[ipp147]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Assuming villain has AAxx and NO redraw you are right around 50%

[/ QUOTE ]

Is this an assumption you can make at this point? All we know of Villain A is that he raised from the small blind into a pot with one limper (that has been identified as a moron). While he is out of position, we cannot assume that because he raised in the small blind he has aces, especially in six max, where players tend to be more agressive. He could have one of a myriad of good starting hands IMO and you have likely made a better connection with the flop than he did.

I believe this is the perfect opportunity for a semibluff, and not necesarily a poor one for a bluff in general. Against two oponents, one that has shown no agression and one that showed passivity after the flop, I think you can successfully bluff quite often. Couple this with the fact that you will rarely be more than a 45/55 dog in this hand, why would you not bet?

To me, checking seems very weak/tight-passive. You MUST play your big draws agressively in omaha, especially 6max to be a successful player.

I would love to hear from more players on this one.

[/ QUOTE ]

Hi,

I normally bet big draws like this for a couple of reasons. It helps build the pot if I hit the turn. This was the specific reason above. I knew villain B would call and then call again if I hit so I wanted to get the pot bigger. The other reason to bet out draws is to give cover for when I am betting out top/middle set etc.

In this specific case when the SB check raises I can put him on AAxx. If I thought he had it I would have just checked it through. I didn't think he had it when I bet the flop as if he had been paying attention he would have known that villain B would have probably called him down.

Anyway. The river was a 4 and villain scooped the pot. The very next hand he stacked villain B and was sitting on $1000. Villain B left for the evening as did I.