PLO: Rivered Two Pair, Multiway Pot

On Friday nights, when there’s generally a bigger-than-usual hold ’em game at my local casino, they also get some PLO action going, which is nice because sitting in a $1/$3 PLO game while I wait for a seat is a lot more interesting than sitting at $1/$3 NLHE and it gives me a chance to practice and think about PLO a bit. Also the max buy-in is $500 instead of $300 so there’s a bit more money on the table.

I was going to post this one as a What’s Your Play? but frankly I’m not confident enough in my PLO game to present it as a clearly correct play. Anyway, it’s my very first hand at the table, six players limp for $3, and I check my option with Qh 9h 6c 3c.

Flop ($21 in pot) Qd 5h 4h. I check planning to evaluate the action and quite possibly raise, but it ends up checking around.

Turn ($25 in pot) Js. I check, UTG bets $15, gets two calls, and I call.

River ($85 in pot) 9c. I check, UTG bets $25, the other two fold. I raise pot, Villain folds.

Other than recognizing that my two-pair doesn’t have a lot of showdown value, this spot really doesn’t require knowing much about PLO. It just requires recognizing that Villain thinks he may have the best hand but doesn’t want to put a lot of money into the pot. After that, it’s a pretty standard spot, in any big bet game, to turn a hand with marginal showdown value into a bluff.

17 thoughts on “PLO: Rivered Two Pair, Multiway Pot”

  1. Sorry if this is a very novice question but I have little experience with PLO. Why exactly does Q9 have little showdown value? If he could only be betting qJ JJ and KT if he would even bet turn with that. Than what are you expecting to fold out? QJ maybe? If he could be betting hearts (which he may if he’ll bet KT) or jacks up then wouldn’t a call be worth it given the odds if you can only fold out one better hand with a rase?

    • I guess if you don’t think he’d bet turn with hearts or KT then there is 6 combos of QJ vs 3 of JJ if you fold QJ every time. I feel like I’m thinking about this way too much like hold’em :/

      • Yeah mostly trying to fold QJ. It’s not that I think he wouldn’t bet KT on the turn, it’s that I think he wouldn’t bet so small with the nuts on the river.

  2. I am just OK online HU-PLO player.
    Effective SPR is missing from you description!.
    I just see very polarized range.
    It is really difficult to get value on river in 6-max PLO.
    The river UTG underbet into 4 way-pot in PLO with Qd 5h 4h Js 9c board represents nuts or bluff(misrepresentation).
    So I am excluding anything with exception str8 or bluff.
    Your outlook of his range and motivation is opposite to my outlook.
    If we combine both outlooks we will have nice Venn diagram.LOL.
    The paradox is that I love your action -raise very much for quiet different reason.

    • After turn Js heavy response the 9c river UTG underbet into 4 way-pot in PLO with Qd 5h 4h Js 9c board,turn represents nuts or bluff(misrepresentation).

    • I agree that a river bet in PLO tends to represent a polarized range, but do you really think he would bet so small with a polarized range? Hard for me to see it being either nuts or a bluff. This concept is even more salient in live poker.

      I’m curious what is the reason you like the raise? It seems like if he has a polarized range raising would be very bad…

      • My arguments are salient in live poker-agreed.I do not have here experience.

        You have 21 cards in play on river after J turn heavy action with wet and heavy board.
        UTG before makes this underbet have to figure out what are odds that one that one of you made str8 or flush on ?
        Somebody who will call this bet have to answer this same questions.
        You did not ask yourself this questions .You put your narrative typical for Holdem player as argument.

        The answers are =48.03% ,80.17% at least.
        select count(handshaving(minhandtype, river, straight) >= 1)
        from game=”omahahi”, board=”Qh9h6c3c9c”, hand1=”****”, hand2=”****”, hand3=”****”,hand4=”***”
        select count(handshaving(minhandtype, river, flush) >= 1)
        from game=”omahahi”, board=”Qh9h6c3c9c”, hand1=”****”, hand2=”****”, hand3=”****”,hand4=”***”
        48% is quiet low for str8 because I put random cards for holes.With tighter range(preflop selection) you get 55% easy.
        You will get slight increase for flush too if you assume tighter ranges.
        Why I like your raise -because of EV? LOL
        Because I like UTG underbet very much because my strong perception that unlike holdem in 6max PLO omaha is difficult to get value on river in 6 max.
        UTG tells to all I have nuts or I have EV cheap bluff to steal pot.
        Because of his bet sizing his range is not skewed towards nuts or bluff.

        • The answers are ~80% for str and ~80% for flush on river.I did not run the query ealier because I do not have PokerTools

  3. An amateur writes: The run out of the cards was favourable to you, and make the play straightforward. You can represent the straight, which is the nuts and what villain would be worried about. Because of the board he cannot have a hand with much absolute value (which may influence his ultimate fold).

    On the river, do you make this play this with one pair? Do you do this if the flush gets there? I don’t think you do, and think that you won this pot with a near perfect river card for you. Often, with a different river card, you don’t win or don’t bet pot. Fortunate, rather than any great play (though you can only respond to the actual hands dealt). I am not sure it is that interesting a spot.

    All of this response needs to have a red flashing warning lights that let you (all) know that a near PLO novice has written it! Just a small contribution… Any responses are very welcome. This novice needs to learn too!

    • This novice is still learning himself!

      In case it wasn’t clear, I was turning my hand into a bluff on the river. I wasn’t raising because I rivered two-pair. So yes, I’d be even more likely to do this with one pair, as that’s a hand that would have very little chance of calling and winning at showdown. The fact that I could profitably call this bet makes the raise a more interesting play, I think, because it forces us to look at whether turning the hand into a bluff is even more profitable than just calling and seeing a showdown.

      I also don’t think the runout of the board by itself is the reason for the bluff. Based on the turn action, it seemed very plausible to me that someone could have the nuts when this river card hit. It was only when one player bet very small and the other two folded that I decided they weren’t nutted. With similar action on a heart river, I would just call because I wouldn’t expect Villain to fold many of the hands that I was behind.

  4. Andrew, in my opinion the Q9 has more showdown value than you are giving it credit for. His range has more air and hands that will call the raise than he does hands that he would bet/fold for value, I think. We are really only targetting QJ and sets, which should mostly be JJ (and are not guaranteed to fold here in 1-3 game with no read or history). KT and T8 are both obviously calling, and we are beating any other 2 pair combo and missed flush draw. I do agree QJ is a very likely hand, and that the bluff will work against it quite often – but I prefer a call as the straights are just as likely and we do have some show down value.

    Also, I think this a flop you should have lead out on. There are a lot of bad turn cards in a 7 way pot when it checks through, and with a three way hand I think you do better to either take it down or (more likely) reduce the opponets down.

    • I agree the hand has some showdown value. I really don’t think he’s bluffing for such a small bet into three people on the river though. I also very much doubt he’s using this sizing with the nuts. Even T8 seems unlikely, though not impossible. There’s also a chance he folds T8 to the raise. Basically I think he folds like 90% of the time to the raise, vs my winning something like 30% at showdown by calling.

      As for leading, this could easily be my PLO inexperience shining through, but general poker theory suggests that I should be checking quite a lot with such bad position. Moreover, I think my hand performs well against wide ranges but not well against the ranges that can call a strong flop bet, especially not since I could easily get called by both a better made hand and a better heart draw. It seemed to me I would fare better against a late position betting range and also wouldn’t really mind seeing a free card. Just explaining my reasoning, though, don’t mean to present it as anything I’m especially confident about.

      • Hey Andrew, do you mind breaking down what range you believe he is likely to be betting for value there? I agree that it is not really a typical bluff size. My inclination is that in a 1-3 live game you might see the nuts/2nd nuts with that size, and that you will win more than the 30% you are giving yourself when you call, but I could be off here as well and don’t hate your raise – what to expect from a 1-3 game will certainly vary from game to game and requires some population epxerience, so I’ll defer to you on that here 🙂

        As for the flop action, a *random* hand out of the top 50% of hands would have nearly 30% equity, and the flop bet will (or at least should) fold out a bunch of these random hands like overs, gut shots, bottom pair plus live cards, BD draws, and the like which could have 20-35% against you. As far as the range that calls you actually do pretty well due to the combo nature of your hand – for example you crush the small wrap, wrap plus pair, smaller flush draws, naked Q, etc that might look pretty to your opponents, and you are not even too far behind a set (and you have a blocker to top set, and the 44/55 hands are not super likely – in short you are doing fine against the range that gives you action. I’d lead out both for value and protection – this is one of those PLO spots where the action you get is pretty often going to be good for you and the folds you get are also pretty good for you.

  5. I like always the hands you post.. much more PLO because is my favorite game.. I don’t want to write for river play (all the posts are great for this) but for turn.. I want to hear your thoughts about overcalling with marginal hand marginal draw.. One advantage is maybe relative position to the bettor… But what rivers you think were good.. Three nut outs you had.. So “What’s your play” to any heart or seven?
    This was ideal scenario: weak bet, two folds and your experience to turn your hand to bluff as, i think, you would check with intention to raise nuts also..

    • There’s a fair chance I win on a heart river, especially if it’s Ah or Kh. I think I can check-decide and generally make the right decision if I river a straight or flush. I actually wouldn’t have checked the nuts, but I didn’t give my opponent credit for realizing/acting on that.

  6. Micro-stakes online PLO player here.

    I like leading out for pot on the flop. In fact, I probably don’t have a check/raise range here at all: I find that my range is much more playable and well-balanced when I lead out with hands like these, as well as sets, some two pairs hands, etc. . Then I can rep board-pairing turns and I can induce bluffs on turns that fill my draws.

    As played, I definitely c/c the river given his small bet sizing. I expect to see air or some bad two pairs most of the time, and better hands than ours a minority of the time. I don’t like the x/r bluff: I think you’re getting called by T8 or JJ, so you’re not bluffing out much of the part of his range that he beats. Really, the only hand I think he’ll fold to your raise is QJ, and even that I think many players at this stake would sometimes call. If you had some live read that he’s tight, then sure, the check/raise is fine (although I still prefer a check/call).

Comments are closed.