Omaha Hi low hand....Flop decision

[FlyingOver]

Hi Guys,
Online 1-2 hi low. I have 348J in the BB.
5 People take a look at the flop of 26J rainbow.
SB checks, I check, UTG bets, three people call.
Question: I am getting roughly around 8:1 pot odds
Do i take one card off hoping its either a 5 or an ace. Or just fold, anyway i did take a card off. The turn brought the nine of hearts puttin two hearts on board. Same player again bet and i folded after several callers.

Anyway.... These are the type of hands that really confuse me. Thanks for all comments,
-MJ

[Buzz]

"Do i take one card off hoping its either a 5 or an ace. Or just fold"

Flying over - It’s very close. Since the player directly behind you bet, and thus you are last to act, I think you should call. Looks to me like you're getting nine to one pot odds, but that is somewhat misleading because your outs are mostly for only half the pot. Since you are only mostly going for half the pot, your pot odds are only 4 to 1. If this isn’t clear to you, take nine chips of one color and one chip of a different color. If you scoop the whole pot of ten chips, you win nine chips for your one chip gambled. However, if you only win half the pot, you only get five chips, winning four chips for your one chip gambled. The hand odds against you are 37 to 8, or 4.6 to 1. Thus, since you want your pot odds to be better than the hand odds against you, it doesn't look like you are getting quite good enough pot odds to continue. However, if you make your hand, you should be able to collect some extra bets from your opponents. These implied odds, I think, make the hand feasable to play in this crowd, though barely.

In a tighter game, with less already in the pot, and with less future expectation, one should seriously consider folding 348J after a flop of 26J.

To optimize your chances and minimize your losses after the flop, I think you should plan to fold unless you catch an ace, trey, four, five, eight, or jack on the turn. That’s a bit simplistic. You may be able to play other turn cards that make the board a rainbow, and what you do exactly depends on how many others stay in the pot and who they are, but you won’t go far wrong, if at all, if you play this hand/flop and then fold unless you catch an ace, trey, four, five, eight, or jack on the turn.

Too bad you didn't catch one of your cards on the turn. Instead you caught a non-rainbow nine on the turn, and therefore folded to a bet. I think you played the hand/flop/turn perfectly.

Just my opinion.

Buzz

[chaos]

I would fold in this situation.

There is a very good chance that at least an Ace or two is out in your opponents hands, reducing your chances of making the nut low. Also a five on the turn will give you the nuts for high but unless the board is rainbow, your hand is very vullnerable.

I have never found drawing to make two pair a very profitable situation. You too often get shown sets or a better two pair.

When you do win, it will only be half of a not very large pot. I would save my chips for a more profitable situation.

Just my opinion.

[Buzz]

Chaos - I agree with you that this many callers in a tight game would decrease the chances of catching an ace on the turn or river. However, I’m taking this game to be a very loose, typical home game, rather than a tight, casino-type, game where with this many callers, the aces are probably all out. There is no mention of raises, so that perhaps the game is relatively passive as well.

It’s not crystal clear how often 348J will end up a winner after a flop of 26J rainbow. I think you’ll agree that turn/rivers of A5, 5A, or JJ will probably be scoopers, with a much lower chance of encountering another opponent whose hand might include a trey and a four than the chance of encountering another opponent who might have an ace and a deuce. What I mean is that you won’t get quartered as much with 34XX as you do with A2XX. I’m going to figure you get quartered 15% of the time. (If I make it 25%, I still end up with a positive expectation, though not as much of one).

Usually I reason in terms of two-card combinations after the flop. However, this is one of those situations where I prefer to think in permutations rather than combinations. Thus with this hand/flop I'm thinking in terms of 1980 permutations, rather than 990 combinations.

If we figure that 348J gets half the pot after turn/rivers of 52, 55, 57, 58, 59, 5J, 5K, 5Q, 5T, 85, 88, 88, 8A, 8J, A2, A6, A7, A8, A9, AA, AA, AJ, AK, AQ, AT, J5, J8, JA, 44, 44, J4, 4J, 45, 54, 33, 33, 3J, J3, 53, 35, that amounts to 393 split pots. (I have 348J folding after turn/rivers of 84, 48, 83, and 38). In truth, 348J will lose some of those hands and will get quartered for others. However, 348J will also scoop some unexpected pots and get 3/4 of other unexpected pots.

You could quibble with my scoop and split estimates, and I’ll agree they might be a bit optimistic, but even if you take part of it away, I believe there is money to be made by playing 348J for one bet after a flop of 26J when there are four opponents who have seen the flop.

Here is the math:

We don’t know how many opponents have stayed for UTG’s bet on the third betting round. Nor do we know how many opponents will stay for a bet on the river. But if everyone does stay to see the showdown, if there is a bet every round, but there is no raising, then:
-1517*1 -36*3 +393*0.85*10 +393*0.15*2.5 +34*25*0.85+ 34*10*0.15 =
-1517-108+3340+147+723+51 = +2636
e.v. = +2636/1980 small bets.

If only two opponents stay to see the showdown, if every one else folds after the flop, if there is a bet every round, but there is no raising, then:
-1517*1 -36*3 +393*0.85*6 +393*0.15*.5 +34*17*0.85+ 34*6*0.15 =
-1517-108+2004+29+491+31 = +930
e.v. = +930/1980 small bets.

If every one but UTG folds after the flop the play of the hand would be largely different. In this case the pair of jacks might win for high, the 34, or even 48 might win for low, and the list of playable turn/rivers would be more inclusive.

In any event, based on my figures shown above, I think a good player can show a profit, on the average, by continuing after the flop here, but being very selective about continuing after the turn. However, I’ll agree it’s close.

Might be a bit difficult to follow my mathematical reasoning, but it’s not deep. For example, in the 393*0.85*6 term above, the 393 represents the number of times (out of 1890) the hand splits, either winning high with a straight or full house or winning low with the nuts. The 0.85 is for not getting quartered 85% of the time (the next term has the 0.15 for getting quartered). The 6 is the number of small bets you win when you split (the next term has 0.5, the number of small bets you win when you get quartered).

This is one of those marginal situations where I believe one can profitably play a hand, as long as one is disciplined, and as long as the hand is very carefully played. Usually when I continue after the flop, I am committed to seeing the river, unless disaster strikes. However, on this particular hand, disaster is mostly very subtle and easily missed. For example, the nine of hearts on the turn is disaster, even though 348J has not been counterfeited and even though the draws that were present after the flop are still present.

It also must be noted that you need a (1) loose and (2) passive table to see another card after this flop. (1) You need a loose table because you need at least four opponents seeing the flop to have odds to continue, and (2) you need a passive table because you can’t afford (odds-wise) to see another card if someone makes you pay double to see it.

Although I try to be correct on this forum, rather than being primarily interested in being “correct,” I’m interested in improving my own game. I may argue with you, as I’m doing now, but I’m arguing more to try to bring out your point of view and find errors in my reasoning than I am to present my own point of view.

Therefore, although I truly believe I am correct here, I welcome opposing points of view and appreciate your dissension.

Finally, you wrote, "There is a very good chance that at least an Ace or two is out in your opponents hands, reducing your chances of making the nut low."

Yes, there probably are one, two or three aces in your opponent's hands. That is normal distribution. Nothing to be overly concerned about.

Just my opinion.

Buzz

[DPCondit]

I'm getting ready to go to sleep, and I am not going to get into a detailed analysis here, but, with the pair of jacks, inside straight draw, nut low (to the ace) draw, and the added possibilities of winning low even without the ace (against low-grade 1-2 players, I mean if you hit your five, it may not be a large possibility, but it does add equity), I think you can see the turn here, since it is one bet, and your call stops the betting. When a 9 [img]/forums/images/icons/heart.gif[/img] hits making a two flush that you don't have, and a higher straight possible if your 5 hits, well that is a different ball of wax. I think you played just fine.

Don

[chaos]

I was reviewing your list of playable turn/river cards. There seems to me to be some ommisions. Since you included 3J and 4J why not 8J. I would be hesitant to include 55 since your second nut straight is quite vulnerable to a paired board.

Why did you include some of the pairs twice but 55 only once?

Just trying to figure out how you came up with these hands and numbers. For the scoopers I get 38 hands:
A5 for 16 (4 Aces * 4 fives)
5A for 16
JJ for 6 (3 jacks * 2 jacks)

But I don't find this number in your calculation.

I never take your arguments as being argumentative. We are all here to learn from one another.

Some of the Aces being out is normal but it reduces your chances or making a nut low. In a loose game more aces might be out than normal since players will be playing A4xx and A5xx.

Did you take into account backdoor flushes negating your straights?

I find the situations so numerous as to be overwhelming. I might be giving up some small EV by folding in these marginal situations. But I don't think it is much and I prefer to err on the side of caution when at the table. But I do enjoy figuring out the best play in these situations when we have a day or two to do it.

[DPCondit]

Here is what I am looking at:

In a loose 1-2 game, 5 players seeing the flop does not sound above normal to me (although I don't play online, and I've never played below 3-6, I've seen plenty of 3-6, and even 6-12 games where 5 players on the flop is normal, in some cases below normal). If the number of callers is not above normal, then it does not indicate that an above average number of aces were dealt already. While loose players might be more likely to play A-3, A-4, or A-5 than tight players, they are also more likely to come in without any ace at all. There is no information here telling me that my aces are any less live than simple random distribution would dictate. If this was a tight game with 5 people seeing the flop, then you have virtually no chance of spiking an ace.

I can't say I went to all the trouble of figuring it all out mathematically by hand, I just ran a few quick sims, and thought about it a little, and I am convinced that you can probably call here in a loose game under these circumstances. You may not be giving up a LOT by folding, but I would still rather call.

I will often go out fo my way to make these types of calls, because even if it is only a small positive ev, since I play less hands than my opponents, I like to show down hands like this so they don't peg me as a rock. I think a hand like this has a certain amount of advertising value, because it confuses people. If it's not costing any ev (maybe a little variance), then it is like a free advertisement. Some unobservant opponents may also just remember that you came in with 348J and forget that you were in the Big Blind.

Just my opinion,
Don

[Buzz]

Chaos -
“I was reviewing your list of playable turn/river cards. There seems to me to be some ommisions. Since you included 3J and 4J why not 8J.”

I think 8J is included. It’s between 8A and A2.

“I would be hesitant to include 55 since your second nut straight is quite vulnerable to a paired board.”

Good point. But this is a runner-runner 55. An opponent would need to have flopped a set to make a full house with runner-runner 55. It’s possible, and I’ll agree that the five on the river would not be what anyone who made a straight with a five on the turn would like to see. True, the second nut straight would be vulnerable, but I think with these particular cards, the 2nd straight would usually stand up to be a winner. But you have a good point. It was an arbitrary decision on my part to include it.

“Why did you include some of the pairs twice but 55 only once?”

Just a glitch in presenting my results. The pairs were all included twice in my original chart, from which I did my figuring. I actually did the chart thinking in terms of combinations, then realized I needed to use permutations, and since I already had a balance with combinations, I decided the quickest, easiest way to proceed would be to double the chart and rearrange the order of the cards in the chart. I meant to go through and delete the pair duplications, but evidently got distracted after deleting the 55 and didn’t follow through with the rest of them. Just an oversight that I missed when I proofread.

“Just trying to figure out how you came up with these hands and numbers. For the scoopers I get 38 hands:
A5 for 16 (4 Aces * 4 fives)
5A for 16
JJ for 6 (3 jacks * 2 jacks)

But I don't find this number in your calculation.”

No. I used 34, not 38.

Since one jack was in the hand and another was on the flop, there are only two jacks left in the pack. That makes two permutations for JJ, not six. I did use 16 + 16 for A5 and 5A. As I think of it now, I should have reduced that number by 3 + 3, for runner-runner flushes and added 6 to the split pot winner total. But it's hard to get that exact. Some of the time your wheel/6 will scoop even though a flush becomes possible on the river. But, yes, that was an oversight on my part.

“Some of the Aces being out is normal but it reduces your chances or making a nut low. In a loose game more aces might be out than normal since players will be playing A4xx and A5xx.”

You can’t figure that way. Perhaps I can explain why, if you want an explanation. (Just ask, if you do). But the bottom line is figuring that way doesn’t get you to the truth.

If you started with at least six opponents, and if you don’t see an ace in your hand or on the flop, any particular ace is probably located in one of your opponent’s hands, but the probability of that ace appearing on the turn is still 1/45.

It is reasonable to conclude that when more opponents than usual pay to see the flop, the chance of catching an ace on the turn is reduced. In the game described by Flying Over, four opponents saw the flop. However, Flying Over’s post did not that more opponents than usual were seeing the flop. Honestly, more than four opponents usually see the flop in the $3-6-kill Omaha-8 ring games held in all of the casinos in the Los Angeles area. Four opponents seeing the flop is not, at least to anyone who plays regularly in low level games in the L.A. area, an indication that there will be less of a chance of catching an ace on the board.

“Did you take into account backdoor flushes negating your straights?”

I thought I did. It was my intention to take them into account. But it's clear (see A5 and 5A above) that I missed at least a couple of them. Although Flying Over didn't mention suits for the 348J hand, I had to assign suits when setting up the chart.

“I find the situations so numerous as to be overwhelming. I might be giving up some small EV by folding in these marginal situations. But I don't think it is much and I prefer to err on the side of caution when at the table. But I do enjoy figuring out the best play in these situations when we have a day or two to do it.”

I agree with you.

By going over some of these situations away from the table, we play them better at the table. Sometimes I am dealt a hand and/or flop and/or turn and /or river the same or very similar to one I have spent time thinking about. But you're right; there are many different situations.

Thanks for your input.

Buzz

[Buzz]

Hi Don - I answered Chaos before reading your response.

"In a loose 1-2 game, 5 players seeing the flop does not sound above normal to me (although I don't play online, and I've never played below 3-6, I've seen plenty of 3-6, and even 6-12 games where 5 players on the flop is normal, in some cases below normal). If the number of callers is not above normal, then it does not indicate that an above average number of aces were dealt already. While loose players might be more likely to play A-3, A-4, or A-5 than tight players, they are also more likely to come in without any ace at all. There is no information here telling me that my aces are any less live than simple random distribution would dictate. If this was a tight game with 5 people seeing the flop, then you have virtually no chance of spiking an ace."

Exactly. Well written!

"I can't say I went to all the trouble of figuring it all out mathematically by hand, I just ran a few quick sims, and thought about it a little, and I am convinced that you can probably call here in a loose game under these circumstances. You may not be giving up a LOT by folding, but I would still rather call."

Your sims are probably better than my figuring it all out mathematically by hand. I went through the chart and math pretty fast, got close enough to recognize the hand/flop was very playable, but didn't feel like spending hours and hours double checking and making it perfect. It's nice to have your sims as a back-up. Thanks.

"I will often go out fo my way to make these types of calls, because even if it is only a small positive ev, since I play less hands than my opponents, I like to show down hands like this so they don't peg me as a rock. I think a hand like this has a certain amount of advertising value, because it confuses people. If it's not costing any ev (maybe a little variance), then it is like a free advertisement. Some unobservant opponents may also just remember that you came in with 348J and forget that you were in the Big Blind."

Excellent reason to play these marginal situations. I was thinking along similar lines but didn't put my thoughts in writing.

Buzz

[chaos]

Buzz, thanks for clarifying things.

I'm now convinced that a call is correct.