ahh hell

[ericsind]

Ok, here's a question:

game: PLO
hand: J [img]/images/graemlins/spade.gif[/img]T [img]/images/graemlins/spade.gif[/img]9 [img]/images/graemlins/diamond.gif[/img]8 [img]/images/graemlins/diamond.gif[/img]
I'm on the button, raise, get 3 callers.

flop T [img]/images/graemlins/heart.gif[/img]8 [img]/images/graemlins/club.gif[/img]7 [img]/images/graemlins/heart.gif[/img]

It's checked to me, I've got the nut straight, I bet pot, all 3 call. Obviously there's at least 1 flush draw out (maybe 2, which is good for me) and a set.

turn: A [img]/images/graemlins/spade.gif[/img]

I've still got the nuts, I have to bet almost all-in to bet the pot. I guess I should go ahead and bet everything here, or should I see what the river card is?

It seems obvious that I should bet, but I'm in the midst of a really bad run, where every time someone can draw out against me, it seems like they do. I realize my limitations -- I've been playing for a fairly short time and I'm usually not the best player at the table, but I guess I just wanted some verification that I'm playing this right.

(I bet pot, the turn brought the flush. two players were drawing for the flush, and I didn't see what the other player had. I said "I give up..." and left.)

[Buzz]

Eric - You flopped the nut straight with a redraw to a full house and then got beaten by a flush on the river.

Flopped nut straights are notorious for losing on the turn or river. It's a fairly common occurance.

You played your hand very aggressively. That's fine. With three callers you're getting good odds for your bets. That's fine.

After the turn you should recognize that there are actually more possible bad river cards than good ones for you. Therefore you should expect to lose here - but since three opponents will see your bet you are getting favorable odds. (You'd even be getting favorable odds if only two opponents would see your bet. And with only one opponent, since your one opponent can't have everything, off-hand I think your straight is actually a favorite to stand up.)

[ QUOTE ]
Obviously there's at least 1 flush draw out (maybe 2, which is good for me) and a set.

[/ QUOTE ]

Doesn't seem obvious to me. There's a good chance you're up against a flush draw, but it doesn't seem a certainty to me. Nor does an opponent necessarily have a set. There's also a good chance an opponent has your identical straight.

[ QUOTE ]
I've still got the nuts, I have to bet almost all-in to bet the pot. I guess I should go ahead and bet everything here, or should I see what the river card is?

[/ QUOTE ]

Betting is fine. The odds of ending up with the nuts on the river are slightly against you, but with three callers you're getting a 3 to 1 pay-off on an almost even money bet.

[ QUOTE ]
I said "I give up..." and left.

[/ QUOTE ]

Sounds like losing is harder for you than winning. Join the club.

Just my opinion.

Buzz

[iblucky4u2]

Well well - sounds like you played one of those hands that are considered good PLO hands but ran into trouble. On the thread where I was touting the value of suited A's you chastized me and asked how may hands would I play? Well, this hand shows a great reason to not play hands without suited A's. Just like the KQsJT hand in the other post, you flopped the nut str8 with 2 pair (ok no flush draw but...) and got crushed! Maybe you are playing too many hands too aggresively. Stop playing these types of hands and you will stop a major leak in your game! [img]/images/graemlins/cool.gif[/img]

[Big Dave D]

Buzz,

It was checked to him on the flop and on the turn. I think the chance of an identical str8 being out there is very very small, online approaching zero.

Also he's getting 4 to 1 on his turn bet.

cheers

Dave

[Big Dave D]

A major leak in his game is engineering a situation where he was getting 4 to 1 on a 50/50 shot (to quote Buzz)? An EV of 150%!!!! Losing hurts but these are the situations that you play PLO for. If you wait for the nuts with all the redraws then you will simply not get enough action when you hit.

gl

dd

[ericsind]

[ QUOTE ]
Well well - sounds like you played one of those hands that are considered good PLO hands but ran into trouble. On the thread where I was touting the value of suited A's you chastized me and asked how may hands would I play? Well, this hand shows a great reason to not play hands without suited A's. Just like the KQsJT hand in the other post, you flopped the nut str8 with 2 pair (ok no flush draw but...) and got crushed! Maybe you are playing too many hands too aggresively. Stop playing these types of hands and you will stop a major leak in your game! [img]/images/graemlins/cool.gif[/img]



[/ QUOTE ]

I had no intention of chastising you in the post you're referring to. I'm still in learning mode, an open to all ideas and input. But are you suggesting I shouldn't play this hand?

[ericsind]

[ QUOTE ]
Eric - You flopped the nut straight with a redraw to a full house and then got beaten by a flush on the river.

Flopped nut straights are notorious for losing on the turn or river. It's a fairly common occurance.
[ QUOTE ]
Obviously there's at least 1 flush draw out (maybe 2, which is good for me) and a set.

[/ QUOTE ]

Doesn't seem obvious to me. There's a good chance you're up against a flush draw, but it doesn't seem a certainty to me. Nor does an opponent necessarily have a set. There's also a good chance an opponent has your identical straight.


[/ QUOTE ]

Other than a set and a flush draw, what else could they be calling with? I felt fairly sure I wasn't up against an identical straight based on the initial checks and subsequent calls, as well as my observations of my opponents play. Additionally, the pot bet on the flop was significant enough relative to the size of the stacks to drive out any low end straights or maybe 2 pair draws. I left that information out of the original post.

Interestingly (because I don't see it that often), the 3 callers were all-in on the turn. I had them covered by a small amount.

[Buzz]

[ QUOTE ]
It was checked to him on the flop and on the turn. I think the chance of an identical str8 being out there is very very small, online approaching zero.

[/ QUOTE ]

Big Dave - Nobody, recognizing the situation, would check/call with a straight here? Are you sure?

[ QUOTE ]
Also he's getting 4 to 1 on his turn bet.

[/ QUOTE ]

Big Dave - Because of the money already in the pot, each of his opponents is getting four to one odds for calling.

However, Eric, as the initiator of the bet, is getting three to one odds. For every dollar he puts in the pot, his three opponents put in three dollars. That's three to one fresh money odds.

The money that is already in the pot belongs to whoever will end up with the winning hand on the river. In terms of figuring odds, the money that is already in the pot counts when you call a bet, but not when you initiate one.

Buzz

[Buzz]

[ QUOTE ]
Other than a set and a flush draw, what else could they be calling with?

[/ QUOTE ]

Eric - It's often a mystery to me why someone calls. I know my opponents do not all think the same and I know they do not think the same as you or I.

To try to answer your question, here are some possibilities: (1) top two pairs, (2) top and bottom pairs, (3) bottom two pairs, (4) the same straight as you, (5) a flopped non-nut straight, (6) a straight draw, (7) some combination of the foregoing, (8) something else. Some of these are such bad calls as to be almost unfathonable, but I've seen people make them.

[ QUOTE ]
I felt fairly sure I wasn't up against an identical straight based on the initial checks and subsequent calls, as well as my observations of my opponents play.

[/ QUOTE ]

I think your observations of your opponent's play is the key. You were the one in position to know better than I whether or not an opponent might have a straight. But straights are fairly commonly duplicated. I've seen opponents back off with straights for that reason. I'm not suggesting that's a good reason to back off with a straight - just that based on comments of opponents, it seems the motivation sometimes. Another possibility is somebody will slow play a flopped traight, not realizing a flopped straight is way too weak a hand to slow play.

[ QUOTE ]
Additionally, the pot bet on the flop was significant enough relative to the size of the stacks to drive out any low end straights or maybe 2 pair draws. I left that information out of the original post.

[/ QUOTE ]

I'm not arguing with you here. But sometimes you make a bet that anyone with good sense would know he/she should fold. And then he/she calls. Everybody out there does not think like you or me. Everybody out there does not play with the same information you or I have. Everybody out there does not play with good poker skill.

[ QUOTE ]
Interestingly (because I don't see it that often), the 3 callers were all-in on the turn. I had them covered by a small amount.

[/ QUOTE ]

Eric - I don't think you did anything wrong in the hand. But sometimes you do things right and they still don't work out for you. It happens to all of us.

Just my opinion.

Buzz

[ericsind]

[ QUOTE ]

Eric - It's often a mystery to me why someone calls. I know my opponents do not all think the same and I know they do not think the same as you or I.


[/ QUOTE ]

I know exactly what you mean, Buzz. I'm quite often mystified by what people call with in this game. I often (relatively) find myself folding the winning hand because of such assumptions, or calling where I'm completely dead. And frequently I find myself shaking my head at what people play or how they play -- slowplaying a made hand that needs protetion, etc.

In this particular case, what in the world was the guy with the 2nd flush doing in there?! And I am assuming (with significant doubt) that the other guy had a set.) It seems fairly common for people to get sucked in with subpar hands simply by the size of the pot.

All this is one of the things that makes Omaha interesting, frustrating, and (sometimes [img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img] )profitable.

I appreciate your feedback and comments...