Some PLO experimentation

[Zag]

I've been experimenting with the effects of secondary outs in PLO, and I found some results that are interesting (to me, at least) so I thought I would share them.

Let's assume that the flop is 5c 8c 9s, and we will assume a heads up match up with hands that contain the following traits, where each hand might have several of them. Also, we will assume one player is all in on the flop, so we always go to the river.
- top set (SET)
- made straight, with 67 (STR)
- higher straight draw with TJ (SD)
- overpair (OP)
- flush draw (in clubs) (FD)
- back door flush draw (in spades) (BDFD)

Here are some interesting match-ups. The numbers are all in per thousand (just like batting averages). Except where noted, the opponent is NOT holding any of the obvious outs.

SET 368 vs STR 632
SET 288 vs STR 712 (STR hand killed two full house outs.)
SET & SD 612 vs STR 388
SET & SD 551 vs STR 449 (STR hand killed two full house outs.)
SET & SD 502 vs STR & FD 498
SET & SD 422 vs STR & FD 578 (STR hand killed two full house outs.)
SET & SD 515 vs STR & FD 485 (Set hand killed two flush outs.)
SET & SD 494 vs STR & FD & BDFD 506
SET & SD 488 vs STR & FD & OP 512
SET & SD 500 vs STR & FD & OP 500 !! (Set hand killed two flush outs.)
SET & SD 479 vs STR & FD & OP & BDFD 521

SET & FD 601 vs STR 399
SET & FD 601 vs STR & BDFD 399 (Why are these the same? -- doh, I see why)
SET & FD 587 vs STR & OP 413

SET & BDFD 402 vs STR 598

Anyway, I found these to be pretty interesting. The effect of two pair to go with your straight is impressive at 59 to 80 points. (Note that this also made a straight flush redraw, in one case.) The effect of an overpair is 14 points when against a set, more than I would have thought. The effect of a back door flush draw is 8 points when against a higher straight draw.

The applicability of this is that I think it might be worth it to call a big raise with your vulnerable (but current nuts) straight if you also have two pair, an overpair, and/or a back door flush draw, where you might want to lay it down if you do not. These added outs at least keep you from being totally freerolled, if the opponent has the same straight but also something more.

Another result is that when you have a set and a flush draw is possible, then having two of the flush cards, even if they are 2 and 3, is valuable just in killing the outs of a possible flush against you. This was worth 12 or 13 points.

I find it interesting to think in this way, rather than just counting your outs, because often you are not sure what your outs are. This analysis helps you consider, for example, that your baby flush draw really is worth something, even if it is just killing the outs of a better flush draw.

Let me know if you found this interesting, and I'll post the results of other experiments of this sort, if I find the time to do them.

[Zag]

Hmmm? Not a single response. Did really nobody else find it interesting at all? Sometimes I wonder if I have entered people's "ignore" list.

(Yes, this is a shameless plea for attention. Pathetic, isn't it? [img]/images/graemlins/crazy.gif[/img])

[Acesover8s]

While this is interesting material, and it does one good to figure this sort of thing out, it is essentially the same thing as the tables produced in the back of Bob Ciaffone's book. Although to give you credit, he doesn't present his in terms of batting averages. [img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img]

[Paul2432]

I find it interesting. Please continue to post your results.

One matchup you left out is SET & FD vs STR (with SF draw, killing 3 flush outs and one FH out).

Paul

[tewall]

"Another result is that when you have a set and a flush draw is possible, then having two of the flush cards, even if they are 2 and 3, is valuable just in killing the outs of a possible flush against you. This was worth 12 or 13 points."

I hadn't thought of this. Makes sense. Makes more of a difference than I would have thought just intuitively.

[Guy McSucker]

This analysis helps you consider, for example, that your baby flush draw really is worth something, even if it is just killing the outs of a better flush draw

This is a bit like "having the blockers" against a straight draw, I suppose. The main difference is that here you're talking about cutting down someone else's draw, whereas every story including the phrase "I had the blockers" is about somone convincing themselves the other guy's obvious straight isn't there...

Very interesting results anyway. I found them easier to get to grips with than Ciaffone's. Thanks for posting them!

Guy.

[Acesover8s]

[ QUOTE ]
Very interesting results anyway. I found them easier to get to grips with than Ciaffone's.

[/ QUOTE ]

You're just being contrary now.