to checkraise.

I think a flop peel is a no-brainer.

Looks to me like you forgot to include the times you get sixthed...

You're also not counting the money you will have to put in on the turn if you get another low card. I'm not sure if that will hurt you much or not though.

To be honest, I often peel in this spot as well, but I thought I was just being stubborn. Seems like I always get trapped for multiple bets, but I guess I'm playing in more aggressive games.

All good points. Psychologically (psychoILLogically?) it's just so hard to fold when there are 14 small bets in the pot already and you only have to put in one. Maybe to combat that psychologically treat it like there are only 7 small bets in the pot since you have so little chance to win all 14 of them?

Ignoring quartering and sixthing for the moment, I have a 20% chance to make a low by the river. Let's say two villains and hero put in one bet on the turn, hero makes a nut low on the river and both villains call one bet. That's 26 small bets by the river, we only win 13 of those, and we have to put in 3 small bets (we're freerolling on the river because we're going to fold if we miss our low). So technically we're betting 3 small bets to win 13 small bets which is already worse odds than our 20% equity. Now add in the possibilities of getting quartered and sixthed. Those are much higher than the possibility of the other two villains getting into a raising war with the nut- and second-nut high with no low.

Now I'm not so sure the flop peel is such a no-brainer, even in a passive game.

I'm hoping to get to play some FLO8 tonight - it'll be interesting to see what I do if I get put in this situation - honestly, I hope I fold.

Your chance of making a nut low really depends on your backup here, which is why we can't know whether your peel is correct without knowing the other two cards. If you have A234, you make a nut low around 24% of the time; if you have A29T, this goes down to 16%.

Since OP just said he had A2xx I had to assume his other cards were pretty much worthless. If they are other good low cards then it's a better peel.

I read the hand as xx being above 8, which is why I asked.