I appreciate hearing criticism of hands I play because it's a good protection against Dunning Kruger. But I'm having trouble finding an argument that convinces me cold calling is good here.
More specifically,
- Arguments for CC above don't really address the 1.5 sb dead, which is the main reason why I believe a 3-bet to be correct. In fact they don't really address equity at all.
- Arguments for CC seem to apply MW LO8 concepts to HU LO8; imo they're almost as different as stud and holdem. Little hyperbole, not much.
When we learn LO8 (or any other Omaha), I'd imagine most of us come across a sentence like "Omaha hands run close in value heads up, hot and cold, but not multiway." Sometimes there may also be an appeal to implied odds (
here's a good one).
Fine and good--implied odds matter, a lot, and multiway you need possibilities to scoop multiway pots. Getting HU doesn't change the importance of IO, but it drastically widens the range of hands that can get neutral or better IO and narrows the range of hands that are laying IO.
I don't see this reflected in many of the pro-cold call analyses. For example:
Quote:
Originally Posted by monikrazy
A focus on equity makes it easy to overlook how poorly a bad a2 hand like this plays postflop. 7 and 9 are both bad cards and we are drawing to a non nut flush.
Why does A2 play poorly postflop? On any flop with two unique cards 3 thru 8 it has enough equity to no-brainer call down. On any flop with two diamonds and a low card (assume I mean non-counterfeiting) it probably has enough equity to call an aggressive player's range. On any flop with two low cards and two diamonds, or two low cards and a nine, or a seven and a low card, it probably has enough to raise.
When you're against one other Omaha hand, it's MUBS to think that hand covers you every which way. Is Matusow only opening A2-wheel or A2-Bway here, ever? He's an underdog to have diamonds. He's an underdog to have a nine or a seven with a better kicker. He's probably a favorite to have A2 (we can debate how big a favorite) but should have other stuff in his range. He's an underdog to have AA2. There's no reason at all to think that he's crushing me for high. More likely than not I'm slightly behind his range, IP, with dead money in the pot.
Quote:
Finally, managing heroes effective stack size at this stage of the tournament is important, if we judge a narrow to non-existent equity edge we don't need to push fractional CeV.
Because of the ICM argument or because of more subtle fold equity related arguments?
Quote:
Originally Posted by MacauBound
But just as I'm not gonna 3b KQJ7 just so that we are more likely to play a HU pot, I'm also not gonna overplay a weak A2 against a range that's tighter than ours.
Fair enough. Here are some more hands I'm not going to 3 bet:
- 99(93)
- KT92r
- 4444
- a fouled hand where the dealer gave me five cards
Yay hyperbole.
I love reductio ad absurdum as much as the next guy but what on God's green earth is the relevance of KQJ7 to the hand in question? This is a high-low game, and HU being able to make any low is huge. Transposed to T984 the hand gains almost 3% against a 12% opening range.
With an eight-four low!
(No, I'm not playing T984 here either. And I appreciate the response; just having some fun here.)
As for "overplay a weak A2 against a range that's tighter than ours," that's an absolute statement in a game that's about marginal quant decisions. If we were 49.99% HU (counting IO) against MM's range and someone promised to splash the pot with a few extra bets if we reraised, would we be overplaying our hand? If not, then there must be some line at which it becomes profitable to play a slight underdog hand (counting IO) in a way to induce dead money. If you think 1.5 sb isn't enough reward to play a 45% H&C dog against a 12% range then fine, but hopefully we can agree there's some point where the reward is enough. When we reach that point we're not overplaying our hand, even though it's a dog.
And honestly I don't buy that RIO are terribly negative, if they're negative at all. Is MM open-folding his worst A2 (which isn't part of a 12% range on PPT) from the CO? If not, then he's as likely to have a weak A2 as a strong one. He has a little better hand range; we have position, a flush draw (HU he's really unlikely to have better diamonds), and an A2 that mitigates IO trouble.
Last edited by AKQJ10; 07-01-2018 at 11:21 PM.