O8 - Less than the Nuts Both Ways

I have been REALLY GOOD lately - throwing away bottom set, drawing only to the nuts, etc. ... Ray ... Buzz ... Louie ... honest. See if you think I strayed from the true teachings this hand.


3-6 Omaha 8, 9 handed, and this is the loosest game you have ever seen. Of my 8 opponents, 6 or 7 see each flop, with very little pre-flop raising. Then they will stay with as little as a non-nut low-only draw, an inside straight draw for only the high half, or a runner-runner draw for anything. I just want you to get the flavor of this extremely loose game. All 8 of my opponents in this hand fit this pattern; no "fishermen" (to use Cappelletti's term); all fish.


One off the button I pick up


2s 3c 6d Ts.


When it gets to me, all 5 players between the BB and me have called. I call. Button and SB fold, BB checks. 7 players see the flop.


I realize this looks pretty loose for a tight player like me. But with the large implied odds of a lot of players in and no pre-flop raising, I play a 23 in late position just for the low value - basically flop an Ace or get out.


Well, here's the exception. The Ace-less flop comes


3d 4h 5c.


My 26 gives me the 3rd nut low (probably no good) and the 2nd nut high straight (maybe good). I have no draw for high nuts, but I do have a "draw" (if you can call it that) for spiking an Ace to get me a share of the nut low, probably an extra quarter of the pot.


The BB leads, 3 more callers to me, and in last position I call.


This is the heaviest question I have for the panel. Do I belong in this hand?? For better or worse, I make the decision that if the "nuts" doesn't change, I will call single bets to the showdown. By the time I call this single bet, 11 SBs are already in the pot - this pot is pretty big.


Turn is the


Jh.


Basically a blank, but it puts the 2nd heart on board. 6 BB in pot.


Betting the same: BB leads, 3 callers to me, I call. 11 BB in pot.


River card is the 7s, making the board


3d 4h 5c - Jh - 7s.


Notice that I still have the second nut high straight, using my 36 as a "live 6" for the 7 high straight. But it now takes a 68 rather than a 67 to make the nut straight, and anyone holding a 67 has been counterfeited.


Now the BB checks, next bets out (he's a new lead bettor), one fold, and my right-hand opponent raises. I now fold. My reasoning is that chances are excellent that either the new lead bettor or the new raiser has an 86, and that I don't want to pay even 2 BB, let alone the entirely possible four BB, to take a shot at, probably, only half of this pot.


Go ahead and chop me up; I'll post the results later. Look at it this way - if I only posted those hands where I followed the instructions precisely, there wouldn't be any discussion at all.


Dick

I would have either folded or raised on the flop. Calling is not an option with a two way weak hand.


My guess is that by calling, you let someone beat your high on the river.

"Do I belong in this hand??"


Dick - Yes, IMHO. In the game you have described, and given the betting you have described, you belong in the hand before and after the flop, even though I agree with you the hand is a dog, the flop is not what you wanted, and you are out of position to play the hand.


"Now the BB checks"


BB now checks? You must be wary of a check-raise here.


"next bets out (he's a new lead bettor)"


Looks like the nuts.


"one fold, and my right-hand opponent raises."


Glory be! You would have faced a tougher decision had your right hand opponent merely called. You probably mildly wondered if the raise was to limit the field, or for value. Whatever. From your perspective your right hand opponent, perhaps inadvertently, has forced you to fold.


"I now fold."


Yep.


The new bettor almost surely has the nuts, one way or the other, and is likely to re-raise. The big blind could have checked as the first step of a check-raise. It's hard to read your right-hand opponent. Anyone who might worry about getting quartered probably would feel free to raise with four players in the pot. When you fold, the raising might stop, but it probably wouldn't have stopped had you continued in the hand.


You wanted to see one of the four aces on the river, or even any of the eleven non-heart kings, queens, tens or nines. With one of those fifteen cards, someone with 6-7-X-X still would have beaten you for high. Even so, with the 2nd nut high you would have been slightly favored to win for high. Now you have the 3rd nut high plus the 3rd nut low. With this sudden flurry of betting you have to feel insecure.


If the betting had been capped on previous rounds, the pot might be so large that you might be trapped in the pot here, but it was not and you are not. There is not enough in the pot to justify calling the expected 4 big bets.


Whether it turned out that you saved money or lost money by folding shouldn't really matter to you if you believe folding to the raise was the correct decision (as I do). The only reason to justify playing this hand to begin with, and then to justify continuing after the ace-less flop, was because you felt you could easily outplay your opponents. Part of outplaying your opponents is knowing when to get out. You missed on the river. Fold to the raise.


Just my opinion.


Buzz

Richard - "I would have either folded or raised on the flop."


Who would fold to Dick's raise here? Would A-2-X-X, the nut low, fold? Would 7-6-X-X, the nut high fold? In the game Dick has described, maybe even 8-7-X-X would not fold.


You may be thinking nobody but the big blind could have A-2-X-X or 7-6-X-X, because they would have raised, but that line of thinking does not apply in the game Dick has described. Poor Omaha-8 players often wait until the river to bet their sure things. Poor Omaha-8 players often slow play the nuts until the river.


Your thinking makes sense in a decent game, but Dick probably wouldn't be playing a dog like 2s-3c-6d-Ts, especially out of position, to begin with, in a decent game.


I don't fault raising on the flop with this hand against these opponents, but I don't fault not raising either. There are pros and cons to both.


Just my opinion.


Buzz

A weak two way hand doesn't play well multiway. By raising, you may be able to elimate the draws, particularly if the bettor reraises. You may even be able to eliminate a second nut, which would help either way.


If you can get the game head to head, the two way hand could take it all if you spike the ace.


Unless you can cut the field significantly, this hand shouldn't be played.

It turns out that my judgment of the opponents' hands was pretty good. The BB folded, and there was another raise and a call. The new lead bettor turned over 68 for the nut straight, and my RHO had A2 for the nut low.


I don't believe that the in-between folder would have folded a "live 6" (either 26, [345]6, or 67) for one bet on the river, and I just don't know about the BB. So I'm guessing that my 26 for 2nd nut high was good until the river, but I don't know for sure.


Thanks, guys.


Dick

Notice the awful situation you are in with a don't-have-the-nuts-unlikely-to-make-the-nuts hand. Also notice if the 86 also had a low card, you were drawing to 1/4 of the pot, and had 3 outs (As) for another 1/4 or 1/6. The only redeeming part of this hand is your position and ability to confidently lay it down for 2 bets on the river.


So at best this is a marginal situation. At worst (about half the deck) this is a bad situation.


You need a better hand with which to go out on a limb. Even when you flop your Ace you still only have a nut low draw. Besides A45 or A66 or TT6 there are few flops you can really like. "Implied odds" are a beneficial thing when fairly often you will make a hand worth a lot of money. Not this hand.


I just invented the following principle: out on a limb hands are those that need a reasonable number of 2 cards on the flop, not 3.


- Louie

"Unless you can cut the field significantly, this hand shouldn't be played."


Good point.


Buzz

thats the problem with these kind of hands, even if you get in for free they are not a bargain. its hard to fold here at any stage but at any stage you dont really have much positive equity, just a hand that looks good.

i still think it is best not to put any money in with these hands, especially when you could have gotten raised before the flop. you need too good a flop to have a hand that you can play intelligently rather than just a crying calling hand. so my vote is to fold these dogs in these multiway pots.

after you got stuck in, you played about the best you could with the situation.