Middle set Omaha 8

[Ms 45]

2/4 Party Poker (10 handed)

Preflop: Hero is BB with Jc, 5c, 2d, 5d

LAG UTG calls, loose passive UTG+1 calls, UTG+2 calls 3 folds, tight CO calls, 2 folds, I check in BB

Flop: Ad 4d 5s (5 players)

Checked to CO, CO bets, I fold

Is this too tight weak, or a standard play?

[Buzz]

[ QUOTE ]
Is this too tight weak

[/ QUOTE ]

Yes. I'd say so.

Buzz

[GMan42]

Way too weak-tight IMO. Unless he's so tight that you think he'd *only* bet here with 23 or AA, you may even want to raise here. You might chase out the other players and/or get a free card on the turn, getting 2 chances to fill up. Don't forget a 3 also gives you a wheel, and your weak flush draw might be worth something, so you have a few more outs here than you think.

[JRegs]

I think it's weak at the low limits, where people will play bottom two pair for high like the stone-cold nuts. I've found that at low-limit Party games, middle set is often profitable for this reason, although in higher limit games I definately wouldn't play this way.

[johnnybeef]

what is the size of the pot in this situation? if it is small i like folding, if it is medium i like a call as you need to build a pot and you have plenty of good draws (unless of course the guy who bet is weak tight in which case you are drawing to 9 cards for half the pot). if the pot is big i like a raise to isolate him or possibly pick off a bluff attempt, furthermore, you do have some equity in this hand.

anyone else?
johnny

[mosquito]

Think U are fine.

It's tight, not weak.

You are playing for 1/2 the pot, and may be
behind needing to draw.

Calling is a long run loser, unless you know
your opponent frequently does not have a hand
here.

[Matt Ruff]

I think what you do here depends on how comfortable you are with your post-flop play. You do still have possibilities, especially if no one's made a wheel yet, but this is the sort of hand that can end up costing you a lot if you're unable to recognize when you're beaten.

One scenario to contemplate: you raise, hoping to get the turn heads up, UTG re-raises, two players fold, CO calls, you call. Turn card is 3s -- you've got the wheel, but the 6- and 7-high straights are enabled, so all you're guaranteed of at the moment is a sixth of the pot, and there's a loose aggressive maniac on your left. What do you do?

-- M. Ruff

[Buzz]

Cut-Off, by betting after this flop, basically represents a flopped wheel, but could simply be making an opportunistic positional bet, having missed this flop but reading everybody else for also missing this flop. But even though BB should recognize there’s a very good chance Cut-Off doesn’t actually have it, the prudent play for BB is to play Cut-Off for the flopped wheel because roughly half the time in a full game <font color="white">_</font>somebody will be dealt a four card hand that includes a deuce and a trey, and this particular deal, that somebody might be Cut-Off - or it might be one of those intervening players who checked - or it might be that nobody holds 23XX. (The exact probability of an opponent having flopped a wheel here doesn’t matter. It’s great enough that you have to be very wary of it, but not so overwhelming that it’s a virtual certainty).

But at any rate, when Cut-Off bets, representing the flopped wheel, the prudent thing for BB to do is to trust that Cut-Off does indeed have the flopped wheel, and if so, then BB should figure on needing to improve to win just half the pot. Accordingly, BB is on a draw, needing to catch a three, four, or five on the turn to feel good about continuing, and wondering what to do if the board pairs aces on the turn. (I think if BB calls and nobody else does, an ace is a positive card for BB, but if one of the intervening players also calls then paired aces on the turn are very scary).

I’ll try to show the reasoning involved below, but it will turn out that at least one of the intervening players who has already checked must call. Otherwise, a call from BB will amount to a minor mis-judgement.

BB should like eight cards (of forty five). Odds BB <font color="white">_</font>won't catch a favorable card on the turn are thus 37 to 8, or 4.625 to 1. If BB catches, it's probably only for half the pot. (If you think of aces as being favorable cards for BB, then the odds against BB are 34 to 11 or 3.1 to 1 - but I prefer the slightly more conservative 4.625 to 1).

Meanwhile, BB's current pot odds for half the pot are 2.5 to 1.

BB needs the implied pot odds to be greater than 4.625 to 1 to make this a favorable bet. In other words, BB needs to expect to win 5 small bets when winning at the showdown to have favorable odds to call Cut-Off’s second round bet.

And this is, I believe, a possibility in a typical $2-$4 game, but only if at least one intervening player who has already checked this round will call and then chase to the showdown. Will at least one intervening player call if BB calls? That is the question. If just one other player also calls and will chase to the showdown, then BB has favorable implied pot odds to call a single bet and see one more card. In other words, for BB to have favorable implied odds, at least one of BB’s opponents must call after BB calls, and then if BB catches a favorable card on the turn, BB’s combined opponents must subsequently put a total of at least four big bets in the pot. If all that happens, BB will be getting implied pot odds of five to one for calling Cut-Off’s second round bet. (Any extra bets over and above that on the third and fourth betting rounds are not out of the question and will be gravy for BB).

In other words, in order to have favorable odds to call Cut-Off’s 2nd round bet, BB has to have a reasonable expectation of at least one opponent (who has already checked) continuing, and then later needs a total of four big bets from at least two opponents after the turn card is favorable for BB.

In a game with top notch opponents, that scenario probably wouldn’t happen.

But assuming this is a typical $2-$4 game, it doesn’t seem unreasonable.

It only costs one small bet to find out if the above scenario will possibly play itself out or not.

I think it's worth the gamble in a typical $2-$4 ring game.

There are a couple of immediate dangers on this (the second) betting round. One danger is that if BB calls Cut-Off’s bet no intervening player will also call. A second danger is that one of the intervening players who has checked will raise after BB calls the single bet. (Will the real 23XX stand up).

It’s hard to know what will happen even if you’re sitting in the game and know the players, let alone when you’re reading about an isolated hand involving unknown and perhaps hypothetical players.

Thus it is not clear at all what the three opponents who have already checked this round will do. Will anyone who has already checked call? Will anyone check-raise? And then if the turn card is favorable for BB (a three, four or five) will anybody call a bet on the third and fourth betting rounds?

If BB’s opponents all play perfectly on the second, third, and fourth betting rounds, then it’s a mistake for BB to call Cut-Off’s second round bet. But if this is a typical $2-$4 game, perfect play by every opponent for the rest of this deal is not what should be expected, in my humble opinion. If BB’s opponents are not making any mistakes, then BB should recognize this is a very tough table - an unusually difficult table for a $2-$4 game.

Because of the danger of facing a better high hand, without improving on the turn, BB simply will not likely have favorable odds to call a big bet on the third betting round. (It’s <font color="white">_</font> possible BB will have favorable odds to draw on the river, but it’s unlikely).

Most of the time, (p=37/45) if BB does call the single bet on the second betting round, BB will not get a three, four or five on the turn, will check and should fold to the expected third round bet from an opponent. It’s a possibility that nobody will bet on the third betting round if BB misses on the turn - but BB should not bank on that possibility. However, to continue after the flop, BB is basically banking on opponents making <font color="white">_</font>some mistakes, and perhaps nobody betting on the third betting round would be one or two of them.

IMHO you have to get used to making these draws and also accustomed to usually missing them when playing Omaha-8. Also IMHO you need to be able to visualize what your share of the pot at the showdown will be if you do make your draw. That’s how you estimate your implied pot odds. (Then you compare your implied pot odds to the odds against making your draw. If your implied pot odds for your share of the pot are greater than the odds against making your draw, then you have favorable odds to call a bet).

Winning at poker is a three step process.

Step 1. In any poker game, including Omaha-8, in order to win consistently, you need to consistently find tables with opponents who make more mistakes than you do. I think it’s just that simple.

Step 2. To profit from mistakes by opponents, you have to be playing in the hands where your opponents make these mistakes. If you play so tightly that you’re not in the hand when an opponent makes a mistake, then you obviously don’t profit from the mistake. (Duh.)

Step 3. Don’t dribble away your profits by seeing too many flops and chasing too much.

Clearly you need to strike a balance between steps two and three. If you're <font color="white">_</font>always in the hand with an opponent who is playing too loosely, then you're probably playing too loosely yourself. (And your <font color="white">_</font>other opponents will punish you for playing too loosely). However, you gain nothing from the mistakes of opponents unless you're involved in the hands where they make mistakes. If you’re hardly ever in a hand with an opponent who plays too loosely and pays off too much, then you're probably playing too tightly. In my humble opinion where you strike a balance between these two extremes depends on how all your opponents are playing. You need to get involved in the hands where some of your opponents will be making mistakes, but you can’t afford to be punished too severely by other opponents when you do.

At any rate, in a typical $2-$4 game, I think folding middle set to a bet from the last position player after you and three other opponents have checked is too tight, but I'll agree if you're in a game where you're very certain nobody else will call this bet, then folding is a better choice than calling.

That’s just my opinion.

Buzz

[Buzz]

[ QUOTE ]
One scenario to contemplate: you raise, hoping to get the turn heads up, UTG re-raises, two players fold, CO calls, you call. Turn card is 3s -- you've got the wheel, but the 6- and 7-high straights are enabled, so all you're guaranteed of at the moment is a sixth of the pot, and there's a loose aggressive maniac on your left. What do you do?

[/ QUOTE ]

Matt - Because of the danger Cut-Off does indeed have the wheel and might re-raise, I don't think you want to get heads-up with Cut-Off.

But let's assume you do raise and then UTG re-raises, thus representing, I suppose the wheel with a redraw or redraws. (Oh dear!). If UTG can re-raise, UTG might be holding some of your outs. (Double oh dear!). What if UTG has the wheel plus top set? (Triple oh dear!). Still, I think you do call the re-raise.

[ QUOTE ]
Turn card is 3s -- you've got the wheel, but the 6- and 7-high straights are enabled, so all you're guaranteed of at the moment is a sixth of the pot, and there's a loose aggressive maniac on your left. What do you do?

[/ QUOTE ]

Yikes. Now what? I don't think you should have raised in the first place. My thinking is you need at least one other player passively limping after you call Cut-Off's second round bet to justify the call. Getting check-raised by a maniac on your left is not what you want at all. Pas du tout.

But O.K. let's say you did raise and have gotten yourself in this mess. What now?

I think you check and call.

Assuming Cut-Off is sensible, you're probably only get your own last two bets back but if your opponents both go nuts, unless the board pairs on the river it seems as though you'll lose a small amount. However, if the board pairs on the river, you might come out ahead. And/or maybe you won't get sixthed for low (although I'll admit it looks bleak if UTG has been planning a check-raise on the second betting round).

Just my opinion. Check and call.

Buzz

[Yads]

I think it's close between calling and folding. If the pot is small it's a definite fold.