View Full Version : limit O8 - betting top two pair or a set on the turn (or not)
I hadn’t thought about this before reading a recent post by Tex.
Suppose Hero’s hand is A/images/graemlins/diamond.gif, Q/images/graemlins/diamond.gif, T/images/graemlins/club.gif, 8/images/graemlins/heart.gif, and the board after the turn is Q/images/graemlins/club.gif, T/images/graemlins/diamond.gif, 6/images/graemlins/diamond.gif, 3/images/graemlins/club.gif.
Notice that every single card possible river card in the deck either pairs the board or enables a straight. I don't think it's an unusual situation for most or all river cards to pair the board or enable a straight.
Four of Hero’s opponents see the flop for one small bet each. SB bets the flop, BB calls, and Hero raises. Button calls the double bet and both blinds also call. Thus three opponents stay to see the turn, (3/images/graemlins/club.gif).
Should Hero bet this turn or not?
(Peeking ahead to the showdown, Hero has only one opponent, Button, who is putting money into the pot. The other two opponents, presumably having missed their draws, fold to a bet on the fourth betting round. Hero needs this sort of information to estimate how much to expect to be able to collect on the river if he makes his draw.)
Because of the money already in the pot, there is no question about whether Hero should call a bet on the third betting round. Hero clearly has favorable odds to call a bet.
But should Hero initiate fresh money into the pot or not? <font color="white">_</font>That is the question. With three people calling, at first glance Hero would seem to have favorable fresh money odds to initiate a bet on the turn.
However, if Hero misses (fails to make the nut flush or a full house on the river), he’s still going to have top two pair and he’s going to wonder if he should pay off a bet on the river or not.
That’s going to be the situation almost every time Hero either has top two pair or a set after the turn and then fails to improve on the river.
When no straight or flush is yet possible after the turn, top two pair or a set is almost surely the top high hand. That is, if there was no river and if the game stopped after the third betting round, Hero’s top two pair would be a likely winner.
However, there’s that pesky river card yet to be known - and then one more betting round.
Looking ahead, if Hero is going to be stuck in the hand and pay off an additional large bet because of the size of the pot, he’s going to be putting in a big bet on the fourth betting round when he misses on the river.
In other words, if Hero intends to call a bet when he misses on the river, in terms of fresh money going into the pot on the third betting round, Hero is really only getting two to one fresh money odds, instead of the three to one Hero is getting if he folds to a bet when he misses on the river.
Immediately after the turn, when no straight or better is yet possible, probably nobody would be able to beat top two pair (or any set) for high. Sensing that, with either top two pair or any set, it seems natural to want to get as much money into the pot as possible.
Like Tex, I would have been inclined to bet the turn, but let’s think about it.
Realistically, is there any way a single big bet by Hero will take the pot (with everyone folding to the bet)? Is there any way a bet will induce anybody who doesn’t hold pure garbage to fold?
I don't think so. This is a $15/$30 limit game, not a pot limit game. Because of the size of the pot already, after a trey on the turn, Hero simply cannot make a bet large enough to knock out anybody except perhaps someone holding A3XY or 23XY who was stupidly drawing purely for a non-nut back-door low (or something of the sort). What I mean is Hero cannot make a bet large enough to knock out a valid draw after this flop and turn and the betting up to this point.
Meanwhile, of the forty four unknown cards, seven (the high diamonds plus the tens and queens) are scoopers for Hero while five more (all the low diamonds except the trey) win the high half of the pot for Hero.
With a queen on the river, Hero could get tied by an opponent also holding QTXY. With a ten on the river, Hero could get beaten by an opponent holding QQXY or tied by an opponent also holding QTXY. Neither of these is likely.
With a queen on the river, I think Hero gets tied by another QTXY about one time out of twenty.
With a ten on the river, I think Hero gets tied by another QTXY about one time out of twenty, and loses to QQXY about one time out of forty.
I ran the sims for a ten or queen on the river on the basis of four opponents seeing the flop and assuming anyone holding QQXY or QTXY would continue after a QT6 flop. (That’s the only way Hero could get tied or beaten when he made a full house on the river). At any rate, the queens and tens are not quite as good outs as high diamonds - but for the sake of keeping it simple let’s not quibble about the 5% ties or the 2.5% beats.
The trey of diamonds is enigmatic. Hero would certainly rather see any high diamond on the river, and next he’d rather see a queen or ten, but the trey of diamonds doesn't enable low, and probably no opponent will make a full house with it so that Hero’s diamond flush, although not the nuts with a pair of runner-runner treys on the board, is <font color="white">_</font>probably a scooper. For the sake of simplicity, let’s group the 3/images/graemlins/diamond.gif with the scoopers.
Since a low diamond on the river probably only gets Hero half the pot and (more to the point) only half of any fresh money Hero initiates into the pot on the turn, a low diamond is not equivalent to a whole out.
When Hero scoops, because of the size of the pot, let's assume Hero will collect one big bet from an opponent on the river. (Notice that in the actual hand two of Tex’s three opponents folded to a bet on the river).
Just considering the fresh money going into the pot on the turn plus the one (implied) pay-off bet from an opponent, Hero seems to be getting 4 to 1 fresh money odds (implied) for the whole pot and 1 to 1 fresh money odds (implied) for half the pot. But looking ahead - if Hero misses his draw on the river, does Hero plan to call a bet by an opponent because of the size of the pot?
Yes, or no?
Look ahead. You can see it coming. If Hero misses his draw on the river Hero should fully expect a bet from somebody. If nobody ahead of Hero bets, then Hero should fully expect a bet from Button (assuming Hero doesn’t bet himself).
And then what?
If Hero does not plan to call a bet on the river when he misses his draw, then
• 8/44, Hero scoops and wins 4 big bets fresh money,
• 5/44, Hero splits and wins 1 big bet fresh money, and
• 31/44, Hero loses 1 big bet fresh money.
However, if Hero does plan to call a bet on the river when he misses his draw, then
• 8/44, Hero scoops and wins 4 big bets fresh money
• 5/44, Hero splits and wins 1 big bet fresh money, and
• 31/44, Hero loses 2 big bets fresh money.
That’s not quite it because we’re ignoring some ties and losses of some of the 8/44 river scoops, but it’s good enough to see an important difference. In terms of fresh money Hero initiates into the pot on the third betting round,
• if Hero plans to call the (expected) bet when he misses his draw on the river, then Hero does better by checking the turn.
• However, if Hero plans to fold to a bet on the river when he misses his draw, then he does better by betting the turn.
I’m not criticizing the way Tex played the hand. Not at all. Tex played the hand just as I would have played it.
But maybe we should re-think betting top two pairs or a set after the turn in a typical limit Omaha-8 game if by doing so we're going to make the pot large enough that we'll probably be stuck paying off when we miss our draw on the river.
(With the added nut diamond draw, I realize Hero actually has better than just top two pairs - but usually when we have top two pairs on the turn, we’ll also probably have better than just top two pairs).
Anyhow, this is just an idea I haven’t completely thought through - but that seems to make preliminary sense. In a limit Omaha-8 game, if we’re going to call a bet on the river even when we don’t improve, maybe we generally do better by not betting top two pair or top set on the turn. On the other hand, if we’re not going to call a bet from an opponent on the river when we miss, looks like we do better by betting (or raising) with top pair or top set on the turn.
Seems odd, kind of the opposite of what it should be. I’ll give it some more thought.
Just an idea.
Buzz
benwood
12-12-2005, 03:05 AM
But some of those possible straights are fairly safe because the cards that complete these straights are not likely ones for the opponents to hold.Right?
I truely appreciate your thought on this topic. It is very well contrived and analyzed thouroughly from a practical view point of odds and e.v.. But take in mind this angle if you will: Assuming you have the best hand with the worst draw vs 3 opp. (And this I would say is true also) I feel you would need to get the fresh money in while you can. There's a probable chance of folding on the river and even more unlikely that you will get any action if the river makes you top nuts scoop. You might get 1 BB, but I am assuming that any resonable field would fold to a big diamond or Q/T hitting. The key to this proposition is that one must have the discipline to fold when you miss the river. Just my take on the situation. I'm not disregarding your side at all. I just feel there is another way to play this hand. Let me know if you disagree please.
[ QUOTE ]
But some of those possible straights are fairly safe because the cards that complete these straights are not likely ones for the opponents to hold.Right?
[/ QUOTE ]
Ben - Exactly!
And that's why it's often prudent to call a bet on the fourth betting round when you end up with top two pair or a set and somebody bets representing a made but unlikely straight on the river.
That's why when you bet the turn with a set, you're not only putting one bet in the pot, but you're committing yourself for another bet on the river when you miss quads or a full house.
Buzz
[ QUOTE ]
You might get 1 BB, but I am assuming that any resonable field would fold to a big diamond or Q/T hitting.
[/ QUOTE ]
Knoll - Yes, the implied 1 BB on the river if Hero makes the nut flush or boat is iffy.
[ QUOTE ]
The key to this proposition is that one must have the discipline to fold when you miss the river.
[/ QUOTE ]
When hero has a set on the turn but doesn't improve on the river, when instead a straight becomes possible on the river, and when Villain bets, as though representing the straight, in truth there is a very strong chance Villain is bluffing.
There isn't much bluffing in Omaha-8, but the situation described is a place where Villain will often bluff.
In a tough game, most of the time when nothing higher than a set is yet possible on the turn and then a straight does become possible on the river, if Villain reads you for a set and thus a missed boat/quads on the river, and if Villain thinks there's a chance you'll fold your set to a bet, then Villain will attempt a bluff. Rightly or wrongly, that's the way the game often gets played.
I do have the discipline to fold when I think folding is in order. But is folding in order when very possibly facing a bluff on the river?
Do you see? When you bet your set or top two pair on the turn and when nothing higher is yet possible, you look very much like you might have top set.
Then when the board doesn't pair on the river, but the river does enable a straight (or a flush), you're set up for a bluff attempt.
I don't know the solution. When the board does pair on the river you want to have gotten some money out of the hand so you want to have bet the turn because you might not be able to collect on the river.
However, when you bet your top set on the third betting round, if Villain knows you "have the discipline to fold" to a bet on the river when the board doesn't pair and when some oblique (or not so oblique) straight or flush becomes possible, then you're damned sure going to be facing a bet from a tough Villain (who may or may not be able to beat a set). When Villain can't beat a set and gets you to fold one, Villain will be clearly out-playing you.
Buzz
willmay3
12-12-2005, 08:37 PM
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
But some of those possible straights are fairly safe because the cards that complete these straights are not likely ones for the opponents to hold.Right?
[/ QUOTE ]
Ben - Exactly!
And that's why it's often prudent to call a bet on the fourth betting round when you end up with top two pair or a set and somebody bets representing a made but unlikely straight on the river.
That's why when you bet the turn with a set, you're not only putting one bet in the pot, but you're committing yourself for another bet on the river when you miss quads or a full house.
Buzz
[/ QUOTE ]
Buzz,
Interesting post. I was tooling around on some sites last night dedicated or having alot to do with 08B, specifically, playwinningpoker.com and 08poker.com. Specifically, the guy at 08Poker.com recommends your posts, so I went looking for them. I have not been disappointed.
I know that you are positing this a discussion, so let me say that I THINK I disagree with you, but I understand your thinking, I think /images/graemlins/confused.gif /images/graemlins/confused.gif.
The two things I got from these sites is this:
1. Don't be afraid of what your opponenets MIGHT have, make your bets and calls and plays based on the probable RANGE of hands.
2. Put money in the pot when you are ahead and have a superior hand.
I think, keeping that in mind, leading the betting, and perhaps even raising with this particular hand is the way to go. Why?
1. You MIGHT have the best hand. Top two is a very respectable holding though no rock crusher. You may be up against wraps and such.
2. You certainly have the best draw. Any Q or non-pairing diamond will give you the nuts high.
3. It is not possible for anyone to be freerolling on you. No matter how bad it is, you can still scoop this pot.
For that reason, I think you are overthinking this a bit. What are the likely hands you are against.
SCENARIO 1
A /images/graemlins/club.gif 2 /images/graemlins/club.gif 6 /images/graemlins/spade.gif 6 /images/graemlins/heart.gif
A /images/graemlins/heart.gif K /images/graemlins/heart.gif 9 /images/graemlins/club.gif J /images/graemlins/club.gif
2 /images/graemlins/diamond.gif 3 /images/graemlins/diamond.gif 3 /images/graemlins/heart.gif 4 /images/graemlins/club.gif
I can see all of these hands seeing the flop and then certain fishy people continuing with them afterwards. In this scenario your EV is .312, which ain't bad in a four-handed pot.
SCENARIO 2
This was the worst I could come up with. Sets all over the place, diamonds dead, straight draws and flush draws.
A /images/graemlins/club.gif 2 /images/graemlins/club.gif Q /images/graemlins/spade.gif Q /images/graemlins/heart.gif
A /images/graemlins/heart.gif T /images/graemlins/heart.gif T /images/graemlins/spade.gif 4 /images/graemlins/heart.gif
K /images/graemlins/diamond.gif J /images/graemlins/diamond.gif 9 /images/graemlins/club.gif 8 /images/graemlins/club.gif
In this situation your EV is only .109, so clearly, in this example, you shouldn't even CALL a bet with this hand.
The truth, however, lies somewhere in the middle. It is unlikely you are as bad off as in scenario 2, conceivable that you have a situation like scenario 1, and in today's fishy climate not unlikely that you are in better shape even than that. So, you are either not entirely hopeless, to positive EV, to GREAT position.
With that being said, on this particular hand, let's look at the three MAIN reasons to bet or raise:
1. Because you have the best hand and want to get more money in the pot. That could certainly be the case here. It is THE major point that Steve Badger keeps making on his site. You put money in when you have the best of it, not when you have a lock. 2 different things (and, I know you know this).
2. To get better hands to fold. Boy, if you can get a set of Tens, sixes, or threes to fold here that is a major coup. They just might do it if you put in a raise
3. To manipulate the pot so it is SOOOO big that you can't fold. By that I mean, there are ALOT of scare cards as you pointed out. By making the pot bigger you absolutely lock yourself into calling on the river which is probably the best thing to do, as your entire post points out, except in unusal circumstances.
So, I think for all of these COMBINED reasons you should bet out with this hand, and consider raising if its led into you.
With a naked flush draw or top two pair, I see your point alot more.
With Regards,
Will May
P.S. - For what it is worth, I'm not sure we should have voluntarily entered the pot with this hand. It's not total garbage, but it has some ugly gaps.
P.P.S - this is a troubled turn card for us, but what flop and turn were we hoping for? It doesn't get a whole lot better for us than this. This hand build top two pair and nut flush draws. We got it and now seem to be complaining a little.
[ QUOTE ]
I hadn’t thought about this before reading a recent post by Tex.
Suppose Hero’s hand is A/images/graemlins/diamond.gif, Q/images/graemlins/diamond.gif, T/images/graemlins/club.gif, 8/images/graemlins/heart.gif, and the board after the turn is Q/images/graemlins/club.gif, T/images/graemlins/diamond.gif, 6/images/graemlins/diamond.gif, 3/images/graemlins/club.gif.
Notice that every single card possible river card in the deck either pairs the board or enables a straight. I don't think it's an unusual situation for most or all river cards to pair the board or enable a straight.
Four of Hero’s opponents see the flop for one small bet each. SB bets the flop, BB calls, and Hero raises. Button calls the double bet and both blinds also call. Thus three opponents stay to see the turn, (3/images/graemlins/club.gif).
Should Hero bet this turn or not?
(Peeking ahead to the showdown, Hero has only one opponent, Button, who is putting money into the pot. The other two opponents, presumably having missed their draws, fold to a bet on the fourth betting round. Hero needs this sort of information to estimate how much to expect to be able to collect on the river if he makes his draw.)
Because of the money already in the pot, there is no question about whether Hero should call a bet on the third betting round. Hero clearly has favorable odds to call a bet.
But should Hero initiate fresh money into the pot or not? <font color="white">_</font>That is the question. With three people calling, at first glance Hero would seem to have favorable fresh money odds to initiate a bet on the turn.
However, if Hero misses (fails to make the nut flush or a full house on the river), he’s still going to have top two pair and he’s going to wonder if he should pay off a bet on the river or not.
That’s going to be the situation almost every time Hero either has top two pair or a set after the turn and then fails to improve on the river.
When no straight or flush is yet possible after the turn, top two pair or a set is almost surely the top high hand. That is, if there was no river and if the game stopped after the third betting round, Hero’s top two pair would be a likely winner.
However, there’s that pesky river card yet to be known - and then one more betting round.
Looking ahead, if Hero is going to be stuck in the hand and pay off an additional large bet because of the size of the pot, he’s going to be putting in a big bet on the fourth betting round when he misses on the river.
In other words, if Hero intends to call a bet when he misses on the river, in terms of fresh money going into the pot on the third betting round, Hero is really only getting two to one fresh money odds, instead of the three to one Hero is getting if he folds to a bet when he misses on the river.
Immediately after the turn, when no straight or better is yet possible, probably nobody would be able to beat top two pair (or any set) for high. Sensing that, with either top two pair or any set, it seems natural to want to get as much money into the pot as possible.
Like Tex, I would have been inclined to bet the turn, but let’s think about it.
Realistically, is there any way a single big bet by Hero will take the pot (with everyone folding to the bet)? Is there any way a bet will induce anybody who doesn’t hold pure garbage to fold?
I don't think so. This is a $15/$30 limit game, not a pot limit game. Because of the size of the pot already, after a trey on the turn, Hero simply cannot make a bet large enough to knock out anybody except perhaps someone holding A3XY or 23XY who was stupidly drawing purely for a non-nut back-door low (or something of the sort). What I mean is Hero cannot make a bet large enough to knock out a valid draw after this flop and turn and the betting up to this point.
Meanwhile, of the forty four unknown cards, seven (the high diamonds plus the tens and queens) are scoopers for Hero while five more (all the low diamonds except the trey) win the high half of the pot for Hero.
With a queen on the river, Hero could get tied by an opponent also holding QTXY. With a ten on the river, Hero could get beaten by an opponent holding QQXY or tied by an opponent also holding QTXY. Neither of these is likely.
With a queen on the river, I think Hero gets tied by another QTXY about one time out of twenty.
With a ten on the river, I think Hero gets tied by another QTXY about one time out of twenty, and loses to QQXY about one time out of forty.
I ran the sims for a ten or queen on the river on the basis of four opponents seeing the flop and assuming anyone holding QQXY or QTXY would continue after a QT6 flop. (That’s the only way Hero could get tied or beaten when he made a full house on the river). At any rate, the queens and tens are not quite as good outs as high diamonds - but for the sake of keeping it simple let’s not quibble about the 5% ties or the 2.5% beats.
The trey of diamonds is enigmatic. Hero would certainly rather see any high diamond on the river, and next he’d rather see a queen or ten, but the trey of diamonds doesn't enable low, and probably no opponent will make a full house with it so that Hero’s diamond flush, although not the nuts with a pair of runner-runner treys on the board, is <font color="white">_</font>probably a scooper. For the sake of simplicity, let’s group the 3/images/graemlins/diamond.gif with the scoopers.
Since a low diamond on the river probably only gets Hero half the pot and (more to the point) only half of any fresh money Hero initiates into the pot on the turn, a low diamond is not equivalent to a whole out.
When Hero scoops, because of the size of the pot, let's assume Hero will collect one big bet from an opponent on the river. (Notice that in the actual hand two of Tex’s three opponents folded to a bet on the river).
Just considering the fresh money going into the pot on the turn plus the one (implied) pay-off bet from an opponent, Hero seems to be getting 4 to 1 fresh money odds (implied) for the whole pot and 1 to 1 fresh money odds (implied) for half the pot. But looking ahead - if Hero misses his draw on the river, does Hero plan to call a bet by an opponent because of the size of the pot?
Yes, or no?
Look ahead. You can see it coming. If Hero misses his draw on the river Hero should fully expect a bet from somebody. If nobody ahead of Hero bets, then Hero should fully expect a bet from Button (assuming Hero doesn’t bet himself).
And then what?
If Hero does not plan to call a bet on the river when he misses his draw, then
• 8/44, Hero scoops and wins 4 big bets fresh money,
• 5/44, Hero splits and wins 1 big bet fresh money, and
• 31/44, Hero loses 1 big bet fresh money.
However, if Hero does plan to call a bet on the river when he misses his draw, then
• 8/44, Hero scoops and wins 4 big bets fresh money
• 5/44, Hero splits and wins 1 big bet fresh money, and
• 31/44, Hero loses 2 big bets fresh money.
That’s not quite it because we’re ignoring some ties and losses of some of the 8/44 river scoops, but it’s good enough to see an important difference. In terms of fresh money Hero initiates into the pot on the third betting round,
• if Hero plans to call the (expected) bet when he misses his draw on the river, then Hero does better by checking the turn.
• However, if Hero plans to fold to a bet on the river when he misses his draw, then he does better by betting the turn.
I’m not criticizing the way Tex played the hand. Not at all. Tex played the hand just as I would have played it.
But maybe we should re-think betting top two pairs or a set after the turn in a typical limit Omaha-8 game if by doing so we're going to make the pot large enough that we'll probably be stuck paying off when we miss our draw on the river.
(With the added nut diamond draw, I realize Hero actually has better than just top two pairs - but usually when we have top two pairs on the turn, we’ll also probably have better than just top two pairs).
Anyhow, this is just an idea I haven’t completely thought through - but that seems to make preliminary sense. In a limit Omaha-8 game, if we’re going to call a bet on the river even when we don’t improve, maybe we generally do better by not betting top two pair or top set on the turn. On the other hand, if we’re not going to call a bet from an opponent on the river when we miss, looks like we do better by betting (or raising) with top pair or top set on the turn.
Seems odd, kind of the opposite of what it should be. I’ll give it some more thought.
Just an idea.
Buzz
[/ QUOTE ]
T-[censored]-L; D-[censored]-R
Can we get an editor on [censored] like this? please?
[ QUOTE ]
T-[censored]-L; D-[censored]-R
Can we get an editor on [censored] like this? please?
[/ QUOTE ]
It's too long, but you quote the whole thing, so we have to scroll down through it all again just to view your words of wisdom at the end? Brilliant /images/graemlins/tongue.gif
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
T-[censored]-L; D-[censored]-R
Can we get an editor on [censored] like this? please?
[/ QUOTE ]
It's too long, but you quote the whole thing, so we have to scroll down through it all again just to view your words of wisdom at the end? Brilliant /images/graemlins/tongue.gif
[/ QUOTE ]
For emphasis.
I hope you didn't fail to realize that you didn't actually have to re-read it.
I agree you put yourself in a precarious situation, but as you know that is Omaha. Obviously some poker skills must take place when you miss with the set and face an aggressive oppenent's bet on the river. I don't think the 2 pair is a hard decision, fairly easy fold most of the time. My only point was that if you check on the turn and hit the river there is a more than likely chance of not getting any more "new money" in the pot. I was just curious if you had any numbers or theories contradicting this stragedy?
benwood
12-15-2005, 01:40 AM
If I were playing this in a live game where I know the players,betting the turn would be the best play for me,because when I missed my boat on the river,I am confident that I could judge whether or not to call based on my knowledge of the player who bets(1.Is he likely to be holding those particular cards?2.Wht is his bluffing propensity in this position?)
If I were playing on the internet with unknown players & I had been in the game for an hour ,I would still bet,& I would have to call more often because of my uncertainty,resulting in a lower ev on average.
If this were my first hand in the same internet game,I have to admit that I would still bet the turn,expecting to check/call the river.Even then,if a river card produced a possible straight that would be completed by cards that most Omaha players are likely to keep,& if a player bet from early position into several other players,it would be an easy fold.
Any help? Probably not.
chaos
12-15-2005, 09:26 AM
[ QUOTE ]
However, if Hero does plan to call a bet on the river when he misses his draw, then
• 8/44, Hero scoops and wins 4 big bets fresh money
• 5/44, Hero splits and wins 1 big bet fresh money, and
• 31/44, Hero loses 2 big bets fresh money.
[/ QUOTE ]
When you call on the river you do not always lose. Sometimes you pick off a bluff. So the last number needs to be adjusted. Let's say you catch a bluffer about 20% of the time when you call on the river. (I assumed half these times you scoop.) The numbers would then look like :
• 8/44, Hero scoops and wins 4 big bets fresh money
• 5/44, Hero splits and wins 1 big bet fresh money, and
• 3/44, Hero scoops by catching a bluff and wins 4 big bets fresh money
• 3/44, Hero scoops by catching a bluff and wins 1 big bet fresh money
• 25/44, Hero loses 2 big bets
Under this scenario betting the turn is profitable.
Did I miss something?
chaos
12-15-2005, 09:27 AM
I think one of the keys to playing the turn is to be aggressive with all of your good hands. If you bet your wrap straight draws strongly in this same spot, it will be harder for your opponents to put you on a specific hand. They will not know whether you have a made hand like a set or two pair, or are betting on the come with a straight or a flush draw. This may cut down on people bluffing into you when you have position. When you are out of position I think you have to check and call.
Phat Mack
12-15-2005, 08:23 PM
Very nice post. I think I'd intuited some of this, but had never seen it worked it out as you have done. A lot of my pre-river betting is done in consideration of these river decisions: something else to consider is hero's read on button, button's likely river play, and whether there is any chance of getting button out with a turn raise.
[ QUOTE ]
The two things I got from these sites is this:
1. Don't be afraid of what your opponenets MIGHT have, make your bets and calls and plays based on the probable RANGE of hands.
2. Put money in the pot when you are ahead and have a superior hand.
[/ QUOTE ]
Will - It's hard to disagree with that advice.... and yet....
[ QUOTE ]
I think, keeping that in mind, leading the betting, and perhaps even raising with this particular hand is the way to go. Why?
1. You MIGHT have the best hand. Top two is a very respectable holding though no rock crusher. You may be up against wraps and such.
[/ QUOTE ]
I think you probably do have the best hand. (Thus the enigma).
[ QUOTE ]
2. You certainly have the best draw. Any Q or non-pairing diamond will give you the nuts high.
[/ QUOTE ]
Yes. You seem to have a very decent, if not the best, draw.
[ QUOTE ]
3. It is not possible for anyone to be freerolling on you. No matter how bad it is, you can still scoop this pot.
[/ QUOTE ]
Yes.
[ QUOTE ]
For that reason, I think you are overthinking this a bit.
[/ QUOTE ]
Possible.
[ QUOTE ]
What are the likely hands you are against.
[/ QUOTE ]
Very hard to tell. You can put a couple of cards in a tight player's hand, ace-deuce maybe, but the other two cards may be almost random. And various opponents may be playing all kinds of stuff. I wouldn't use simulations where you have to put four cards in each opponent's hand.
[ QUOTE ]
....The truth, however, lies somewhere in the middle.
[/ QUOTE ]
Very hard to tell. In simulations I have run where you don't have to stipulate all four cards an opponent holds, it seems that top two pair plus a nut flush draw (which seems very strong) should not bet the turn.
And the reason is if you get enough money into the pot, you're almost surely going to be calling a single bet on the river even though you don't improve your top two pair. Well... I suppose an alternative would be to fold to a bet on the river, but weak play like that opens other doors for your opponents.
I'm thinking maybe we should use game theory principles here. Not sure exactly how.... maybe merits more thought....
[ QUOTE ]
With that being said, on this particular hand, let's look at the three MAIN reasons to bet or raise:
1. Because you have the best hand and want to get more money in the pot. That could certainly be the case here. It is THE major point that Steve Badger keeps making on his site. You put money in when you have the best of it, not when you have a lock. 2 different things (and, I know you know this).
[/ QUOTE ]
I think that's probably generally true. But I don't know as it's always true. Who am I to disagree with Steve Badger, and yet...
[ QUOTE ]
2. To get better hands to fold. Boy, if you can get a set of Tens, sixes, or threes to fold here that is a major coup. They just might do it if you put in a raise
[/ QUOTE ]
I agree with you completely on this point. Getting a better hand to fold is the major reason to raise, in my humble opinion.
[ QUOTE ]
3. To manipulate the pot so it is SOOOO big that you can't fold. By that I mean, there are ALOT of scare cards as you pointed out. By making the pot bigger you absolutely lock yourself into calling on the river which is probably the best thing to do, as your entire post points out, except in unusal circumstances.
[/ QUOTE ]
That just doesn't make sense to me. Getting stuck if I can avoid it just seems foolish to me.
[ QUOTE ]
P.S. - For what it is worth, I'm not sure we should have voluntarily entered the pot with this hand. It's not total garbage, but it has some ugly gaps.
[/ QUOTE ]
Agreed. Of course you're going to play it in the unreaised big blind. I also would probably play it for one bet from the button and maybe even the cut-off and small blind, depending. I'm not advising anyone to play (or not play) the hand.
[ QUOTE ]
P.P.S - this is a troubled turn card for us, but what flop and turn were we hoping for? It doesn't get a whole lot better for us than this. This hand build top two pair and nut flush draws. We got it and now seem to be complaining a little.
[/ QUOTE ]
The flop was not ideal, but was good - clearly good enough to continue.
The turn was bad, but clearly not bad enough to fold.
I'm no complaining. (And the hand itself is from a recent post by Tex that got me thinking).
I'm wondering about the advisability of initiating money into this pot with this hand/board/#opponnets/history. At first glance it seems like you should. And yet I think you do better, on average, when you don't.
At any rate, thanks for your input.
Buzz
[ QUOTE ]
when I missed my boat on the river,I am confident that I could judge whether or not to call based on my knowledge of the player who bets
[/ QUOTE ]
Ben - Good point. However, against tough opponents, it's really hard to tell, and if the pot gets big enough you should probably be more inclined to call.
[ QUOTE ]
Even then,if a river card produced a possible straight that would be completed by cards that most Omaha players are likely to keep,& if a player bet from early position into several other players,it would be an easy fold.
[/ QUOTE ]
Another good point except that folding top two pair on the river, although perhaps easier under certain conditions, is not necessarily correct. You do encounter bluffing in this game, and when low is possible, you can't always tell if the bet is coming from a rivered nut straight or a rivered nut low (or neither or both).
Anyhow, thanks for the input.
Buzz
[ QUOTE ]
When you call on the river you do not always lose. Sometimes you pick off a bluff. So the last number needs to be adjusted. Let's say you catch a bluffer about 20% of the time when you call on the river. (I assumed half these times you scoop.) The numbers would then look like :
• 8/44, Hero scoops and wins 4 big bets fresh money
• 5/44, Hero splits and wins 1 big bet fresh money, and
• 3/44, Hero scoops by catching a bluff and wins 4 big bets fresh money
• 3/44, Hero scoops by catching a bluff and wins 1 big bet fresh money
• 25/44, Hero loses 2 big bets
Under this scenario betting the turn is profitable.
[/ QUOTE ]
Chaos - Thanks.
[ QUOTE ]
Did I miss something?
[/ QUOTE ]
No. I did.
Thanks again.
Buzz
[ QUOTE ]
A lot of my pre-river betting is done in consideration of these river decisions
[/ QUOTE ]
Mack - Seems wise.
[ QUOTE ]
something else to consider is hero's read on button, button's likely river play, and whether there is any chance of getting button out with a turn raise.
[/ QUOTE ]
Yes. Thanks.
Buzz
[ QUOTE ]
I don't think the 2 pair is a hard decision, fairly easy fold most of the time.
[/ QUOTE ]
Knoll - For me it depends. Not always an easy fold for me.
[ QUOTE ]
My only point was that if you check on the turn and hit the river there is a more than likely chance of not getting any more "new money" in the pot.
[/ QUOTE ]
That's a good point. I think it depends very much on how many opponents will be matching your bet.
[ QUOTE ]
I was just curious if you had any numbers or theories contradicting this stragedy?
[/ QUOTE ]
Not really. I'm still probably betting the turn here. I was just having some second thoughts about the advisability of doing that, depending on varous factors. My ideas on this need more thought before posting again.
I've gotten some clear insight from reading the repiles in this thread.
Thanks for your input.
Buzz
Thank you for your insight. I truely appreciate your views and thoughts. You're one of the few on here that gives an honest and valuable opinion. Much thanks and more to come I'm sure.
Knoll - Thanks. I appreciate your views too.
Is Hero stuck calling with top set on the river or not? In my humble opinion, it depends on a whole bunch of things, but in general, I’m very inclined to call a single bet on the river when I have top set.
Assuming Hero does plan to call on the river when he does not improve top set and when a straight becomes possible, and considering bluff pick-offs, in the example hand/board, Hero gains by initiating fresh money into the pot on the third betting round. But using Chaos’s values of 3/44 and 3/44, which seem not unreasonable, Hero does not gain very much by betting or raising with top set (plus the nut flush draw) on the turn.
{my math: 4*11/44 + 1*8/44 - 2*25/44 = (44+8-50)/44 = +2/44}.
In a pre-flop-loose game of limit-Omaha-8, I think you view top set as a drawing hand. (This is obviously a very different situation from Texas hold 'em). An important difference between top set failing to improve and a flush or straight draw failing to improve in a limit Omaha-8 game is that you’re not tempted to call a bet on the fourth betting round with only a four-flush or a four-straight. But with top set, well... you still have top set, which often wins even when the river enables a straight or flush. (Top set is going to beat anything worse than a straight).
But without also the nut flush draw or something equally compelling, my current thinking is Hero generally probably does better just limping with top set on the turn. And if that’s true of top set, I think it’s even truer of any other high draw.
A made straight or better is different. But with just a draw for high, even if your draw is the top set, depending on the exact situation, I think you probably do better by playing passively on the third betting round.
Just my opinion.
Buzz
Buzz - I do agree top set as a finished hand is not the worst in this situation. I would probably call off about 1/3 overall, but it does depend on position and how many were in before me naturally. If heads-up, I'd call probably 2/3 to 3/4 of the time. The pot size usually determines my decision. Then I account for the player betting. As you know, usually in O8 no one bets into the raiser or led out on the river unless they have it. Just standard practice for low or middle limit games.
In regard to not having the flush draw to go with it: that's a weak position and a crying call usually. I hate top set or two pair with that board. Only drawing for posible half, it's just awful against 2 or more opponents.
What I was mostly concerned with in regards to this hand was Hero's position. I feel since he was the preflop raiser and driving the bus the whole way, he has to continue to keep his foot on the gas. There's a good chance one will fold and possibly two (though doubtfully). Nevertheless, if he doesn't get any new money in before the river and hits, I think it's highly doubtful he'll get paid off. I'm not sure what my decision would be if I was Hero in every situation such as this. But it seems to me betting and being aggresive in this particular situation is the best play. Even if the numbers contradict slightly. The edge seems to be about 3.5 to 1 against, and you're only getting 3 to 1 one on 4th. But I have bet on horses giving only 5/8 so what the hell. Just make take on it...lol
Thank you again!
Knoll
[ QUOTE ]
What I was mostly concerned with in regards to this hand was Hero's position. I feel since he was the preflop raiser and driving the bus the whole way, he has to continue to keep his foot on the gas.
[/ QUOTE ]
Knoll - Here’s a quote from the opening post of this thread.
“Four of Hero’s opponents see the flop for one small bet each. SB bets the flop, BB calls, and Hero raises.”
As you can see, Hero did not raise before the flop. Rather, Hero raised on the flop. However, it’s a moot point because Hero was “driving the bus” before the turn.
Hero’s raise on the second betting round seems absolutely correct to me. With two cards yet to come, Hero figures to make a decent full house or the nut flush or a nut straight more often than not.
But then, as happens more often than not when things look very rosy immediately after the flop, the turn is ugly (but not an absolute disaster).
Now what?
You wrote:
[ QUOTE ]
I feel since he was .... driving the bus the whole way, he has to continue to keep his foot on the gas. ..... if he doesn't get any new money in before the river and hits, I think it's highly doubtful he'll get paid off.
[/ QUOTE ]
I agree Hero is more likely to collect when he hits on the river if the pot is bigger. And that seems a good reason to be aggressive.
Another good reason to be aggressive was suggested by Chaos: [ QUOTE ]
I think one of the keys to playing the turn is to be aggressive with all of your good hands. If you bet your wrap straight draws strongly in this same spot, it will be harder for your opponents to put you on a specific hand. They will not know whether you have a made hand like a set or two pair, or are betting on the come with a straight or a flush draw.
[/ QUOTE ]
What to do obviously will always depend on your opponents and the exact situation. And I like mixing it up a bit. But how about some general guidelines for this very common situation?
I like the reasoning for aggressive play.
Still ..... if you take away the nut flush draw leaving Hero with just top two pair (four scoop outs), I don’t like betting on the third betting round. <font color="white">_</font>I’m not sure I’m even calling with only four scoop outs. Raising seems overly aggressive (maniacal). Similarly, I also don’t like betting on the third betting round if all Hero had here was the nut flush draw (four scoop outs plus five half-pot outs). <font color="white">_</font>However, I wouldn’t characterize raising with the nut flush draw as maniacal.
The number of outs Hero has is obviously a factor. In terms of general guidelines, I’m leaning toward wanting a minimum of ten scoop outs (or the equivalent) to bet a draw on the turn when low, a straight, or a flush is not yet possible. Depends on the number of opponents and how they play, of course.
I don’t think initiating fresh money into the pot depends much on the size of the pot already. However, calling or not does depend very much on the size of the pot.
In the opening post hand/flop/turn, Hero has 8 scoop outs plus 5 half pot outs. I’d say that was good enough to bet, even though Hero can’t like the 3/images/graemlins/club.gif on the turn much. I think that’s about equivalent to top set (would be ten scoop outs here). A wrap-around straight draw with at least ten scoop equivalent outs works for me too, as do various straight/flush straight/boat, flush/boat combinations.
What if low, a straight, or a flush is already possible? Then I think Hero backs off betting draws, including top set (depending on how many opponents he's facing and how they play of course).
That’s admittedly a somewhat conservative approach.
Buzz
I apologize for the misread regarding the preflop raise. I thought he had. Nevertheless, I agree with yours and Chaos's view also with the play of this hand from the flop forward. No! The turn is not a good card for Hero's hand, but I feel betting will work out best overall more times than not with these conditions. I just have the approach that giving free rides in O8 is one of the worst things you can do. The game is so multi-dimensional that nearly every river card besides a pair will make a flush or straight. It is extremely rare when a set is the best possible hand. Therefore, if you can get rid of any players with a bet, take the chance everytime. I have a fairly strong image at the table and can usually flush 1 or 2 players out each betting round. I pick my spots naturally. I did remark however in my last post, that without the flush draw I really don't like the hand much anymore.
*If the low, a straight, or a flush is already possible then you have to back off. It's a big dog and a crying call most of the time against a field of 3 opponents. I don't feel it conservative, just wise Buzz.
JMO - Knoll
[ QUOTE ]
giving free rides in O8 is one of the worst things you can do. The game is so multi-dimensional that nearly every river card besides a pair will make a flush or straight. It is extremely rare when a set is the best possible hand. Therefore, if you can get rid of any players with a bet, take the chance everytime.
[/ QUOTE ]
Knoll - You make a compelling argument for betting the turn. Thank you.
Buzz
You're Welcome Buzz - I have been playing O8 for about 15 years and have seen pretty much everything the game has. I've only been "truely" analyzing the game for the past 3 years I'd say, it took me about 5 years to really learn it...lol
I appreciate all your views and arguements, sometimes it's hard to see the finer aspects of the game. I'd like to talk more with you if you have the time. Send me a private message on here if you care, I'd like it.
Thanks Again
Knoll
vBulletin® v3.8.11, Copyright ©2000-2024, vBulletin Solutions Inc.