Keeping the Initiative (Stars 100 hand)

[BluffTHIS!]

If the preflop action and effective stack sizes are such that you can get allin on the flop with top set of QQ/KK and junky no redraw sidecards, then that is fine. But if not, and you and an opponent have enough for a full pot size bet on the turn, what are you going to do when the straight card comes? Call the rest of your stack off for 2-1 on your money as a 4-1 dog? Or better yet, fold to an aggressive player behind you who merely represents that straight? Of course you can always just bet in front heedless of what comes if you are first to act to avoid being bluffed out, but if the opponent is a reasonable player that is not wise.

And most hands you play should be able not only to stand at least one raise, but also a second moderate raise that is not more than 20% of your stack or an allin bet by a short stack player from whom you can make no more money if your hand hits when a preflop dog.

Joe, I from your posts you seem to be a tight player capable of folding top set when a draw hits, but why play a hand that lacks additional outs to continue to the river if someone makes a straight on you on the flop (even as little as a gutshot)? And what are you going to do when you flop bottom 2 against a preflop raiser marked with aces? Shove with 4s up and hope he doesn't hit his ace or counterfeit you or get trapped for your stack by a 3rd player with a set or good wrap? And if you are going to play QQ with junky sidecards then why leave out a similar JJ hand?

The preflop standard of 4 cards working together, and the principle that 2 holdem hands don't make a good omaha hand are not just valid but critical in a game where your stack is potentially on the line in any hand you choose to play.

[Tilt]

Bluff,

I think you are generally right about this. At some tables where the payers have shown a propensity to make bad fishy calls however I think its playable from MP. But I think 90% of the time here its a muck preflop.

[beset7]

I think preflop is fine as long as you can fold top set.

I like to mix in some big check raises on the flop here. I'd like to bring down the hammer before I find myself trying to make very player dependent type reads on the turn and river online vs. a relative unknown.

I think leading out on the turn is best although just for style reasons I'd probably make it atleast 30 to go.

As played I think folding on the turn is OK given your read.

[joewatch]

Thanks for the detailed response, Bluff. I greatly appreciate the points you are making.

Fact is, everything you say valid, and I have run into all of those situations. But I think that this where the post-flop skill makes a difference. Knowing how to deal with tricky situations is what separates the good players from the mediocre ones.

I could tell you what I would do in every one of those situations you mentioned, but that would be revealing too much about my game. [img]/images/graemlins/laugh.gif[/img] However, I can assure you, I am prepared to deal with every one of them.

True, I am a tight player, and that does make me prone to being bluffed out of some small and medium pots by aggressive players occasionally. However, the many small pots I win with semibluffs, and the huge pots I win vs. aggressive players when the semibluff gets there more than compensates.

Playing top set in an unraised pot with a coordinated board, no matter what your position, is always a tricky situation. But the statistics show that top sets are the biggest money winners in Omaha.

[TheRempel]

Playing very coordinated hands certainly helps, but the only two sidecards that are really helping you here are AK. If he'd played QQJT preflop and someone else has the straight, he would be in worse shape then you are right now.

Playing a raggy big pair at an aggressive tabl, even OOP, is a winning play. Certainly it is nice to have ways of winning other than flopping a set, but playing a one way hand to hit a flop or fold is certainly not as terrible as you make it out to be.

[BluffTHIS!]

I'm going to make 1 additional comment on these types of hands. Look at the situations that can arise when you play them:

1) You see the flop miss and fold, which will happen most of the time. Same as when there is a 2nd very large raise and you have to fold. But all these misses add up, and are the same as a limit leak of playing too many hands even if you don't go too far with them.

2) In a small pot without any big draws you bet the pot and win a small pot.

3) A big pot gets played when you flop top set and the draw gets there on the turn, and you have to fold as a money dog. More money lost. (Plus beware the temptation offered by an expert player who now bets only slightly above 1/2 the pot offering you still insufficient odds to call but not as bad as if he had bet the full pot.)

4) A big pot gets played on a KQx board and you lose to top set, or rarely to quads to a player who had a lower set and a draw on the flop. More money lost if you can't read really well and the stack sizes allow you to get away from the hand.

5) A big pot gets played and you bust middle set or a player who is overaggressive with a wrap and wants to get allin on the flop as a dog and you win. The best situation of course.

6) A big pot gets played and you get allin on the turn and the draw gets there on the river and busts you. Money lost. Happens a mathematically determined number of times.


But the kicker to all this, is that by playing better sidecards, you are the one who might pick up a quality draw and be able to win a big pot and bust someone else with a draw that gets there. Although rare, you sometimes will flop a straight and flush draw and make an overset on someone and win a big pot that way as well.

So you have to be able to win enough with a junky QQ/KK hand to make up for all the times you don't and lose. And you have to be able to do it out of position where you suffer the worst possibility of being bluffed by a player behind you with a weak draw who bluffs the river when a different draw gets there. And you never have a freeroll situation where you both make the straight together and you bust him when you fill the river after getting allin on the turn, where he would have folded to a board pair if mony was left to bet.

So my final advice is to consider all these things and balance not just how much you win with those marginal hands but also how much you lose. I predict you will find such hands are marginal winners at best and add significantly to your variance.

[TheRempel]

Just curious, what is your VP$IP?

As for your comments:

[ QUOTE ]
1) You see the flop miss and fold, which will happen most of the time. Same as when there is a 2nd very large raise and you have to fold. But all these misses add up, and are the same as a limit leak of playing too many hands even if you don't go too far with them.

[/ QUOTE ]

Oh well. A lot of your superstrong preflop hands are going to be folded on the flop as well, in and out of position.

[ QUOTE ]
2) In a small pot without any big draws you bet the pot and win a small pot.

[/ QUOTE ]

And this is a problem because?

[ QUOTE ]
3) A big pot gets played when you flop top set and the draw gets there on the turn, and you have to fold as a money dog. More money lost. (Plus beware the temptation offered by an expert player who now bets only slightly above 1/2 the pot offering you still insufficient odds to call but not as bad as if he had bet the full pot.)

[/ QUOTE ]

You either bet and got called on the flop, or let an aggressive player with position bet out and you checkraised. In both cases, you put the money in with a positive expectation and are faced with a situation where you will either have to fold with no immediate or implied odds or commit more money in a second +EV situation when you do have immediate or implied odds. Anytime I can put in money and get a +EV return I am happy to do so.

[ QUOTE ]
4) A big pot gets played on a KQx board and you lose to top set, or rarely to quads to a player who had a lower set and a draw on the flop. More money lost if you can't read really well and the stack sizes allow you to get away from the hand.

[/ QUOTE ]

Well, this is where postflop skills come in. If you can't fold middle set, just play AA. If you are really worried about being in a situation where you have an overset and get drawn out by quads, I don't know what to say. Generally, top or middle set against a lower set with a medium draw is at least a 60/40 favorite on the flop. Why would you not want to put as much money in as possible here?

[ QUOTE ]
5) A big pot gets played and you bust middle set or a player who is overaggressive with a wrap and wants to get allin on the flop as a dog and you win. The best situation of course.

[/ QUOTE ]

Well, yeah.

[ QUOTE ]
6) A big pot gets played and you get allin on the turn and the draw gets there on the river and busts you. Money lost. Happens a mathematically determined number of times.

[/ QUOTE ]

Oh well. A 'mathematically determined number of times' the draw won't even be out there and you will be getting people to overcommit with weakish draws.

[ QUOTE ]
But the kicker to all this, is that by playing better sidecards, you are the one who might pick up a quality draw and be able to win a big pot and bust someone else with a draw that gets there. Although rare, you sometimes will flop a straight and flush draw and make an overset on someone and win a big pot that way as well.

[/ QUOTE ]

Yeah, ideally I would like to have the best sidecards possible in any given top or middle set situation so at the very least I am blocking some of the draws that are out there against me. Good sidecards certainly give you other flop options as well, but consider a hand where you have played something like QQTKss. The flop comes 9J3 rainbow, you call a PSB from the PFR, and the turn is a 9. By your logic, it would be better to have QQ24 there since you would have folded the flop and lost less money to a player with 9Jxx or JJxx. You need to remember that PLO is all about equity, not about having the best hand hold up.

[ QUOTE ]

So you have to be able to win enough with a junky QQ/KK hand to make up for all the times you don't and lose.[ QUOTE ]


Well, that is a given, and I think most of the people that are justifying playing these hands OOP are intelligent enought to know whether or not they are leaking money this way. I know I'm not, and in fact, big pair hands, regardless of sidecards, are my second money winner after AAxx, especially in aggro games.

[ QUOTE ]
And you have to be able to do it out of position where you suffer the worst possibility of being bluffed by a player behind you with a weak draw who bluffs the river when a different draw gets there.

[/ QUOTE ]

This is going to be the case with every hand you play OOP unless you have the nuts every time. It simply requires good post flop play.

[ QUOTE ]
And you never have a freeroll situation where you both make the straight together and you bust him when you fill the river after getting allin on the turn, where he would have folded to a board pair if mony was left to bet.

[/ QUOTE ]

Well, not never. If you are playing any KK or QQxx in EP, then you are certainly also playing when you have great sidecards, but again, those situations are very rare. When was the last time you had a huge freeroll that got there? I play about 1500 - 2000 hands a day and it typically happens once every 4000 hands or so.

[ QUOTE ]
So my final advice is to consider all these things and balance not just how much you win with those marginal hands but also how much you lose. I predict you will find such hands are marginal winners at best and add significantly to your variance.

[/ QUOTE ]

Variance is not a bad thing and if you are properly bankrolled for the level you are playing, you should not be afraid of it. If your opponents know you only continue past the flop with a absolute monster of a hand, you will also get labelled as a nut peddler and win smaller pots when you do win and get bluffed out of a lot of bigger ones.

[Tilt]

Bluff is right about this hand. QQ24ss is really a dominated hand in lots of ways. Everything you can make out of it has second best hand possibilities - your flush, your straight potential, your set potential - all have real trouble ahead of them in a multiway situation.

There are conditions where this is playable. For instance, heads up against a preflop raiser who you think has AA I like it cause its an easy "no set no bet" hand. But generally no.

If you just had a little something more to it...if it were double suited, or had another broadway with it, it would be much more playable. But with just a 2 and a 4 its kinda trashy.

[beset7]

Tilt/Bluff,

You both have described many difficult and marginal postflop situations. I don't think anybody disagrees that those situations are what arise when you TTxx-AAxx irrespective of side cards and position when the preflop action isn't too heavy.

But, what I, and others disagree about, is that they are money losers. What do you say to people who have tens of thousands of hands in a PTO database and are turning a profit playing dry big pairs for set value? Is it supposed to be discouraging that they are "only" marginal winners? +EV is +EV. Who cares if you are building non-nut hands.

I win way more with these hands than I do with coordinated runs and so forth. They are winning hands across many limits and against many different types of opponents. Is that unpersuasive for some reason?

[Tilt]

[ QUOTE ]
Tilt/Bluff,

But, what I, and others disagree about, is that they are money losers. What do you say to people who have tens of thousands of hands in a PTO database and are turning a profit playing dry big pairs for set value? Is it supposed to be discouraging that they are "only" marginal winners? +EV is +EV. Who cares if you are building non-nut hands.


[/ QUOTE ]

I say that you are a very competent player, who knows your opponents and can make good laydowns. I don't think everyone should be playing these hands.

I wouldn't argue that a hand like this can't make money. I just think for most players that it won't. And I don't think it should be on anyone's autoplay list. As I said before, its a very playable hand against the right opponents/conditions. Its a big loser I am sure against some opponents.

And I think you are making my statement too general about "big pairs". I don't like QQ24 from MP. I like it OTB. I like QQ76 in MP much more. I like KK24 in MP, I like JJT2. But this specific "big pair" has unique issues. How does QQ24 specifically fare in your PTO db from MP?