SB is generic reg...


Winning Poker Network (Yatahay) - $1/$2 Hi/Lo (6 max) - Omaha Hi/Lo - 5 players
Hand converted by PokerTracker 4

Hero (UTG): 20.33 BB
CO: 36.2 BB (VPIP: 33.78, PFR: 20.36, 3Bet Preflop: 6.58, Hands: 230)
BTN: 38.1 BB (VPIP: 56.26, PFR: 32.53, 3Bet Preflop: 10.35, Hands: 1,208)
SB: 113.27 BB (VPIP: 29.04, PFR: 18.18, 3Bet Preflop: 7.98, Hands: 3,175)
BB: 25.69 BB (VPIP: 35.50, PFR: 18.50, 3Bet Preflop: 4.11, Hands: 203)

SB posts SB 0.25 BB, BB posts BB 0.5 BB

Pre Flop: (pot: 0.75 BB) Hero has A J 4 3

Hero calls 0.5 BB, fold, BTN raises to 1 BB, SB calls 0.75 BB, fold, Hero calls 0.5 BB

Flop: (3.5 BB, 3 players) K 2 8
SB bets 0.5 BB, Hero calls 0.5 BB, fold

Turn: (4.5 BB, 2 players) 5 SB Bets 1 BB...

Hero?

Assuming Fixed Limit game?

Raise 100%.

The only decision is whether to insta-raise, smooth raise or tank raise. (Not sure those are actually things BTW). But it's a raise.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Hmmm. I agree, but lets assume we are five years old, and 'splain it out exactly. We raise because....

We are guaranteed to win the lo or part of the lo on all possible runouts
Unless villain has a3 and a better hi, hero is pushing an equity advantage
villain should have the same lo something like 1/20 times

i interpret this as villain should have A3** (not specifically A34*) approximately 5% of the time.
I was hoping you would explain how you come to that conclusion.


fwiw, simulating for a 4 handed deal accounting for the card removal of the 4 board cards and hero's actual hand, someone other then hero gets dealt A3 ~15% of the time. if we assume A3 gets played preflop and not folded on the flop then we can assume if it was dealt it was dealt to sb.
using ppt ranges and assuming that he has a 3-bet range of his strongest hands i would conclude A3 is around 20% of his range.
so 5% seems rather low and hence why i inquire.

btw, i don't think it has an impact on the advice to raise.

with regard to my post above
Nevermind!

you obviously think he's completed with a very wide range.

the tracker stats indicate otherwise, but who knows how many of those hands were shorthanded.

Just checked and 5% could be too low, 10-15% may be more realistic, though really I think leading the flop with a lot of a3 combinations is incorrect, I think call or xr will tend to be better

But even when villain has a better a3 raising is only a small mistake, it will cost something like .25bb after calling a reraise (assuming villain puts in another bet)

Edit: in conclusion, I think if villain is playing optimally on flop he should not have a3 more than 10% on turn.. that's not even getting into the many a3 hands play better as a 3! Vs button range

I'm used to playing in loose 10-handed games in which this exact scenario would almost never come up. With four or more players seeing the turn, I'm pretty much always raising the turn with your hand. Even with just three players seeing the turn, if I'm last to act, I'm inclined to raise. But heads-up, I'm inclined to call.

Best-case scenario, you're up against someone with A46T and a flush draw (i.e., a worse low and a worse high) who is overplaying his hand. Worst-case scenario, you're up against A3 with any pair or A3 with a Queen kicker for a better high. More likely, you're simply up against a better high hand and you're chopping the vast majority of the time.

You think you have 13 outs to make a straight, but if your opponent has A3 or A4, that takes away two of your straight outs, and if your opponent has just one flush draw, that takes away another three or four of your straight outs. So, realistically, you might have seven or eight outs for three-quarters or a scoop, but your opponent could have 30 or more outs for three-quarters or a chop. If that's the case, I don't see the benefit of raising the turn.

There is a play in Limit Hold'em where you raise the turn with the idea of checking back the river if you don't improve. This way you put the same two big bets in when you don't improve as you would if you simply called a single bet on the turn and river, but you have the option of putting three big bets in when you do improve.

But in Limit Hold'em, your raise on the turn is more likely to take the initiative away from your opponent. In Limit Omaha, your opponent could raise you back with A3K or A3 and a flush draw—and now you're putting in four big bets instead of two in a situation in which you could be the one getting quartered.

imo you should raise in these situations when it is multiway and you are likely to get multiple callers behind, or there is calls after the original bettor and they will get sandwiched in.

in hu situations it's less beneficial, and more specifically should be done when you are confident the opponent is not sitting on the same low as you.

This. My question to OP: what are your reasons for NOT raising?

No reason not to raise. These strong draws on the turn should be raised for value as well as balancing a raise range that also includes nutted freerolling hands. This leaves a turn calling range weak and cards-up, but having a balanced call range here is not a priority to me, or probably more advanced than my game.

The reason for the thread was not to waste anyone's valuable time but to throw the question our there since it was highly debated at the table I was playing at that time.

Gotcha. Sounds like a good game.