Trying to learn PLO

[CrisBrown]

Hi CCass,

[ QUOTE ]
I have been dabbling with PLO on Stars, and have good success on weak tables, but I have gotten killed a couple of times when my table selection isn't good.

[/ QUOTE ]

I second these remarks. I've read that fairly small skill edges play very heavily in Omaha, more so than in Hold'Em, so for we newbies, the line between a "good" or "bad" table can be very, very thin.

Cris

[CrisBrown]

Hi aces,

I'm new to Omaha so I'm probably wrong, but I think the call decision maybe has as much to do with the other cards as with the KK? With a hand like KKQJds, there are more kinds of flops that are playable vs. AAxx, so maybe you don't need the flopped-set 8:1 implied odds. By contrast, with a three-flush KKT8, with only one flush possibility and a high likelihood of flopping only a gutshot draw ... I think the 8:1 implied odds are probably more reasonable.

Again, though, I really don't know anything yet. I'm just kinda voicing an idea and hoping people will explain where I'm wrong. *shrugs*

Cris

[sherbert]

You're right in part - one of the probs in Omaha is that hands run much closer preflop - even a hand like AAKK will lose regularly. If you have a hand like KKQJds then sure, that's a no brainer - but these hands are incredibly uncommon. You could probably play the game for a few years and fold this hand each time you were dealt it and not make much difference to your results.
Why? Because it is so rare. And when you connect with a flop you like, occasionally your opponent will be drawing dead. But often they will outdraw you.
So you have to make the most of what you are dealt. KKT8ss ain't brilliant but it ain't bad either. I'd go with a call in the scenario outlined here.

[CrisBrown]

Hi sherbet,

Thank you for the reply. Yes, you're right, that one has to make do with the cards one is dealt. I guess right now I'm at the point of maybe playing a little too tight, as I am still practically using training wheels. I like to have an idea of what I want to flop with a hand, and with KKT8 3-flush, I'm kinda stuck looking for a K-high flop, or QJ.

I would figure I'm facing AA with this reraise, which means a 50% chance he has the Ace of my suit and a fair chance that it's suited. So my K-high flush really doesn't look very profitable. At best, I'd have to play it defensively, because if I get a lot of action on it, it's unlikely to be good.

So the only really big pot hands I can hope to flop are K-high, or a K-high straight vs. someone else's Q- or J-high straight. And given the pre-flop action, I don't have the option of playing a small pot.

Again, though, I'm very new to the game so that probably explains why I'd be so reluctant to make that pre-flop call.

Cris

[sherbert]

Just out of interest, if you were heads up against AAss, weak sidecards, do you know what the difference is in win rate between KKQJds and KKT8ss?

[CrisBrown]

Hi sherbert,

[ QUOTE ]
Just out of interest, if you were heads up against AAss, weak sidecards, do you know what the difference is in win rate between KKQJds and KKT8ss?

[/ QUOTE ]

According to two-dimes.net, where "live" means the KK's flush draw is live:

AA87ds -- 71% (live) or 74%
KKT8ss -- 29% (live) or 26%

AA87ds -- 61% (live) or 65%
KKQJds -- 39% (live) or 35%

To me, that's a significant difference: 7:3 or as much as 3:1 vs. KKT8ss, as compared to 2:1 or as little as 3:2 vs. KKQJds. And those numbers assume both hands go to the river. It seems to me, and again I'm new at Omaha, that KKQJds is much more likely to flop enough outs to justify going to the river.

[Edit:] Sorry, I misread your original post and thought you meant the AA hand was double-suited. Duh. Against AAxxss, if the KK's flush draw is live, the win rates are 32.5% for KKT8ss, and 43% for KKQJds. If the KK's flush is covered, the numbers are essentially the same as above.

So, against a single-suited AA, provided the flush draw is live, KKQJds is basically a 4:3 dog, while KKT8ss is a bit worse than a 2:1 dog. Again, to me, those differences are substantial.

Cris

[sherbert]

Cris

Thanks for that. The results I got were a little different - using PokerCalculator to do Monte Carlo sims.

If the hand was AA72ss vs. KKT8ss the Kings equity is 35.5 per cent, vs 41.3 per cent for KKQJds (both flushes live) - or an increase of 6 per cent. Your point is well made and I completely agree that an increase in ev of six per cent is not to be sniffed at. But the point I was making is that I don't think the difference is so substantial as to make the KKT8 an automatic fold - it's not as if your ev has rocketed with the QJ. (BTW I make that 3:2 vs 2:1.) Clearly the KKT8 is a thinner call. More debateable if it's a clear fold.

And there remains the fact that unfortunately you will very rarely have the luxury of deciding whether or not to call a raise with KKQJds - in a database of just over 10,000 hands I've been dealt it just once! Needless to add, perhaps, I lost a bucketload with it. Ho hum.

Cheers

[CrisBrown]

Hi sherbert,

[ QUOTE ]
And there remains the fact that unfortunately you will very rarely have the luxury of deciding whether or not to call a raise with KKQJds - in a database of just over 10,000 hands I've been dealt it just once! Needless to add, perhaps, I lost a bucketload with it. Ho hum.

[/ QUOTE ]

Yes, and your point is well-taken. It's not as if I get to look down at my cards and say "Well, I'd rather call this with KKQTds...." I have what I have, and I have to make a decision on those cards and that situation.

I guess the only point I was making is that the side cards make a significant difference in the strength of a big pair hand. Perhaps I undervalue big pairs on Omaha, but I see a lot of people complaining (at the tables, not here): "I always lose with KK." Well, if your hand is KK83o ... the Kings aren't really worth much anyway, as I see it. On the other hand, with solid side cards, KKxx isn't that big of an underdog to even an AA hand.

Cris

[The Gift Of Gab]

I think the truth is somewhere in between what sherbert and aces are saying.

One one hand, looking at the all-in equity of the hands is misleading because much of the kings' equity comes from making hands on the later streets when the flop wasn't good enough to call. It also makes a big difference if you know you will be heads-up against the aces: if you flop an 8-out straight draw with your KKT8ss you can be pretty sure your ten outs are good. In a three- or four-way pot you often won't have the best draw, and you'll sometimes lose even if you flop two pair or trips. In a multiway pot I'd want odds close to what acesover8s is talking about. The poster is also sandwiched between the raiser and anyone else who comes in.

On the other hand, if you're not getting great odds but know the pot will be heads-up you can sometimes call liberally with decent kings. It helps a lot if the raiser will check and fold when the board comes down scary. I've played with guys who raise every time with aces and shut down after the flop unless they hit another, but online most guys just throw their money in.

[Guy McSucker]

[ QUOTE ]

Guy?


[/ QUOTE ]

You mean me? [img]/images/graemlins/blush.gif[/img]

The numbers look right.

As for what strategy to take based on the numbers, I'm not sure. As the calculations elsewhere in the thread show, the to-the-river equity of the KKxx hand is a lot better than the chance of flopping a set, and as GoG rightly points out, a good deal of that comes from backdoor draws.

Playing a short stack, you get to see the river more often than if you're playing a deep stack, so the backdoor equity helps you out. Playing a deep stack, unless you flop a set or a really good draw, you're going to have to muck on the flop. So with a deep stack you have to look for the set; but then you also have to hope the AAxx is prepared to bet the pot and call a full blooded raise when the flop comes K-high, which he might not be.

The more I think about it, the less I like KKxx when up against almost certain aces.

Guy.