does anyone raise this? or how do you approach this situation?

i don't believe I ever get better hands to fold if i raise, and i give worse hands (whether villians realize or not that their hand is worse) the ability to bluff me off my hand with a raise ((is this my leak that i would fold to a re-raise)), but just calling down, seemed weak/passive and i hadn't gained any information on the flop or turn, which led to me not knowing what to do on the river.

villian is a reg. seems more active then many with a wider range w/o being LAG/dumb 33vpip 13pfr nearly a 50% call open 86% flop c-bet and only 20% fold to flop c-bet

Full Tilt Poker $0.25/$0.50 Pot Limit Omaha Hi/Lo - 6 players
The Official 2+2 Hand Converter By DeucesCracked Poker Videos

UTG: $52.90
MP: $12.50
Hero (CO): $69.70
BTN: $20.00
SB: $98.15
BB: $77.55

Pre Flop: ($0.75) Hero is CO with T A A 6
2 folds, Hero raises to $1.50, 2 folds, BB calls $1

Flop: ($3.25) Q Q 2 (2 players)
BB bets $1.60, Hero calls $1.60

Turn: ($6.45) 9 (2 players)
BB bets $3.20, Hero calls $3.20

River: ($12.85) T (2 players)
BB checks, Hero

Your play is fine. V. bet the river!

I think I bet here as well, but not for value, I am turning my hand into a bluff. As played, I am giving the villain credit for the Q and with the 9s being probably the worst card in deck for the hand he is representing I am betting to get him get him to fold

Did you see that Hero backdoored the flush?

^ You don't see the flush?

If your plan is to catch bluffs, improving to a medium-strength hand (from a weak hand) relative to the board on the river isn't enough of a reason to make a value bet, in my opinion. You lose a lot more when you are wrong and get check-raised than you gain from the few hands that can call on the river, because a tricky check on the river seems more likely than a hand that will call a value bet, unless this guy won't fold bare trips.

Raise when? You raised pre-flop. I might raise or not pre-flop, depending. I don't think it's "wrong" to raise and I don't think it's not wrong to raise. (I think "it depends").

Do you mean raise BB's flop bet? You already raised pre-flop and now you're asking if you should take the maniac approach of also raising BB's flop bet?

Gee... I don't know... I guess you could do that...

I have some questions at this point myself. Is this guy reading you for aces because of you pre-flop raise. If so, and if he figures two slots in your hand are taken up by the aces, you only have roughly a random chance of having one of the two missing queens in your hand. Assuming he doesn't have Q***, on the basis of your holding aces, he should figure it's roughly 10 to 1 that you don't also have a queen.

Since it's ~10 to 1 unlikely you don't have a queen (assuming you do have AA**), he might be betting this flop without a queen himself (or 22**).

Meanwhile, from Hero's perspective, before Villain bets this flop, it's about 5 to 1 that Villain doesn't have a queen. Since he'd always bet this flop with a queen (we presume) but might not bet this flop without one, when he bets this flop, he's more likely to have a queen than 5 to 1 against. But without knowing a lot of past history, we can't say how likely Villain is to actually have a queen (or 22**).

So, yeah, I guess you could raise Villain's flop bet, to $15, or something like that. But then what do you do if he re-raises to $60 (or whatever). If you call, you're practically all in praying for an ace.

I had not read the above when I wrote my last paragraph. Your thoughts are about the same as mine.

I agree.

For me, the solution is not to generally raise before the flop with aces if I think my opponent is very likely to put me on aces if I raise. I think you can get out played by a cagey opponent if he thinks you have aces when you do.

Seems like the question is, does he have a full house or not?

Let's give him a queen and three blank cards and simulate.

ProPokerTools Omaha Hi/Lo Simulation

600,000 trials (Randomized)

board: QQ29T

Hand	Pot equity	Scoops	Wins Hi	Ties Hi	Wins Lo	Ties Lo
As6sAdTd	49.40%	296,391	296,391	0	0	0
Q***	50.60%	303,609	303,609	0	0	0

Looks like about a toss up if he has a queen, as to whether he would have ended up with a full house.

Would he check the river with a full house, so as to induce a bet from Hero?

I don't know. He's your opponent.

I don't think he has a full house. He might not even have a queen. But if he does have a queen without a full house (about 50/50 from the sim) or if he has a straight or a non-nut flush, he probably pays off.

I'd bet, pot sized. If Hero bets the pot, there's not enough Hero has left in his stack to worry about getting re-raised. I wouldn't want to give Villain, and the table, the information, for free, that I actually did have the pair of aces for the pre-flop raise. And if Villain doesn't call, Villain more or less verifies he was betting without a queen.

By all means, bet here. Pot sized. Make him pay to see.

If we lose to a full house, meh, goes with the territory.

Buzz

As Villain, I'd often check-raise a boat on the river here, against aggressive players. They don't know when to take the free showdown!

buzz --i did mean 'would you raise the flop or raise the turn'

i wouldn't think an open-raise from the CO at a 6 max table, maybe even especially a Rush table, should be interpreted as AAxy. I raise preflop 12%+ fwiw, although of course villian can have a different stat for my pfr%, and/or think about my range quite differently from what it actually is.

i think the preflop raise is necessary to either narrow the field or buy the button or get some information/feeling as to the strength of the caller's hand from the blinds.

i don't believe i play AAxy particularly well post-flop and hopefully not permitting the blinds to come along cheaply with 3578 or 2489 or 2588(hands of that ilk) will make it easier for me to play the hand postflop.

I appreciate all the responses -and will hopefully receive more. THANKS

i like the way you played this hand, i would bet 6.85 dollars on the river and get paid, obviously you fold to a river raise as well but i cant imagine him checking a FH on the river, i imagine the majority of his range is a naked Q, if he has better then b/f and be fine with it, there is no way this oppo would c/r w/o having it

Right.

But the shoe is on the other foot here.

If Villain bets here instead of checking, do you call the bet?

You have the nut flush, but a full house or quads is possible.

If Villain bets here instead of checking, do you call the bet?

(I do).

I don't like it. I'd rather have the nuts. We'd all rather have the nuts. (Duh).

But Hero doesn't have the nuts. And honestly, that usually will be the case when low is not possible.

If you would call a river bet by Villain in this scenario, as I would, then, in general, I think when Villain checks, you should bet yourself here. (And yes, that will sometimes back-fire. We're all capable of checking a strong hand here so as to allow an over aggressive opponent enough rope to hang himself).

In my humble but firm opinion, good poker play sometimes involves taking calculated risks.

I don't know what kind of patsies you encounter playing on-line. All I hear from the on-line players is how superior on-line players are to live casino players at the same limits.

However, in my live Omaha-8 casino play, I don't run across many patsies who would allow me to only play nut hands successfully. Nits don't get any action when they do bet if they wait to bet until they have a sure thing.

You might make a nit-like approach work for you if you rarely play in a live casino setting, but if you're a regular, except as an occasional change of pace, that approach simply doesn't work well. That's my experience, anyhow.

I don't want to seem stubborn, but despite the risk of running into an opponent with a better hand, and admittedly there is such a risk, but despite that risk, I believe Hero should bet this river after Villain checks. It might be different if Hero had a big enough stack to get stung by a river check/raise. But that's not the case here.

Buzz

Thanks for explaining.

You're right. If you raise before the flop 12%, then your raise should not be interpreted as AA**. (But, rightly or wrongly, is it?)

OK.

Seems like over the years we have had post after post about it. In non-folding simulations, AA is the best heads-up two card combination you can have, better than suited ace-wheel-card. (Those are next).

Against more opponents in non-folding simulations, the ace-wheel-card combos are better than AA. But it's still right up there with them.

But in real Omaha-8 play somehow the two card combo AA doesn't seem to do that well relative to various other two-card combinations. Seems like it should but I don't think it does. And I think maybe the reason is somehow opponents are able to sniff it out and get out of the way when it could hurt them. That's pure speculation on my part. Just a feeling.

Seems like it should if you somehow don't teletype that you have it.

Buzz

Run that again with the flop. Hero's an 82:18 dog.

Villain might be betting air or something like KK, but at this level most players don't bet here into a preflop raiser without a Q (or better). So I think the best play is just fold on the flop.

I'll take your word for it.

But we don't know if Villain has a queen or not. If Villain does have a queen, then, in my opinion, Hero should fold to Villain's flop bet. (And your simulation verifies that).

However, Villain (rightly or wrongly) may be playing Hero for a hand held pair of aces because of Hero's pre-flop raise. And in that case Hero would be roughly half as likely to have a queen than without those two slots taken up by aces. And in that case, Villain would feel freer to bet without a queen.

I (intentionally) ran the simulation on the river, because at that point Hero has miraculously back-doored a nut flush and should be wondering in case Villain does have a queen, whether or not Villain would be expected to have made a full house.

I understand your point of view (or think I do). Thanks for expressing it.

Buzz