Raising standards for loose, small games... (noobish Q)

[bholdr]

I've had some fantastic winrates playing .25/.50 and .50/1 PLO lately. However, i think i'm leaving money on the table... being only a dabbler (albeit a skilled one) in the game, don't really know what the standards are for raising/calling/re-raising a raiser...

of course, i know to raise suites aces, big broadways, etc... but that's as deep as i've gone...

Has there been a good/helpful thread about what to raise with/ call with/ re-raise/ etc in loose PLO games? specifically, one aimed at small, weak/passive games ($200 buy-in or less on party or the equivalent, i suppose), that someone would link me to? helpful tips appreciated, too...

tyia.

B

[ QUOTE ]
being only a dabbler (albeit a skilled one) in the game, don't really know what the standards are for raising/calling/re-raising a raiser...

[/ QUOTE ]

Does anyone see anything oxymoronic here...

Try this site (http://www.winningonlinepoker.com/)

[thatpkrguy]

Ok well first off if you don't know hands acceptable to be raising with then i don't see how your "skilled" at the game.

But to answer your question..

Just stick to raising with Big Wraps and double suited AA and KK and you should be fine in that loose of a game. But of course position is relative at all times when raising in OPL as with any game.

[Wheatsauce]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
being only a dabbler (albeit a skilled one) in the game, don't really know what the standards are for raising/calling/re-raising a raiser...

[/ QUOTE ]

Does anyone see anything oxymoronic here...

Try this site (http://www.winningonlinepoker.com/)

[/ QUOTE ]

Also...what is the difference between raising a raiser and re-raising a raiser?

To answer your question, it depends heavily on your post flop abilities. I don't think that there is a chart that will effectively answer your questions. Play hands that you are comfortable playing. Few hands in omaha are sizable favorites over another preflop.

[ QUOTE ]
Also...what is the difference between raising a raiser and re-raising a raiser?

[/ QUOTE ]

All that was said was raise/bet/re-raise the raiser, which is perfectly valid. You bet into an empty field, raise a better and reraise a raiser. There is no logical flaw.

[Wheatsauce]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Also...what is the difference between raising a raiser and re-raising a raiser?

[/ QUOTE ]

All that was said was raise/bet/re-raise the raiser, which is perfectly valid. You bet into an empty field, raise a better and reraise a raiser. There is no logical flaw.

[/ QUOTE ]

Well it depends how you translate it as far as whether or not it is a logical flaw, although I'll admit upon closer reading that your translation is just as good as mine (raise/call/reraise as a blanket statement for "a raiser").

However, if you take it your way, then the "a raiser" part is superfluous. Who else would you re-raise?

[BluffTHIS!]

Big pairs with good sidecards
4 broadway cards with at least 1 suit
3 broadway cards with at least 1 suit and a nearby straight or wheel card
4 in a row straight hands with at least 1 suit but not 3 to the same suit
2 pair hands with at least 1 suit, assuming you can fold bottom set if necessary

And don't raise with anything that isn't strong enough or where the effective stack sizes won't allow you to call 1 moderate reraise.

[bholdr]

Wow... there's a bunch of NITS on this board:

[ QUOTE ]
Does anyone see anything oxymoronic here...

[/ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Ok well first off if you don't know hands acceptable to be raising with then i don't see how your "skilled" at the game.

[/ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Also...what is the difference between raising a raiser and re-raising a raiser?

[/ QUOTE ]

I mean, C'mon. you'd think the forum would give a guy with almost 3k posts a little benifit-of-the-doubt, or at least TRY to understand my intent as opposed to attacking my syntax (was posted at 4:20 AM, fer crying out loud). *sighs*

Here:
[ QUOTE ]
being only a dabbler (albeit a skilled one) in the game,

[/ QUOTE ]

not: ['am a dabbler' + 'am skilled'] but rather: ['am skilled, for a dabbler[/i]']... geez. I'm not claiming to be sammy-freakin-farha here, just a guy that plays most of the other games well (O/8, LHE, NLHE, 7cs, 7/8)... I wasn't looking for "raise this, fold that to a raise"- sry if i gave that impression. I was looking for insight/discussion/etc...


here's a starter:

in PLO, I like to (sometimes) re-raise weak players when they show strength (esp when they're screaming 'aces') and the hero's probably behind PF... only in position, of course...

I find that there are a lot of players in the smaller games, esp the .25/.50 and .50/1 have a standard range for calling raises, but ONLY open-raise aces and maybe their big broadways like KKQTss... so, easy to read... If the stacks are deep, sometimes i like to bump/min-re-raise their raise with hands that are good for cracking aces... these same weak players generally won't re-raise without a monster..

three reasons:

A: to isolate them
B: to tie them on if i hit
C: to make the pot big enough to fire off a worthy bluff if they seem weak
D: to get control of the hand

you think the advantages that re-raising a probable pair of aces from position could offset the loss of implied odds/ threat of re-raises that it entails? it seems to be a powerful weapon, but, like i said, i'm a dabbler. are there any omaha or PL specific concepts that would come into play here?

[dibbs]

FWIW I consider you the best player in a certain game on a certain site, so theres some respect.

I like BluffThis's post. The thing that's sticking out in my mind is bumping someone who you almost for sure know has AAxx is they usually try and get as much money in as possible, so as he mentioned do it only with hands that can stand the heat or that you're deep enough with implied odds.


Position is king here for a reraise IMO.

[bholdr]

[ QUOTE ]
The thing that's sticking out in my mind is bumping someone who you almost for sure know has AAxx is they usually try and get as much money in as possible, so as he mentioned do it only with hands that can stand the heat or that you're deep enough with implied odds.


Position is king here for a reraise IMO.

[/ QUOTE ]

like they say... location, location, location...

and, yes... deep stacks. Though... with poor players that tend to get tied on to the pot it's the same thing... implied odds and effective stacks... Bluffthis:

[ QUOTE ]
And don't raise with anything that isn't strong enough or where the effective stack sizes won't allow you to call 1 moderate reraise.

[/ QUOTE ]

[ QUOTE ]
I find that there are a lot of players in the smaller games, esp the .25/.50 and .50/1 have a standard range for calling raises, but ONLY open-raise aces and maybe their big broadways like KKQTss...

[/ QUOTE ]

While most raises in the smaller stakes games do tend to open raise with A-A-x-x or other big cards, I disagree with the first part of your statement. Many players at these stakes will throw in 10-20 BB preflop with complete crap simply because they are defending a limp or a call of an initial raise.

I don't think re-raising a known A-A-x-x hand preflop is a great idea unless you are a) really deep with position & your opponent is also deep or b) there is enough dead money in the pot and you feel like gambling with something like 6-7-8-9 knowing that it will be all-in before the flop.

The whole reason for getting involved with marked big cards is that you can pretty much play perfectly against them. Reraising and allowing someone to put in 80% or more of their stack takes away much of your advantage.