3/4 Hand #2

[Moneyline]

Party 3/6 10 handed

very loose very passive EP limps, loose/aggressive MP limps, loose/aggreassive sb completes, I check in BB with A /images/graemlins/club.gif J /images/graemlins/diamond.gif 5 /images/graemlins/club.gif 4 /images/graemlins/spade.gif.

Flop: 6 /images/graemlins/diamond.gif 4 /images/graemlins/heart.gif 3 /images/graemlins/heart.gif (4 players, 4 sb)

SB bets, I raise, EP calls, MP folds, SB calls.

Turn: 2 /images/graemlins/club.gif (3 players, 5bbs)

SB checks, I bet, EP calls, SB calls.

River: 9 /images/graemlins/spade.gif(3 players, 8 bbs)

SB checks, I bet, EP calls, SB calls.

[Spladle Master]

Your flop raise is atrocious.

[bholdr]

RUN!!!

fold preflop.

failing that, fold the flop.


but since you got to the turn, go nuts, you're hand is awesome.


god i love omaha.


it's plays/cards like this that make he good players money and keep the fish coming back.



PLAY TIGHTER. MUCH TIGHTER.

edit: didn't see that you were in BB. fold the flop.

[Moneyline]

Would you mind explaining why? Personally, I'm not sure if raising or calling is the preferred play here. FWIW, I think a fold is out of the question.

[Nick709]

Flop: Folding sucks, and so does calling, raise is good.
I like everything about this hand.

[gergery]

[ QUOTE ]
Would you mind explaining why? Personally, I'm not sure if raising or calling is the preferred play here. FWIW, I think a fold is out of the question.

[/ QUOTE ]

The flop is the only question here, the other streets are obvious. So,

What 2 card combo's are you looking for on turn/river?
How often do you think you'll win high?
What lows do you think will fold, that you want to fold?

--greg

[arcticfire]

Your drawing for 4 outs only from the flop on. If you do not recognize that putting a riase in on a 4 out draw is a bad idea your in trouble.

A4xx , A5xx , 23xx - These are all the hands that people commit suicide on. You have to be extra cautious about playing any of these.

[Moneyline]

[ QUOTE ]
What 2 card combo's are you looking for on turn/river?


[/ QUOTE ]
Well, a J, 4, 2, or 7 would be nice. The cards I don't want to see are hearts, fives, or an A if the pot stays multiway. A 6 or a 3 wouldn't be great either.

[ QUOTE ]
How often do you think you'll win high?


[/ QUOTE ]
That's hard to say. If I'm getting quartered h/u I'd guess I take all of the high about 2/3 of the time, but if I'm not getting quartered h/u I think my chances of winning the high are substantially less... unless I can get everyone else to fold. If the pot stays multiway a total guess is that I'll win the high half 25% of the time.

[ QUOTE ]
What lows do you think will fold, that you want to fold?

[/ QUOTE ]
A5xx, but I'm much more concerned with getting better high hands to fold, as I think the chance of A2xx being out is quite small in this situation.

[gergery]

Well, there are a bunch of problems with this flop.
1. There are few cards you want to see that will help you for high
2. If you hit your high its not that strong.
3. There are still redraws even if you hit.
4. Winning high will still only win half the pot
5. There are many that could be ahead of you right now, and many others that have better equity, and a bunch more that are very close
6. For low, you only have 2nd nut low now and no counterfeit protection.

You essentially have 3 outs to a very strong hand – the non-heart 2’s, and maybe another 4 outs to a reasonable hand (4’s, 7’s), and still vulnerable to redraws if you hit those.

Usually with bi-direction hands I’d say raise to thin the field, but this hand is so marginal I’d probably just fold it. It may be slightly positive EV to play on, but the 3-6 is full of fishy callers, so why push what is at best a tiny edge.

My two cents,
Greg

[pokahpro]

Preflop: Fine by me, it's a Krieger/Tenner starting hand and your the BB.

Flop: Call don't raise, You only have 4 outs to the nut low and 4 more to non-nut high with a flush draw that also beats you on the board. Even the call may not be good. I don't think the pot odds are there for it. Plus in case you do make your hand you don't want to drive people out with the raise. You would have made more money. Did you get 1/4 or 3/4?

Turn: Fine

River: Fine

I would have folded the flop. You don't have a reasonable chance for a winning high and have 2nd best low, which is generally a loser and causes trouble pursuing. The bet on the flop indicates that one of the ways you might be able to go is probably a loser (either he's got A-2, straight, or flush draw).

[Moneyline]

I took 3/4, and was behind on the flop both ways

BB had 2s 3c 5s Ks for a flopped straight
EP had Ah 2h 2d 9d for the flopped nut low and nut flush draw

My reasoning on the flop was that SB and MP would have certainly raised preflop with A2xx, and EP could have anything. So I thought there was a good chance that I wasn't beat for low. Turns out I was in bad shape, but I'm still not convinced I played it incorrectly.

[arcticfire]

[ QUOTE ]
I took 3/4, and was behind on the flop both ways

BB had 2s 3c 5s Ks for a flopped straight
EP had Ah 2h 2d 9d for the flopped nut low and nut flush draw

My reasoning on the flop was that SB and MP would have certainly raised preflop with A2xx, and EP could have anything. So I thought there was a good chance that I wasn't beat for low. Turns out I was in bad shape, but I'm still not convinced I played it incorrectly.

[/ QUOTE ]

Let me try and explain what everyone here is saying in this case. Your focusing on the play of this paticular hand. Omaha8 is not about single hand play. Holdem you have to break down post-flop play because holdem is a game of exploiting small edges.

Omaha8 is not. What you do after the flop is almost illrelavent in comparision to what you do before the flop and on it. It's not if or not you won this paticular hand in this paticular instance. It's that you'll do the exact same thing the next time the situation comes up and get burned on it , again and again and again.

Try and think of your play in more of a long term strategy then if or not you play a paticular hand correctly. The only thing you should be examining post flop play for is to make sure you extracting the right amount from your pots , not if or not it's a profitable choice in the first place.

[Moneyline]

I appreciate your comments. I don't want to sound condescending here, but I am aware of long term profit and result-oriented thinking. I think part of what you're saying is that it's a bad idea to draw to the 2nd nuts for low, and I think in most cases you're right. IMO, however, you leave a lot of profit on the table if you don't draw to less than the nuts in many circumstances.

Your thinking sounds very Badgeresque (in places), and I agree that the early streets are much more important in 08 than in hold 'em. However, I think examining specific hands is a fantastic way to learn how to deal with general types of situations that occur on the flop in 08 because I/we will be better prepared when we face those situations in the future. IMO, it's hard to learn strategy that gains long-term profit without knowing how to deal with specific situations that occur frequently.

[ QUOTE ]
I appreciate your comments. I don't want to sound condescending here, but I am aware of long term profit and result-oriented thinking. I think part of what you're saying is that it's a bad idea to draw to the 2nd nuts for low, and I think in most cases you're right. IMO, however, you leave a lot of profit on the table if you don't draw to less than the nuts in many circumstances.

Your thinking sounds very Badgeresque (in places), and I agree that the early streets are much more important in 08 than in hold 'em. However, I think examining specific hands is a fantastic way to learn how to deal with general types of situations that occur on the flop in 08 because I/we will be better prepared when we face those situations in the future. IMO, it's hard to learn strategy that gains long-term profit without knowing how to deal with specific situations that occur frequently.

[/ QUOTE ]

I don't agree with you. At the low limits, O/8 is largely a game of the nuts ... or at least many outs to the nuts. Drawing specifically to pull 2nd best, over the long run, is a losing strategy at the low limits, in my opinion.

[Moneyline]

I don't think I articulated my point as well as I should have. I think you're totally right that low limit 08 is largely a game of the nuts. My point is that "largely" and "always" are different (obviously). I felt and still feel, perhaps wrongly, that this particular hand is a clear exception because of my reads on the other players. But again, I could easily be mistaken.

[arcticfire]

[ QUOTE ]
I appreciate your comments. I don't want to sound condescending here, but I am aware of long term profit and result-oriented thinking. I think part of what you're saying is that it's a bad idea to draw to the 2nd nuts for low, and I think in most cases you're right. IMO, however, you leave a lot of profit on the table if you don't draw to less than the nuts in many circumstances.

Your thinking sounds very Badgeresque (in places), and I agree that the early streets are much more important in 08 than in hold 'em. However, I think examining specific hands is a fantastic way to learn how to deal with general types of situations that occur on the flop in 08 because I/we will be better prepared when we face those situations in the future. IMO, it's hard to learn strategy that gains long-term profit without knowing how to deal with specific situations that occur frequently.

[/ QUOTE ]

Btw - I didn't mean to sound condencending in my post if it came off that way I apologize.

Yes I suppose my thinking is badgeresque in many ways , I still to this day agree with much of the way he thinks. Anyway , I also agree with you that examining specific hands can help in developing your overall strategy. However I disagree that chasing non nut hands is a profitable choice. Certain hands will never have the pot odds to chase , things like 4 outters are a prime example. How often are you going to be offered 11-1/10-1 on your money at a 10 person table ? If you call with hands that will end up as 4 outters (many poket pair with crud xx) even if they hit are you going to ever have the pot odds to hold your ground.

In limit I think you can get away with the occasional foraee into non nut land. Yes there is money to be taken if you can play the marginal hand well , however it's a very very small % of your profit expectation and unless played imho perfectly will overall really hurt you.

[gergery]

[ QUOTE ]
Yes there is money to be taken if you can play the marginal hand well , however it's a very very small % of your profit expectation and unless played imho perfectly will overall really hurt you.

[/ QUOTE ]

Completely agree. Run some math on various ranges of hands here, and your edge might be at very best .1 or .3 of a BB.

By contrast, with actual cards you were drawing to 1 out for 3/4 and 4 outs to tie. You are giving up almost nothign by not playing this.

[ QUOTE ]
this particular hand is a clear exception because of my reads on the other players. But again, I could easily be mistaken.

[/ QUOTE ]

probably the most important part of the whole thing ... if you think you've got good reads that tell you your hand is good, go for it.

[Buzz]

[ QUOTE ]
Flop: .... SB bets, I raise

[/ QUOTE ]

Moneyline -
1st betting round - fine. You check your very playable hand from the big blind. Fine. You also could have raised, but I like a check better.

2nd betting round - Folding here is out of the question. And you don't want to chase with this hand, calling all the way to the show-down.

Therefore, I think the raise is your best play here. You have flopped the second nut low and although your hand looks very much as though it has not much chance for high, you might promote it by raising on this flop.

When ten opponents have been dealt cards, and you have either one ace or one deuce, but not both, roughly half the time an opponent will have been dealt A2XX. It's enough so that you have to be concerned about it, but your second nut low should be good about half the time.

Your best way to promote your hand to a scooper, or even have a better chance at half the pot is to raise. Your raise may have the effect of causing another A5XX to fold. Or your raise may somehow cause someone else to fold what might have been the winning high hand, perhaps garnering you the high half of the pot.

Would SB raise before the flop with A2XX? If there's a good chance SB would raise before the flop with A2XX, the lack of a pre-flop raise would seem to indicate SB doesn't hold A2XX. No guarantees, but let's raise and see what SB does.

Similarly, from your description of MP, since there was no pre-flop raise from MP, you should tend to think MP does not have A2XX. Again, no guarantees.

But either of them might have A5XX, and your pre-flop raise might shake SB and MP loose from a flop hand that would quarter you for low, MP on this betting round, and maybe SB on this or the next.

Hard to say what a loose, passive player like EP holds at the point you make the raise. Could be A2XX, in which case you expect a call. Again, you might shake EP loose of a hand that would quarter you for low, and again, no guarantees.

And you have some outs. Any deuce might be for the whole pot as might any non-heart seven. And there are some other possibilites if you can get some of your opponents to fold here.

3rd betting round - fine. Without the deuce on the turn, you have a tougher decision.

4th betting round - fine.

Just my opinion.

Buzz

[Buzz]

[ QUOTE ]
At the low limits, O/8 is largely a game of the nuts ... or at least many outs to the nuts.

[/ QUOTE ]

Niss - That particular glib generality bothers me. It's not exactly wrong, but neither is it exactly right.

[ QUOTE ]
Drawing specifically to pull 2nd best, over the long run, is a losing strategy at the low limits

[/ QUOTE ]

I can't imagine anybody wanting to end up second best in a poker hand. But that's not quite what Moneyline is doing by raising on the second betting round.

Buzz

[Buzz]

Greg - What you write is true, and as it turned out, Moneyline needed a miracle card on the turn to pull it off - but it didn't look to him (or me, in reading his description of the hand history) as though he was up against a flopped straight plus A2XX when he raised on the second betting round.

Just my opinion.

Buzz

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
At the low limits, O/8 is largely a game of the nuts ... or at least many outs to the nuts.

[/ QUOTE ]

Niss - That particular glib generality bothers me. It's not exactly wrong, but neither is it exactly right.

[ QUOTE ]
Drawing specifically to pull 2nd best, over the long run, is a losing strategy at the low limits

[/ QUOTE ]

I can't imagine anybody wanting to end up second best in a poker hand. But that's not quite what Moneyline is doing by raising on the second betting round.

Buzz

[/ QUOTE ]

Let me respond by first saying that I have great respect for you and your posts, so nothing below is intended to be condescending. You know much more about this game than I ever will.

My statement about the nuts is indeed a generality. There are of course instances when you do not have to have the nuts to succeed on a particular hand. But as a poster said somewhere else in this forum, O/8 is about long-term expectations, not particular hands. If you play to draw second best, without draws to the nuts, on a continuous basis, you will be a loser. Of course, there will be times where table reads will tell you that such hands are good. The OP says that this is one of them. That's for the player to determine.

Look at this hand. The flop is 6d-4h-3h. The OP cannot have any reasonable expectation to do any better than 1/2 the pot. He as no reasonable expection of a winning high, let alone the nuts. Yes he can have a low straight. But he cannot have a nut straight, and there is a flush draw. The prospects of success on this hand after the flop are poor.

I thus do not understand the suggestion of a raise in general. There were only 4 players. It's not like there is a ton of pre-flop money in the pot that it pays to make a play for it, to decrease the odds for the players acting after the OP, or to try to make this hands a heads-up. Again, the OP believed that he had a read on the table. I can't question that. But when SB bets, (1) he tells me that he has something that is probably better than what OP has (one way or the other -- or maybe even both), and (2) it becomes clear that OP has little chance of doing better than 1/2 the pot, barring a miracle.

Moreover, at the low limits, raises on flops like this one achieve little. If a player after him as A-2, he's not going to fold for the raise. And if the players after him have bad hands, they will fold to the bet, they don't need to be raised.

As Krieger says in his new book (which I recommend), low limit O/8 is a straightforward game. If you have good hands, bet them. If you don't, get out. I'd define a good hand as (1) a reasonable chance for a scoop or (2) a guarantee of 1/2 when there are multiple players. After the flop, he didn't have either -- unless again his table read told him otherwise. In general, I would have folded.

PS, it is hard to ask for advice on a hand when your justification is based on a table read.

I hope this adequately explains my thought process. I would be happy to hear what you think, as I always am.

Mr. Niss

[gergery]

[ QUOTE ]
2nd betting round - Folding here is out of the question.

[/ QUOTE ]

Really? I am very surprised by this. I think if you're going to play on in this hand, I agree raising is best because you want to limit the field to promote your hand in one way or the other (mainly high).

But raising here won't fold an A2 hand, maybe it folds an A5 but at this level that's questionable. But more importantly, for low here any time A2 is out, you will lose bets on this street and the turn/river. anytime A5 is there you're likely to get quartered or maybe make alittle. Any time a worse low is around they fold and you're just up again high. So the 40% of the time that low is there you lose a bunch of bets, and when its not you win nothing additional. Net, bad implied odds.

For high, you could easily be drawing dead to A2 or 52 straight, but of which are hands that could easily be played at 3-6. You could be dead to 66,44,33. You could be behind to 6x. You could be a dog to any two diamonds(which would almost certainly have overcards).

if you improve, you are still against diamond redraws, and even hitting a 7 ties you with anyone with a 5 AND leaves you open to redraws for higher straights too.

Since this flop has both many lows, potential straights and flush draws, I would not expect many folds. So you will likely need to actually win at showdown for high, even if you get 1 or more opponnets to fold.

Your chances of scooping are poor, and if you do scoop, its because your relatively weak high got lucky -- meaning its unlikely someone else had enough of a hand to put much money in -- another negative implied odds spot.

Net, I just don't understand how playing on here can be much more than very slightly EV+, and more likely its signficantly EV-

--Greg

[Moneyline]

[ QUOTE ]
Of course, there will be times where table reads will tell you that such hands are good. The OP says that this is one of them. That's for the player to determine.


[/ QUOTE ]

I don't agree with this statement at all. IMO, reads play a huge role in 08 because strategy changes enormously depending upon who is in the pot, especially when the pot is shorthanded. They're also very easy to come by in 08 because a large percentage of hands are shown down. So since you will almost always have reads available and they greatly affect game strategy, I don't see how you can discuss strategy without taking them into account. I included my table reads in the post and I can assure you they were at least fairly accurate, so I don't know why people would want to discount that information when making desicions about how to play the hand.

[ QUOTE ]
Look at this hand. The flop is 6d-4h-3h. The OP cannot have any reasonable expectation to do any better than 1/2 the pot. He as no reasonable expection of a winning high, let alone the nuts. Yes he can have a low straight. But he cannot have a nut straight, and there is a flush draw. The prospects of success on this hand after the flop are poor.

[/ QUOTE ]

I could be wrong, but I think there is a significant chance that I could take 3/4 here. SB (and no one else) is likely to hold A2xx, but if the bet represents A5xx then I'm likely way ahead for high. I'm even money to win high if A5xx has a flush draw, a 2: 1 favorite if A5xx has no pair, and slightly better than 4: 6 if A5xx holds a bigger pair (which is not a terribly likely scenario because half the opponents cards are used to make the low). There's also a possibility that another A5xx would fold, which would allow me to win the whole pot. If it turns out I have the low all to myslef, I still have redraws to a straight. When I posted I wasn't sure if raising or calling was the right play in this situation, but folding seems really really bad.

[ QUOTE ]
As Krieger says in his new book (which I recommend), low limit O/8 is a straightforward game. If you have good hands, bet them. If you don't, get out. I'd define a good hand as (1) a reasonable chance for a scoop or (2) a guarantee of 1/2 when there are multiple players. After the flop, he didn't have either -- unless again his table read told him otherwise. In general, I would have folded.



[/ QUOTE ]

I think the "fit or fold" strategy is a bit too simplistic once you get past the beginner stage... but I also felt the Tenner/Krieger book was pretty bad. You may want to check out Cappelletti's 08 book, as his book describes how to navigate through the murkier 08 situations where you aren't way ahead or way behind on the flop.

I didn't disagree with you about the importance of table reads at all. To the contrary, I completely agree with you, and that was what I was trying to convey in the language you quoted -- that all of the babble goes out the window if the player has a read such as the one you say you had here.

Also I'd be interested in your criticims of the Krieger book. I thought it was quite good.

[Buzz]

[ QUOTE ]
But raising here won't fold an A2 hand.

[/ QUOTE ]

Greg - Agreed.

[ QUOTE ]
maybe it folds an A5 but at this level that's questionable.

[/ QUOTE ]

I think whatever tactic you try, it has to have a reasonable chance of success. I can visualize opponents who would fold A5XX to a raise - and I also can visualize opponents who wouldn’t.

Since part of the object in raising is to fold another A5XX, if you try the tactic against an opponent who would steadfastly hang on to his/her second nut low, then raising loses its appeal here. I think whether the tactic would work for you on a particular opponent might depend on that opponent’s perception of you.

[ QUOTE ]
But more importantly, for low here any time A2 is out, you will lose bets on this street and the turn/river.

[/ QUOTE ]

Well, I’ll agree if you’re up against A2XX, by raising you’ll lose more than you’ll win on this street. But another reason for raising here is to probe for some evidence of A2XX before the betting limits double. You want to pick up a tell of some sort - or some evidence in the betting. It already looks a bit as though neither MP nor SB have A2XX. (first betting round: loose/aggressive MP limps, loose/aggressive sb completes)

Players tend to stick to one style of play throughout a session. I think you’re better able to out-play an opponent of you watch and remember how they’re playing and adjust. It’s not simple because there’s a lot to remember and keep in mind. Sometimes you get burned, as here, and then you try keep in mind specifically who burned you and how, and re-adjust.

I can see the argument for folding here, but I don’t think it’s wrong to raise. You might at least consider the possible effect of a raise when you’re in a similar situation. But of course you don’t try it if you don’t think it will work.

I do agree with playing straightforwardly and folding when you miss. But I think you have opportunities to out-play your opponents, and I see this as one of those opportunities. But I wouldn’t necessarily see it as one of those opportunities against everyone.

[ QUOTE ]
anytime A5 is there you're likely to get quartered

[/ QUOTE ]

One main purpose of the raise is to cut down on getting quartered. Doesn’t always work - but when it doesn’t work the people who stay for the raise usually have all kinds of crap, not necessarily the exact cards you want them to fold.

[ QUOTE ]
Any time a worse low is around they fold and you're just up again high. So the 40% of the time that low is there you lose a bunch of bets, and when its not you win nothing additional. Net, bad implied odds.

[/ QUOTE ]

You’re assuming Hero’s opponents will all play correctly, almost as though they know what cards Hero is holding, and if they do, I agree Hero is sunk.

I think you win when your opponents make mistakes. When you bet and raise, you make it more difficult for them to play and they are more inclined to make mistakes. Isn’t it generally more difficult for you to play after the flop when you are facing a double bet?

[ QUOTE ]
For high, you could easily be drawing dead to A2 or 52 straight, but of which are hands that could easily be played at 3-6. You could be dead to 66,44,33. You could be behind to 6x. You could be a dog to any two diamonds(which would almost certainly have overcards).

[/ QUOTE ]

Agreed. All are possible.

[ QUOTE ]
if you improve, you are still against diamond redraws, and even hitting a 7 ties you with anyone with a 5 AND leaves you open to redraws for higher straights too.

[/ QUOTE ]

Yes.

[ QUOTE ]
Since this flop has both many lows, potential straights and flush draws, I would not expect many folds. So you will likely need to actually win at showdown for high, even if you get 1 or more opponnets to fold.

[/ QUOTE ]

If Hero’s opponents hung on to the perfect hands to thwart Hero and threw away everything else, the game would be so tough that nobody could play in it.

[ QUOTE ]
Your chances of scooping are poor, and if you do scoop, its because your relatively weak high got lucky -- meaning its unlikely someone else had enough of a hand to put much money in -- another negative implied odds spot.

[/ QUOTE ]

If so, then I agree Hero should muck after the flop. But if Hero mucks after this flop, then perhaps Hero should not be playing A45Ks as a starting hand. However, A45Ks is a fairly decent starting hand, probably the best starting hand at the table on any given deal.

You greatly expand the range of playable flops with A45Ks if you sometimes play 2nd nut low draws after the flop. I think you have to be very alert to your opponents and read your opponents well to successfully play second nut draws - and, yes, you can get in trouble playing second nut draws. I’d fold here, rather than chase or raise, if I thought I was likely up against the nut low - but if I thought I wasn’t, a raise here, if not over-used, is another option.

[ QUOTE ]
Net, I just don't understand how playing on here can be much more than very slightly EV+, and more likely its signficantly EV-

[/ QUOTE ]

There is no doubt in my mind that A45Ks comes out +EV in simulations before this flop. This is not an ideal flop for A45Ks. I do comprehend your compelling argument for folding. All the same, I like Hero’s raise here.

Just my opinion.

Buzz

[Buzz]

[ QUOTE ]
If you play to draw second best, without draws to the nuts, on a continuous basis, you will be a loser.

[/ QUOTE ]

Mr. Niss - In general that makes sense. However...... (read on):

I think there are four main types of drawing hands after the flop in a full game of Omaha-8:
• lows
• full houses/quads
• flushes
• straights

Hopefully you will simultaneously have a draw to more than one of these. but sometimes you don’t. What to do then depends. In my humble opinion, you don’t necessarily give up on the hand.

I keep reading, here and there, that you need the nuts to win in Omaha-8, but that simply isn’t true. It’s especially not true for high.

If you deal out nine starting hands, it’s hard as the dickens to predict which one of the nine would end up winning for high. If you don’t believe me, see for yourself. Deal out nine hands and pick the winner for high. Then deal out a five card board and see if you predicted correctly. Some starting hands have a better chance than others to have the two particular cards that make a winner for high, but before you see the flop, unless you figure out what cards are in the stub, it’s very difficult, almost impossible, to tell which starting hand will hold the winning two cards for high. Try it and see for yourself.

Then see how often one of the nine hands actually has the nuts for high. I think you'll find that it's not all the time - and often when you do locate a hand that would have been the nuts for high, you would have folded the hand before the showdown.

• Full houses? Remember that when the board is paired, unless the nut boat also has a card the same rank as the board pair, the nuts is quads (or a straight flush). Usually when the board is paired, nobody has the nuts (quads), nor even the top boat.

• Flushes? Someone only has the nut flush about one time out of three. And that’s with everybody seeing the flop and then staying to see the showdown.

• Straights? With QJT on the flop somebody is very likely to have seen the flop with AKXX and will continue playing. But if the board is T98-J-Q, someone holding AKXX might have folded on the flop.
With 2567J on the board, 89XX is the nut straight. Who is going to be seeing the flop with 89XX? (Possible XX cards are very restricted). Bottom line: probably nobody has the nut straight when the board is 2567J.

In a real life casino ring game, someone simply doesn’t usually have the nuts for high at the showdown. That’s just the way it is. Watch a casino ring game for a little while and that simple truth should be evident to you. It’s true for tournaments too.

Some writers advise beginners to only draw to the nuts - and that’s good, safe advice for beginners. Sure, you always like to have the nuts for high, whether you’re a beginner or not. But the simple truth is, the nuts is not usually what wins for high.

Therefore, writing or implying that you need the nuts to win playing Omaha-8 is simply misrepresenting the truth. Yet people keep writing it, as though it were a law of nature.

• Low is a different story. Because of the propensity of players to play hands with A2XX, A3XX, or 23XX, and because one of these hands usually ends up as the nuts for low, in a full game, the winning low hand may more often be the nuts than not. But it's certainly not unusual for non-nut lows to win. The second nut low figures to win about half the time.

When a three appears on the flop, the A4 is elevated to the second nut low. When a four also appears, the A5 is elevated to the second nut low. Playing A45K after a flop of 346 is similar to playing A34K after a flop of 456. Maybe you wouldn’t want to play that one either.

But if you don’t play A34K unless there is a deuce plus at least one other low card on the flop, then you’re ony playing about 15.8% of the possible flops because of the low or low draw capability. If you include 2nd nut lows and 2nd nut low draws, then you’re playing 46.1% of the possible flops because of the low or low draw capability. About three times as many flops become playable. Makes A34K a much more playable hand.

But to play all these flops, you have to be good at putting your opponents on A2XX.

I wouldn’t guarantee my numbers are exactly right here, but I think they’re close enough for you to get the idea.

It's obviously safer and easier to play nut draws than non-nut draws. But if you're going to give up on
A/images/graemlins/club.gif, 4/images/graemlins/diamond.gif, 5/images/graemlins/club.gif, K/images/graemlins/spade.gif, after the flop is
6/images/graemlins/diamond.gif, 4/images/graemlins/heart.gif, 3/images/graemlins/heart.gif, then I don't see how you can play the hand to begin with, or A/images/graemlins/club.gif, 4/images/graemlins/diamond.gif, 5/images/graemlins/club.gif, K/images/graemlins/spade.gif either. And if you don't play those starting cards, then I think you're being extremely restrictive in the selection of starting hands. You can’t just be playing hands with an ace and a deuce. (I suppose maybe you can if you play in three or four on-line games simultaneously). In a casino playing like that, you’d stand out like a sore thumb, your opponents would adjust so that you wouldn't win very much when you did have a good hand/board fit, and the game would be terribly boring.

I think there’s another way to play the game, and I think I’m doing that. Omaha-8 is interesting and fun for me. But I’m not just waiting for A2XX and then raising before the flop when I do have it.

[ QUOTE ]
Look at this hand. The flop is 6d-4h-3h. The OP cannot have any reasonable expectation to do any better than 1/2 the pot.

[/ QUOTE ]

Wrong (in my humble opinion).

[ QUOTE ]
The prospects of success on this hand after the flop are poor.

[/ QUOTE ]

I agree they’re not good. But depending on how the hand is played and depending on the opponents, the hand has scoop or 3/4 possibilities. That can obviously back-fire, as it did here.

[ QUOTE ]
But when SB bets, (1) he tells me that he has something that is probably better than what OP has (one way or the other -- or maybe even both),

[/ QUOTE ]

Maybe. Depends on SB (in my humble opinion).

[ QUOTE ]
and (2) it becomes clear that OP has little chance of doing better than 1/2 the pot, barring a miracle.

[/ QUOTE ]

I don’t think it takes a miracle. But you do have to know your opponents. However, even when you do, sometimes an opponent misleads you; it's all part of the game.

[ QUOTE ]
Moreover, at the low limits, raises on flops like this one achieve little.

[/ QUOTE ]

Depends (in my humble opinion).

[ QUOTE ]
If a player after him as A-2, he's not going to fold for the raise.

[/ QUOTE ]

Agreed.

[ QUOTE ]
And if the players after him have bad hands, they will fold to the bet, they don't need to be raised.

[/ QUOTE ]

Well, no. Not necessarily. These are players who might limp for a small bet and then take part of what would otherwise be Hero’s share of the pot. Hero really wants these players out of the hand (in my humble opinion), and the double bet should help to accomplish that objective.

[ QUOTE ]
As Krieger says in his new book (which I recommend), low limit O/8 is a straightforward game. If you have good hands, bet them. If you don't, get out.

[/ QUOTE ]

I have the book. I’ve read the book.

I believe the advice you cite is good, general advice. But it doesn’t change my mind about how to best play this hand/flop/turn/river. I like Lou Krieger and find him very readable. I have several of his books. I don’t agree with everything Lou writes about Omaha-8, but that may have to do with a difference in playing style. At any rate, I don't disagree with the particular bit of general advice you cite. However, carpe diem. Hero sees an opening here and seizes the opportunity.

[ QUOTE ]
I'd define a good hand as (1) a reasonable chance for a scoop or (2) a guarantee of 1/2 when there are multiple players.

[/ QUOTE ]

Seems reasonable, depending on what you mean by a guarantee of 1/2. Rarely is the a “guarantee” of 1/2 before the river.

[ QUOTE ]
After the flop, he didn't have either unless again his table read told him otherwise. In general, I would have folded.

[/ QUOTE ]

I don’t like chasing with second nut low. But I don’t like folding either - because there’s no guarantee SB (or anyone) has the nut low here. A raise might have the effect of inducing another second nut low to fold. And it might also have the effect of inducing someone with a mediocre high or high draw to fold. And you might pick up a tell on an A2XX.

[ QUOTE ]
PS, it is hard to ask for advice on a hand when your justification is based on a table read.

[/ QUOTE ]

I’ve been in this sort of situation more than once myself. What to do is always based, in my humble opinion, on a table read of your opponents.

[ QUOTE ]
I hope this adequately explains my thought process.

[/ QUOTE ]

What you have written seems very clear to me. You have a very reasonable point of view. I respect your point of view.

[ QUOTE ]
I would be happy to hear what you think, as I always am.

[/ QUOTE ]

You won’t generally show much of a profit on a hand unless you scoop. If not over-used, there are opportunities to increase your chances of scooping. It seemed as though there was an opportunity to do that here. Although things didn’t work out this time, the attempt was not really very expensive and showed a good grasp of tactics.

Just my opinion.

Buzz