$2k 6-Max PLO SCOOP Live Session (part 12)
Posted by Phil Galfond
Video Player is loading.
This is a modal window.
The media could not be loaded, either because the server or network failed or because the format is not supported.
Resume Video
Start from Beginning
Watch Video
10
Loading 18 Comments...
Omg wtf the AA hand?!?! Don't know if it's crazy or brilliant. Going to find results now.
Do you have the link?
final table replay with commentary by Dave Tuckman. Note hand numbers at bottom right as it doesn't show all hands.
13:00 for those who are curious about it el_klonkador had ATcc54dd. I have absolutely no clue why he decides to lead river expecting that you are not betting some hands, but I think you need to bet all your floats that improved OTT to make it a profitable turn call and value betting thinly some AJxx combos. But I am just a PLO noob at the time. b-xc-l is probably the weirdest line ever. From all poker hands I have ever played, nobody ever bluffs so quickly and they need a pretty sick plan overall to make this one. Congratz for the laydown but everybody know that you are one of the few that are capable of it.
You think that your general decrease variance style made his river lead more likely to occur with 54xx ?
well I think it's questionable whether or not two pair is a value bet on the river, so he probably leads in order to avoid missing value from this portion of Phil's range. bet/folding the turn in Phil's position for value and protection with two pair planning on checking back the river is a pretty common plo strat, also not bluffing rivers in a spot that would cost you the majority of your stack has been a pretty common decision by Phil in this tournament. If villain has observed Phil's relatively polarized small-ball style, and figures the turn is much more likely to be value than a bluff, then this x/c turn lead river line makes more sense. Phil is very unlikely to have a set in his range based on board texture, positions, and stacks sizes so villain probably figures that the river is either two pair (would check back), air (probably gives up), or a chop. I think it's actually a fine way to play the hand, but I think x/r'ing the turn smallish to shove the river, or changing his river sizing in order to allow his rejam to look like a potential bluff (as well as timing down before making the rejam) both would have stacked Phil. Both of those plays of course revolve around the assumption that Phil is flatting AAxx preflop and has it in his range for taking a flop call turn bet line, which most players may not think is the case.
that is the reason to lead, right ? I think I am aware of that and does not matter if is PLO or Stud8. But in terms of logic makes the play is very, very awkward. I know that in PLO is more common to see river leads after checking some turns, but I think b-b-b or b-xr-jam little better.
what he is going to do on hearts/pairing rivers when he decided to x/c turn ? x/c against any bet size ? x/f to 90k or more ?
ty. from me looks so weird the play on boards that the nuts is static from the flop to the river. but w/e. lets see what PG brings us on this hand (:
Lol crazy.
Do we have any PLO MTT experts in the RIO community? I think you could have been even tighter preflop in many spots. Folding to a 3b at 31:00 with JT97ss seems dirty and unimaginable, but given SPR is 1 OTF, calling seems wayyy spewy to me. We just have to call off our stack with marginal equity vs a dominating range that realizes >100% of its equity by potting 100% of flops. Its My instinct(which could very well be wrong) makes me think that we should be considering ICM more heavily and probably lean more towards just potting pre the shorter we get with a tighter range that we wont fold to a 3b as often - finding more fold equity. Yea we want to win, but it's such a huge success when our opponents are getting it in against each other, I think you could consider just folding J9T7ss preflop, from the HJ with your stack - or am I ubernitting?
I would be folding A992ds OTB at 55:00 wanting to avoid the exact situation we found ourselves in. Isn't flipping for tons of equity a pretty big and unavoidable(unless we fold) mistake when we are flatting with fairly shallow stacks in a game where hand equities run so close and each player has a lot to gain by making the other fold? Sure we have to run g00t and win the flips when we do find ourselves in them to win the tournament, but everyone else at the table is stoked for us to flip. Seems like the pros of flatting are outweighed by ICM cons.
Nash works for NLH because of fold equity. Because we cant just jam and exercise our FE, I would argue ICM just translates into PLO by folding preflop more for people that have shorter stacks than their opponents. I dunno, I could be very wrong.
I think you're right. It was interesting to see Phil make the adjustments and I think he adjusted much more than any other player at the table. But still not enough imo. Now I'm not a PLO MTT expert as such, but I know ICM very well. Most people get it wrong. They think oh there's this thing called ICM, and now I should call a little bit tighter. No, the adjustments are very extreme. Much more so than people think. In NLHE very frequently ICM dictates your reshove or calling range to basically be KK+ or thereabouts, which I've almost never seen anyone get right.
The top set hand is a perfect example of that imo. Flatting AA preflop is great. Flop play great. Turn bet is probably ok, but river should be an easy flat from an ICM perspective. The downside is just so much more damaging than the upside, even if Phil just runs into the nuts a very small % of the time.
There were some other plays at the table that were ICM disasters imo, but I think they were made by other players. ICM is harder to judge in PLO since things run so close, but adjustments would probably be to open much tighter when there's high risk of 3-bet, and to basically not 3-bet at all OOP.
Strong arguments sro, but imagine a tournament where every player agrees with you but one. The odd man out runs over the table and has a much higher chance of winning than the others, right? A tournament is sort of a game of chicken, and the implications of that for PLO are very tricky.
People *play* tournaments as if they were a game of chicken. That's why they're so soft. The adjustments are kinda boring though, which is mainly why I don't play a lot of MTT myself.
BEAST!!!!! BEAST GALFOND
do we know uremyatm's hand at 18:30 from the replay?
nope :( I bet 1:1 that he had naked Ah :D
thoughts on limpin a lot in that icm situation
especially when u have between 18-40bb it is supertough to isolate you because you could be limp/raising and vs people that dont overfold their blinds too much ur not giving up that much
this way you lower the risk of busting a lot
Really surprised at the Qhigh flush fold at the 17 min mark. After you take this line this is the top of your range so your fold indicates that you think villain would never bluff in this spot. Considering his sizing and your clear propensity for bet/raise folding at this final table this seems like a dangerous assumption. Of course you were right to fold the top set hand ;). I guess my question is, if we're b/f'ing the top of our range are we even getting enough calls to warrant a bet, especially at that sizing? Wouldn't it make more sense to bet smaller in general in this spot to increase the likelihood of a call by worse as well as potentially inducing a raise that we could call without having strong ICM implications? I guess I trust that you're playing and making these decisions well due to experience and understanding of the game, but when trying to determine strategy or logical applications for myself (or other members) I struggle with some of these hands.
Be the first to add a comment
You must upgrade your account to leave a comment.