From the Desk of the Poker Philosopher

I almost didn't play the $500 PLO 6-max, but a few people convinced me I should, and I'm glad I did. The field was really weak, and it was a lot of fun to boot. Well, except for losing a monster pot, but I'm getting ahead of myself. For a while I was getting short but then finally managed to connect with a flop (and turn)

Full Tilt Poker
Pot Limit Omaha Ring game
Blinds: $50/$100
6 players
Converter

Stack sizes:
UTG: $8528
UTG+1: $10433
Hero: $2450
Button: $4604
SB: $10522
BB: $7720

Pre-flop: (6 players) Hero is CO with :3d :2s :3c :4s
UTG folds, UTG+1 calls, Hero calls, Button raises to $550, 2 folds, UTG+1 calls, Hero calls.

Flop: :5s :7h :2d ($1800, 3 players)
UTG+1 checks, Hero bets $1800, Button raises all-in $4054, UTG+1 calls, Hero calls all-in $100.

Turn: :2h ($11808, 1 player + 2 all-in - Main pot: $7500, Sidepot 1: $4308)

River: :5c ($11808, 1 player + 2 all-in - Main pot: $7500, Sidepot 1: $4308)

Results:
Final pot: $11808
Button showed Qh Ac 7s Ah
UTG+1 showed Jc Qs 7d 9c
Hero showed 3d 2s 3c 4s

Four Pair

Full Tilt Poker
Pot Limit Omaha Ring game
Blinds: $60/$120
6 players
Converter

Stack sizes:
UTG: $8768
UTG+1: $2396
Hero: $6820
Button: $7556
SB: $10247
BB: $8470

Pre-flop: (6 players) Hero is CO with :kc :ah :2c :qd
2 folds, Hero raises to $370, 2 folds, BB calls.

Flop: :2s :qs :ac ($800, 2 players)
BB checks, Hero bets $550, BB raises to $1200, Hero calls.

Turn: :kd ($3200, 2 players)
BB bets $3200, Hero raises all-in $5250, BB calls.

River: :6h ($13700, 1 player + 1 all-in - Main pot: $13700)

Results:
Final pot: $13700
BB showed 5h As 5c 7s
Hero showed Kc Ah 2c Qd


I figured him for the nut flush draw on the flop, but if he's got something like a gut shot or better to go with it, he could still be the favorite or a very slight dog, so I wanted to get it in on a non-spade turn. Obviously a broadway card wasn't ideal, but I felt I could be way ahead and I'd have a lot of boat outs even if he had turned a straight. Unfortunately, my exuberance over my big stack was short-lived:

Gwaaaaaaah!!!

It's definitely not a good idea to re-pot habitually with Aces in PLO, but here I had a nut flush draw and the opportunity to get a good chunk of my stack in preflop. Both turned out to matter, but not enough:

Full Tilt Poker
Pot Limit Omaha Ring game
Blinds: $60/$120
6 players
Converter

Stack sizes:
Hero: $13700
UTG+1: $7436
CO: $10187
Button: $1530
SB: $9008
BB: $2396

Pre-flop: (6 players) Hero is UTG with :ad :ac :9c :3h
Hero raises to $400, UTG+1 folds, CO raises to $960, 3 folds, Hero raises to $3460, CO calls.

Flop: :jc :9h :tc ($7100, 2 players)
Hero bets $6300, CO raises all-in $7127, Hero calls.

Turn: :2h ($21354, 1 player + 1 all-in - Main pot: $21354)

River: :5d ($21354, 1 player + 1 all-in - Main pot: $21354)

Results:
Final pot: $21354
CO showed 7c 7d 8d 8c
Hero showed Ad Ac 9c 3h

I have no idea what he was thinking pre-flop. If he just called that wouldn't be too bad, though in general two pair is an overrated PLO holding. But to make that tiny 3-bet and then call my 4-bet is awful. This would have been a tough decision for me without the flush draw, but with it I definitely have no choice but to stick it in and hope for the best.

Bit of a Comeback

Full Tilt Poker
Pot Limit Omaha Ring game
Blinds: $60/$120
6 players
Converter

Stack sizes:
UTG: $8828
UTG+1: $2706
Hero: $4826
Button: $7136
SB: $19051
BB: $1710

Pre-flop: (6 players) Hero is CO with :ks :kh :qh :7h
2 folds, Hero raises to $376, Button calls, SB folds, BB calls.


Flop: :tc :jc :3s ($1188, 3 players)
BB bets $1188, Hero raises all-in $4450, Button folds, BB calls all-in $146.
Uncalled bets: $3116 returned to Hero.

Turn: :9d ($3856, 0 player + 2 all-in - Main pot: $3856)

River: :8s ($3856, 0 player + 2 all-in - Main pot: $3856)

Results:
Final pot: $3856
BB showed 7s 8c 6c 5s
Hero showed Ks Kh Qh 7h

This put me back in the running for a while, but eventually I got ground down, shoved QJ96 or something from the SB, and got it in against AQJ9, in other words I was massively dominated. And that was that.

I'm off on my road trip by now, but I've tried to take advantage of a new Blogger feature and post-date some entries, so hopefully there will continue to be updates even while I'm not around.

Labels: PLO, poker, poker strategy, tournament

Stumble It!

This was a $200 PLO tournament with a $40 bounty. Predictably, there were a ton of people playing trashy hands. I imagine a really good PLO player could have done a lot more to take advantage of that, but the best I could do was tighten up and try to take a few flops in position when I was able. Here's the first substantial pot I won:

Full Tilt Poker
Pot Limit Omaha Ring game
Blinds: $40/$80
9 players
Converter

Stack sizes:
UTG: $1734
UTG+1: $4762
Hero: $2212
MP2: $3395
MP3: $6684
CO: $7740
Button: $6085
SB: $6365
BB: $2343

Pre-flop: (9 players) Hero is MP1 with :ad :5c :ah :4d
UTG folds, UTG+1 calls, Hero raises to $360, 4 folds, SB calls, 2 folds.

Flop: :2c :td :7c ($880, 2 players)
SB checks, Hero bets $880, SB folds.
Uncalled bets: $880 returned to Hero.

Results:
Final pot: $880

My instinct from NLHE is to make a smaller flop bet, giving the illusion of fold equity in order to induce a check-raise from weaker hands. I had to remind myself that in PLO, the edge that Aces have against "weaker hands" is slim or non-existent and I will often prefer that they fold.

This one is not as bad as it looks, but still probably bad:

Full Tilt Poker
Pot Limit Omaha Ring game
Blinds: $80/$160
8 players
Converter

Stack sizes:
UTG: $3000
UTG+1: $9725
Hero: $4715
MP2: $5093
CO: $8932
Button: $2812
SB: $9033
BB: $3257

Pre-flop: (8 players) Hero is MP1 with :ks :qs :2s :qd
UTG calls, UTG+1 folds, Hero raises to $715, 5 folds, UTG raises to $2545, Hero raises to $4770, UTG calls all-in $615.
Uncalled bets: $1610 returned to Hero.

Flop: :6s :td :kd ($6560, 1 player + 1 all-in - Main pot: $6560)

Turn: :jc ($6560, 1 player + 1 all-in - Main pot: $6560)

River: :8c ($6560, 1 player + 1 all-in - Main pot: $6560)

Results:
Final pot: $6560
UTG showed Ac 8h 8d As
Hero showed Ks Qs 2s Qd


This guy had been limping a ton of random trash hands, including worse bare pairs, and I felt like I was ahead of his limping range. That's probably true, but I'm not way ahead, and I'm committing for his entire stack. I probably don't beat his limp-shoving range, especially since he's UTG.

And my bustout hand:

Full Tilt Poker
Pot Limit Omaha Ring game
Blinds: $80/$160
9 players
Converter

Stack sizes:
UTG: $4300
UTG+1: $4230
MP1: $3051
MP2: $10390
Hero: $2115
CO: $4265
Button: $5340
SB: $10757
BB: $14463

Pre-flop: (9 players) Hero is MP3 with :jd :ah :7h :qs
4 folds, Hero raises to $440, 3 folds, BB calls.

Flop: :9d :kd :ts ($960, 2 players)
BB checks, Hero bets $960, BB calls.

Turn: :3s ($2880, 2 players)
BB checks, Hero is all-in $715, BB calls.

River: :3d ($4310, 1 player + 1 all-in - Main pot: $4310)

Results:
Final pot: $4310
BB showed Tc 7s 7c Td
Hero showed Jd Ah 7h Qs

Not much I can do about that. I skipped Event 3 because I didn't feel like it and Event 4 because I was busy, but I'm looking forward to Event 5, the $200 Stud/8 that's about to start. Wish me luck!

Labels: PLO, poker, poker strategy, tournament

Stumble It!

This is a pretty consistent problem for me:

Poker Stars
Pot Limit Omaha Ring game
Blinds: $2/$4
6 players
Converter

Stack sizes:
UTG: $302.70
UTG+1: $361.75
CO: $338
Foucault: $400
SB: $76
BB: $304


Pre-flop: (6 players) Foucault is Button with
2 folds, CO raises to $12, Foucault calls, SB folds, BB calls.


Flop: ($38, 3 players)
BB checks, CO checks, Foucault bets $33, BB calls, CO folds.


Turn: ($104, 2 players)
BB checks, Foucault bets $80, BB calls.


River: ($264, 2 players)
BB checks, Foucault bets $261, BB calls all-in $179.
Uncalled bets: $82 returned to Foucault.


Results:
Final pot: $622

He won with [6h 7h 4d 2s] (a full house, Sixes full of Deuces). Granted he made a pretty implausible full house, but there really aren't second best hands for him to have here. Flopped two pairs either boated up or got counterfeited, draws missed (unless we are chopping), and the 6 has to be a scared card if he has a K. The 6 in my hand made me a bit more confident, and his failure to raise the flop or turn made me think he didn't have a set, so I was thinking he'd have to hold the case 6 to make a boat. But I wasn't thinking enough about which worse hands could call me.

Labels: PLO, poker, poker strategy, session review

Stumble It!

In Pot Limit Omaha, hand values tend to run close, which means that people often do not fold to re-raises. Consequently, a lot of players will never reraise without Aces, and any time you do re-raise, your thinking opponents will put you on Aces. By occasionally re-raising with other hands, however, you can confuse your opponents, both inducing mistakes now and protecting your future reraises when you do have Aces:

Poker Stars
Pot Limit Omaha Ring game
Blinds: $2/$4
4 players
Converter

Pre-flop: (4 players) Foucault is SB with :qc :9h :jd :th
UTG raises to $14, Button folds, Foucault raises to $46, BB folds, UTG calls.

Flop: :7h :8d :6d ($96, 2 players)
Foucault bets $70, UTG raises to $304, Foucault raises all-in $350, UTG calls.

Turn: :7d ($796, 1 player + 1 all-in - Main pot: $796)

River: :2d ($796, 1 player + 1 all-in - Main pot: $796)

Results:
Final pot: $796

Ugh, the converter didn't capture my opponent's hand here, and I only sort of recall it from memory, but it was something trashy, I want to say TT86 without diamonds (ie I won). I know that he got it in on this flop with top and bottom pair, which is always questionable in PLO and especially on a board this coordinated. The only possible justification for it is that he put me on Aces. Granted there are a lot of bad players who will just re-raise Aces, pot any flop, and get the money in, but against someone competent, they are at least going to have the nut flush draw if they get it in with Aces on this flop. So even there I hate his play. But I do think it's a good example of how I got an opponent to make two bad calls by re-raising with something other than Aces.

There are a few reasons why I chose this hand to reraise. For one, it's a monster, one of the best in PLO, meanings that I figure to be in good shape against my opponent's range. It's also a hand that plays well in multiway pots, because of its ability to flop the nuts with re-draws, but in this case there was only one player who could potentially get in on the fun anyway. Lastly, there will be a lot of flops that I like, so I will rarely be giving up after putting a lot of money in pre-flop.

Labels: PLO, poker, poker strategy, session review

Stumble It!

This was a $200 PLHE/PLO mixed event. I was thinking it would be pretty juice because of how poorly even some of the better hold 'em players would do in the PLO portion, and boy was I right. Unfortunately, I didn't get much chance to push my edge. I lost a flip for about half my chips with AK on the button all in against QQ in the BB, then this happened in PLO:

Full Tilt Poker
Pot Limit Omaha Ring game
Blinds: $25/$50
9 players
Converter

Pre-flop: (9 players) Foucault is CO with :ac :ah :3h :7h
2 folds, MP1 raises to $175, MP2 folds, MP3 calls, Foucault raises to $775, 3 folds, MP1 calls, MP3 calls.

Flop: :qs :6d :7d ($2400, 3 players)
MP1 checks, MP3 checks, Foucault is all-in $1510, MP1 calls, MP3 calls.

Turn: :9d ($6930, 2 players + 1 all-in - Main pot: $6930)
MP1 checks, MP3 checks.

River: :4d ($6930, 2 players + 1 all-in - Main pot: $6930)
MP1 checks, MP3 bets $1650, MP1 calls.

Results:
Final pot: $10230
MP3 showed 9h 8d Jc Jd
MP1 mucks As Qc 4s Ks
Foucault mucks Ac Ah 3h 7h

Aces are not the monster in PLO that they are in hold 'em, and with deeper stacks I probably would not have 3-bet here since my hand doesn't have a lot of post-flop playability (one shot at flopping the nut flush draw but nothing else). However, here I had a chance to squeeze and get 1/3 of my stack in pre-flop, which means I didn't have to worry too much about getting outplayed after.

MP1 was one of those decent hold 'em players who sucked at PLO, though in his defense he openly acknowledged that after this hand. It's true that hand ranges run closer in PLO and you'll often be getting the right odds to call a 3-bet, but it's pretty obvious I have AAxx here, and calling with AKQ4 is pretty suicidal. Regardless, calling the all in with TPTK, no redraws, and a player still to act behind him is God awful.

The second guy played it well: he had a hand with good equity against AAxx (no dominated Aces, can flop straight/set/big draw) and flopped a pair plus an open-ended draw and a flush draw. I especially liked the way he took MP1's two pair to value town on the river.

Labels: PLHE, PLO, poker, poker strategy, session review, tournament

Stumble It!

In his Closing Thoughts, Jeff Hwang comments on what motivated him to write Pot Limit Omaha Poker: The Big Play Strategy:

"...nowhere in poker literature was truly useful instructions on where to start. Everybody says the same thing: Play four cards that work together, A-A-J-T and A-A-K-K are the best hands, and four connecting cards are playable. But what else is playable and what am I trying to do when I see the flop?"

The resulting book is far from the definitive word on PLO strategy, but it is an excellent introduction to the game, which, as Hwang points out, was a market niche badly in need of filling.

The author proposes a simple but effective strategy geared towards the low-stakes, full-ring PLO games primarily found in brick and mortar casinos. Echoing the advice of other Omaha authors, Hwang argues that PLO is a game of straights. In other words, the winning hand at the river will often be a straight.

But PLO is also a flop game, even more so than Hold 'Em, and that is where most of the fireworks happen. Although big pots emerge most frequently when a monster draw runs into the flopped nuts, Hwang refutes the common misconception that PLO is primarily a game of luck and gigantic post-flop coin flips. Instead, he claims,

"there are a variety of common big-pot situations where not only does one player usually have the other one smashed, but in some cases will be on a total freeroll. Our goal is to be the one on the dominant end when the big pots get played: this involves first recognizing what those big-pot situations are, and then identifying the hands that have the potential to put us in the position to get the edge in those spots."

This is exactly what he goes on to do, beginning with a discussion of the most common profitable flop situations in which an Omaha player may find himself. Just as the Hold 'Em player is accustomed to winning big pots when he flops an overpair versus top pair top kicker or a set versus an overpair, the PLO player has his own set of dream flop scenarios, such as the Nut Straight Freeroll (nut straight with re-draws to a flush, full house, or higher straight versus the same straight without redraws) and the Dominating Draw (a 16-out draw to the nuts versus a lower draw to non-nut hands, or a pair and a wrap draw versus a bare wrap draw, for instance).

Having laid out these profitable situations on which one's sights should be set, Hwang next considers which starting hands are most likely to produce such situations: combinations containing suited Aces and four connecting cards (gaps at the bottom only, if at all), and pairs accompanied by either of these. Higher is better, in all cases. These hands form the core of Hwang's pre-flop strategy, which unfortunately cannot be laid out quite as clearly as can its hold 'em equivalents, given the much larger set of possible Omaha starting hands.

Hwang gives some consideration to how to play these hands pre-flop as well, such as whether to enter with a call or a raise, what can be played from which position, and what is still viable when the pot has already been raised. Frankly, this isn't the strongest part of the book, and the advice here sometimes feels haphazard and a little weak. Still, the reader does accumulate a feel for what works by studying Hwang's many examples, and this should be enough to get him started at the table, where he can work out his own answers to these questions.

Returning to the discussion of ideal flop situations, Big Play Strategy next discusses how much heat different kinds of hands can handle post-flop. Hwang devotes quite a lot of pages and examples to what is really a fairly simple strategy: only draw to the nuts, play big draws aggressively, don't slowplay, bluff when your opponents show weakness. It's not quite fair to call the many quizzes and example hands "filler", but I'd rather poker books stuck to content and left the study aids to high school textbooks. A lot of the material is repetitive or downright irrelevant.

Hwang's strategy is a good one, especially for relatively passive and straight-forward full ring live games. I don't imagine it would adapt well to the short-handed games that are more popular online or to games with tricker and more aggressive opponents. One weakness in particular that shows up in some of the sample hands is an eagerness to bet big and take down the pot in situations where a hand is likely to be way ahead or way behind of an opponent. Though Hwang's admonitions against slow-playing are generally well taken, it may not be best to bet pot again with AQQ8 on an AA6K board after getting called on the flop.

When I saw that Hwang included sections on O8 and PLO8, I was more than a little skeptical that he could cover three games adequately in one book. After seeing how little space he required to offer some excellent insights into PLO, though, and how much space he devoted to review, reiteration, and even the occasional bad beat story, I had renewed hope. As it turns out, he does an admirable job with both of the other games.

His approach is similar, identifying the most profitable post-flop situations and then working backwards to derive a pre-flop strategy. His recommendations concerning starting hands and how to play them is generally solid in both cases, though his bias for post-flop play occasionally leads him to disregard preflop edges. With A-A-3-x or A-A-4-x in O8, for instance, he advises a limp "in a 'zoo' game where everybody is going to call your raise." Even if it will be necessary to give up on many flops, it's hard to see a reason not to make a raise that will be called by so many hopeless hands that will both lose equity pre-flop and connect with fewer flops than this relative monster. Hwang also seems a bit too willing to give up on non-nut high hands for a fixed limit game where most opponents are playing primarily low cards.

Aside from these shortcomings, though, the O8 section is nearly as strong on post-flop play as on pre-flop strategy. It contains good advice on value betting, raising to clear the field and promote hands, semi-bluffing, and 'demi-bluffing' the river with the nuts in one direction in hopes of knocking an opponent off of half the pot.

Demi-bluffing plays an even larger role in the pot limit version of the game, where the bets are bigger and the bare nuts in one direction must sometimes be folded. In PLO8, high hands with any kind of low potential, like K-K-3-2, gain a lot of playability from the demi-bluff.

Hwang clearly highlights this and other differences between PLO8, O8 , and PLO. On the other, he makes good use of the similarities between the games to cover all three in a single book. Of course, none is covered in all its intricacies. But Pot Limit Omaha: The Big Play Strategy does a surprisingly good job of introducing all three of these games by orienting new players not just to the nuts and bolts but to the guiding objectives, the profitable situations towards that game's strategy is directed.

Perhaps more importantly, Hwang's fondness for Omaha shines through on every page, encouraging readers to recognize that it can be both fun and profitable. His book will certainly contribute to his dream of seeing "small stakes PLO games... become standard in card rooms across America."

Labels: book review, O8, PLO, PLO8, poker, poker strategy

Stumble It!

Too Thin

Full Tilt Poker Pot-Limit , $6 BB (6 handed) Hand History converter Courtesy of PokerZion.com

BB ($386.55)
UTG ($428.05)
Hero ($986.50)
CO ($618.45)
Button ($249.30)
SB ($538.15)

Preflop: Hero is MP with 5d, 6d, As, Ah.
1 fold, Hero raises to $21, CO calls $21, 1 fold, SB calls $18, 1 fold.

Flop: ($69) Jh, 8s, 5s (3 players)
SB checks, Hero bets $45, CO calls $45, SB calls $45.

Turn: ($204) Ac (3 players)
SB checks, Hero bets $145, CO folds, SB calls $145.

River: ($494) Tc (2 players)
SB checks, Hero bets $494, SB calls $327.15 (All-In).

Final Pot: $1315.15

Results in white below:

SB has 9d 6h 7d Kd (straight, jack high).

Hero has 5d 6d As Ah (three of a kind, aces).

Outcome: SB wins $1148.30. Hero wins $166.85.

It's not often that one ought to check back top set on the river when no obvious draws come in. But with this guy over-calling big bets on the flop and turn, he's almost certainly on a draw. And even though the obvious ones missed, there's no reason to think this guy has a hand that can call my river bet. He either missed, or he hit and checked something improbable.

Here's another one versus the same guy (he's the one in the middle):

Full Tilt Poker Pot-Limit , $6 BB (6 handed) Hand History converter Courtesy of PokerZion.com

CO ($778.95)
Hero ($1299.90)
SB ($467.85)
BB ($339.85)
UTG ($619.35)
MP ($1043.55)

Preflop: Hero is Button with Qh, 8s, Td, Qd.
1 fold, MP calls $6, 1 fold, Hero raises to $27, 1 fold, BB calls $21, MP calls $21.

Flop: ($84) Kh, Js, Qs (3 players)
BB checks, MP checks, Hero bets $72, BB raises to $300, MP calls $300, Hero calls $228.

Turn: ($984) 9h (3 players)
BB bets $12.85 (All-In), MP raises to $716.55 (All-In), Hero calls $716.55.

River: ($2429.95) 3h (3 players, 2 all-in)

Final Pot: $2429.95

Results in white below:

Hero has Qh 8s Td Qd (straight, king high).

BB has 5h Kc 9s Ks (three of a kind, kings).

MP has Ah 9d Th Kd (flush, ace high).

Outcome: MP wins $2429.95.

Given his demonstrated penchant for slowplaying, I was already feeling bad about his cold call on the flop. I told myself that my holding a T made it somewhat less likely for him to have a straight and that he would pay off if I boated up. Then I improved to the second nuts on the turn and decided there was some chance he was on a combo draw or the same hand I now had, and that T9 was a more likely combo than AT for him to be limp-calling. Bad bad bad really, I probably ought to have just folded the flop.

Labels: PLO, poker, poker strategy, session review

Stumble It!

Full Tilt Poker Pot-Limit , $6 BB (5 handed) Hand History converter Courtesy of PokerZion.com
MP ($425.65)
Button ($588)
Hero ($620.55)
BB ($388.55)
UTG ($978.80)

Preflop: Hero is SB with 7c, 5h, 8s, 9h.
3 folds, Hero raises to $18, BB calls $12.

Flop: ($36) Ac, Js, 2h (2 players)
Hero bets $27, BB calls $27.

Turn: ($90) 2s (2 players)
Hero bets $75, BB calls $75.

River: ($240) Jd (2 players)
Hero bets $240, BB calls $240.

Final Pot: $720

Seemed like a good time for this, because he seemed like the sort of guy who wouldn't want to fold top pair but could eventually be convinced if I kept the pressure on. Classic calling station bluff. These guys almost always reraise Aces, so I was thinking Jacks full was as strong as he could be on the turn, and the river made that safer. Unfortunately, he had quad deuces :-(. Pretty weak of him not to raise the river, though; I'd say my calling range is AA, AJ, JJ, putting him squarely ahead.

Labels: PLO, poker, poker strategy, session review

Stumble It!

Full Tilt Poker Pot-Limit , $6 BB (5 handed) Hand History converter Courtesy of PokerZion.com

Button ($819.45)
SB ($1382.40)
BB ($604.65)
Hero ($837)
MP ($813)

Preflop: Hero is UTG with Kh, Ac, Ah, 7d.
Hero raises to $21, MP calls $21, Button calls $21, 2 folds.

Flop: ($72) 9c, 2d, Kc (3 players)
Hero bets $41, MP folds, Button raises to $162, Hero folds.

Final Pot: $275

Aces are always a tricky hand to play in PLO, and NLHE converts like myself are especially prone to overplaying them. Folding in a spot like this probably wouldn't be bad regardless, but what's especially relevant here is that I have the Ac. To be raising here, my opponent is likely to have either a set or a big draw. Since I have the Ac, I know that he can't have the nut flush draw, and that makes sets a much bigger part of his range, even though something like JcTcxx that has a gut shot and a flush draw are also possibilities. If I had another club such that I had the nut draw, I would get the money in now, since I'd have his draws crushed and would have reasonable equity against his sets.

Labels: PLO, poker, poker strategy, session review

Stumble It!

Since I'm trying to improve my Pot Limit Omaha game right now, I found this to be one of the more useful Full Tilt Tips from the Pros. Brandon Adams argues that,

"

One of the best bluffing opportunities in Omaha comes on paired boards, but to pull this off, you have to know what kinds of paired boards to look for. Let's say you're involved in a hand with two other players. You're in late position and have called a pre-flop raise only to completely miss on a flop of K-K-8 rainbow. The flop is checked around to you, and you consider bluffing to see if you can steal the pot. My advice - don't do it.

If your opponents are experienced and knowledgeable players who generally play premium starting hands, one of them probably connected with the board and is likely slow-playing a monster. Bluffing here gives him a chance to come over the top or just flat call and let you keep throwing chips into his made hand.

Now, let's take the same scenario and change the flop to something like 3-3-7 rainbow. Bluffing on this board makes much more sense because it's likely that opponents who are playing strong starting hands failed to connect on this board. Experienced players may read your bet here as being credible because you could have very easily called a pre-flop raise with a small hand and hit the board hard."

I think that evaluating flop texture relative to my opponent's range and the range that I think he gives me is one of the strongest parts of my NLHE game, and although Adams' insight here isn't particularly nuanced, I do think it's a helpful starting point towards adapting this skill into PLO.

Labels: PLO, poker, poker strategy

Stumble It!

Full Tilt Poker
Pot Limit Omaha Ring game
Blinds: $3/$6
6 players
Converter

Stack sizes:
UTG: $676.15
UTG+1: $598.20
Hero: $658.70
Button: $535.30
SB: $110.95
BB: $251.10

Pre-flop: (6 players) Hero is CO with :td :as :qs :qd
UTG folds, UTG+1 raises to $21, Hero calls, Button folds, SB calls, BB folds.

Flop: :ts :4d :3d ($69, 3 players)
SB checks, UTG+1 bets $34.5, Hero calls, SB raises all-in $89.95, UTG+1 raises to $407.85, Hero raises all-in $637.7, UTG+1 calls all-in $203.85.
Uncalled bets: $26 returned to Hero.

Turn: :ah ($860.6, 0 player + 3 all-in - Main pot: $338.85, Sidepot 1: $1043.5)

River: :qh ($860.6, 0 player + 3 all-in - Main pot: $338.85, Sidepot 1: $1043.5)


Results:
Final pot: $860.6
UTG+1 showed Kc Jh 4s Ks
Hero showed Td As Qs Qd
SB showed Th 5s Jd Ad


I think everyone's play here was reasonable. UTG+1's move is thin, but I am very often on a weaker draw than this, and I can see why he wants to isolate the short stack. A fold is also very defensible in his shoes, but I think repotting to chase me out is alright.

I actually thought for a while before getting it in with an overpair, top pair (yes, having both matters in PLO), and the non-nut flush draw. There are so many different hands I could be up against. A worst case scenario of AAxx with the nut flush draw really has me crushed. Sets are pretty bad for me also, but with UTG+1 raising pre-flop, those are a bit less likely, since the average player in these games is pretty passive pre-flop and more likely to limp with 3345 or something.

This is an interesting spot to employ a very valuable free tool called the ProPokerTools Simulator. It is similar to Poker Stove, in that allows you to calculate equity versus a range of hands, but can be used for Omaha and Razz in addition to Hold 'Em. There's really no better way to learn a new game than to play for a while, come upon some tough spots, and then calculate your equity.

For instance, I was initially concerned about my opponent having some combination of an overpair, the nut flush draw, or a set. I excluded middle set from the range I entered to reflect the fact that I didn't think he would have a set as often based on his pre-flop raise. The results suggests that, with the dead money in the pot, this is a very close decision:

Hand	Pot equity	Wins	Ties
TdAsQsQd	45.58%	271,727	3,525
AA**,Ad*d**,TT**,33**	54.42%	324,748	3,525

I was kind of surprised to see my opponent show up with bare KK, but mixing that into his range turns it into a pretty clear call for me:

Hand	Pot equity	Wins	Ties
TdAsQsQd	47.88%	286,005	2,578
AA**,KK**,Ad*d**,TT**,33**	52.12%	311,417	2,578

I'm a 60/40 favorite against my opponent's actual KKJ4 with no redraw (except that @#$#@%#% back door straight requiring the case Q!). I excluded the third player from the simulation since he was short and would greatly complicate matters, but it seems like given how close I was to my UTG+1's range, it might be worth considering the main pot with shorty.

In retrospect, I often wonder if maybe I should have raised flop. For range-balancing purposes, I do like to flat call flops with hands that aren't automatically folding unimproved on the turn, and something like this where there are few cards I don't want to see make good candidates for that. But I guess folding out a dry KK or AA with a raise is pretty valuable for me. PLO really requires getting out of the NLHE mentality where you can often be way ahead of an opponent's range. There are so many more drawing opportunities in PLO that I probably need to place more value on folding out the weaker end of opponents' ranges.

Labels: PLO, poker, poker strategy, session review

Stumble It!

I haven't set up Poker Tracker Omaha to record UB HH's, so this is from memory. But it was a PLO tournament, and while I've been doing well in 6-max PLO cash games, I don't have a lot of full ring experience. I still think I was playing pretty well, but it's a way less interesting game. Anyway, I chopped a few multiway pots when both I and someone else made the nuts, then got short some how I don't remember, then doubled up with AAxx vs KJT9 or something all in preflop.

The hand that did me in, there was a limper for 150, and I raised to 600 with As Ks Qd 9d. There were three callers, including the limper. Flop was Qs 8s xs, giving me the nuts. I bet like 2/3 pot, the others folded, the limper called. Turn blank, he checks and calls 70% pot. At this point he's got like a half pot sized bet in his stack. River Q to pair the board, he shoves into me. Yeah good odds blah blah I think he has a full house pretty much always. But I lost a preflop all in after that and it was lights out.

Labels: PLO, poker, session review, tournament

Stumble It!

Chris Ferguson's introduction to the game of Pot Limit Omaha is strongly grounded in mathematics and game theory, just what you'd expect from the computer science PhD. It's a little light on tournament theory for a chapter in a tournament strategy guide, but it does a very good job of explaining how and why PLO must be played differently than big bet hold 'em games.

The central difference between the two games, of course, is that in Omaha everyone gets two more hole cards. As Ferguson explains, however, this actually translates into five more two-card combinations for each player in Omaha. He goes on to explain how this difference should affect your pre-flop hand selection and your post-flop play. You should play your hands straight-forwardly, betting hard even with your monsters since drawing hands may have many outs and rarely bluffing since your opponents will connect with the board more often. And following from that, your position becomes more important, since you have more information to gain from your opponents' actions.

Ferguson addresses all of these concepts in more depth when he moves into the nuts and bolts of post-flop play. His theoretical approach to post-flop play is captured well when he says, "I like playing in a way that minimizes the number of difficult decisions I have to make, and maximize the number of difficult decisions my opponents have to make."

This is the sort of vague poker advice that can be either right or wrong depending on how it is interpreted, and in fact Ferguson finds himself on both sides of the line at various times. Avoid reverse implied odds situations where you are likely to get outplayed or to find yourself with no good options is important, but sometimes the easiest decisions isn't the most profitable one. After all, good players profit by making better decisions than their opponents.

For example, Ferguson describes situations "where I am confident I am ahead but I won't know if I'm ahead after the turn" and suggests that he likes to get as much money as he can in on the flop in these spots. Against tricky opponents, that's wise, but as he points out, many people play very straightforwardly in PLO. It's hard to say for sure, because he doesn't give a specific example of such a situation, but particurly when in position, he might be better off keeping the pot smaller on the flop and relying on his hand-reading skill to make a good decision on a future street.

He returns to this discussion when in the section "Playing the Turn and River", suggesting that, "If you have one of those hands where you don't know if you are ahead or behind, you might want to try betting out on the turn. Especially if this pot commits you, betting eliminates your opponent's positional advantage and puts him to a tough decision." I fail to see how this results in a tough decision for your opponent: most likely, he'll fold his worse hands and call or raise with his better ones, particularly if you make a pot committing bet. Even if it does result in a more difficult decision for you, checking and calling (or making a read if the turn checks through), ought to be more profitable.

At other times, Ferguson's advice seems to contradict his "keep it simple stupid" mentality when such thinking really does make sense. For instance, he argues that because hand values aren't sharply divergent pre-flop, "you should usually call a raise and see the flop when you are in the big blind." Deliberately playing a lot of marginal hands out of position for the sake of immediate pre-flop pot odds seems like just the sort of thing one ought to be avoiding, particularly when stacks are deep.

Oddly, in the "Tournament Strategy" section (which gets a mere two and a half pages in a thirty page article), he seems to argue just the opposite, that when on the bubble "You lose very little value by folding marginal hands because a lot of hands are close in value." It seems backwards to me that you would make more marginal calls out of position with deep money than you would when stacks are shallow simply to avoid bubbling.

Aside from these caveats, Ferguson's chapter is a comprehensive and reliable introduction to the game of Pot Limit Omaha. There are so many unique situations that can arise in PLO hat writing a practical guide in the form of a book chapter is a real challenge, but he does a good job of focusing on the strategic considerations that ought to guide you while also examining a fair number of common and tricky situations in detail. The result is a piece that makes PLO both comprehensible and enticing to a NLHE player looking for a change of pace.

Labels: book review, PLO, poker, poker strategy

Stumble It!

I make a lot of continuation bets in PLO, but other than that, it can be tricky to pull off a bluff. The biggest mistake most players make is overvaluing hands that are strong in Hold 'Em but marginal in Omaha, so once they call one street, they usually don't want to fold their two pair later. But this guy was just asking for it:

Poker Stars
Pot Limit Omaha Ring game
Blinds: $2/$4
5 players
Converter

Stack sizes:
UTG: $20
CO: $840.20
Foucault: $442.60
SB: $724.95
BB: $309.25

Pre-flop: (5 players) Foucault is Button with :td :qs :9s :8d
UTG calls, CO folds, Foucault calls, SB calls, BB checks.

Flop: :jc :ts :5s ($16, 4 players)
SB bets $12, 2 folds, Foucault raises to $51.2, SB calls.

Turn: :2h ($118.4, 2 players)
SB checks, Foucault checks.

River: :ad ($118.4, 2 players)
SB bets $36, Foucault raises to $224.4, SB folds.
Uncalled bets: $188.4 returned to Foucault.

Results:
Final pot: $190.4

The flop doesn't really count as a bluff or semi-bluff; I'm easily ahead of his range. But I do think that his call suggests that he thinks I'm on a draw, and I had a feeling he was looking to check-raise this safe turn. Thus my decision to check it back on the turn.

Labels: PLO, poker, poker strategy, session review

Stumble It!

Poker Stars
Pot Limit Omaha Ring game
Blinds: $2/$4
5 players
Converter

Stack sizes:
CO: $784.95
Button: $146.10
SB: $662.20
Foucault: $702.30
UTG: $397.40

Pre-flop: (5 players) Foucault is BB with :4s :2d :3s :5d
UTG raises to $12, CO calls, Button folds, SB calls Foucault calls.

Flop: :qd :5h :3h ($46, 4 players)
UTG checks, Foucault checks, SB checks, CO bets $46, SB folds, Foucault calls, UTG folds.

Turn: :ts ($136, 2 players)
Foucault checks, CO bets $108, Foucault raises $434, Co raises $729 (all-in) Foucault calls
Uncalled bets: $0.3 returned to Foucault.

River: :8h

Results: He had QQxx and won the pot with top set.

I put him on either a set or the nut flush draw from the beginning, possibly with a pair or flush draw to go along with the latter. Against that range, I don't have great equity, so even with two pair and an open-ended draw, I'm just going to call and see what the turn brings.

I would have folded a heart turn, but on this safe card, I decided to commit to a big pot. He definitely ought to be firing again with a flush draw with these stacks, because it puts a lot of pressure on me to fold something like two pair and I'm rarely going to be slowplaying the flop looking to check-raise him. However, people do tend to play very straight-forwardly in PLO, and although he shouldn't, I don't know for sure that he wouldn't have checked behind with a flush draw on the turn. However, the fact that I held a 3 and a 5 made those sets less likely, which made me somewhat more comfortable against his range.

Labels: PLO, poker, poker strategy, session review

Stumble It!