Four Table PLO Live Session (part 1)

Posted by

You’re watching:

Four Table PLO Live Session (part 1)

user avatar

Jack Mitchell

Essential Pro

Video Player is loading.
Current Time 0:00
Loaded: 0%
Duration -:-
Remaining Time 0:00
  • descriptions off, selected

Resume Video

Start from Beginning

Watch Video

Replay Video

10

You’re watching:

Four Table PLO Live Session (part 1)

user avatar

Jack Mitchell

POSTED May 02, 2015

Jack jumps in to 4 tables of small stakes PLO action with a mix of tables.

8 Comments

Loading 8 Comments...

jjkim0915 9 years, 8 months ago

Hey Jack, thanks for the vid! In 13:40, if you did not get c/r otf, and you get to the turn, would you be betting all 3 streets with the 10 high fd? Or are you still checking turn, and calling/betting most rivers. Thanks, and keep up the good work~

Jack Mitchell 9 years, 8 months ago

Hey man, no problem, it's what I'm here for! I don't think I'd be getting three streets from too many worse hands, and it would be gross to call a c/r on the turn if I barrelled, as stacks would be such that he could then jam the river and put a ton of pressure on. I would likely be checking turn and then betting if checked to on the river, or calling a decent amount if bet into depending on the sizing. Given he just flatted in the BB I wouldn't expect him to have as many suited A or K combos as some of those stronger connected hands would likely 3bet, and if he just c/called the flop I would expect alot of his combos to contain mediocre flushdraws. So my turn checkback would mainly be to induce/let him valuecut himself. Given the presumptions I just made, it would be interesting to consider checking turn and raising a bet on the river, some opponents might get pretty curious! I would probably want more history/reads on the opponent though
I think I would generally go for 3 streets with the nf, 2nd nf (although obviously he had that in this instance) and the nf blocker as well.

Gothicrow 9 years, 8 months ago

Hi Jack, I liked your video. Just once question: In min 22:40, top left table with 373Kds, why do you prefer to realize the equity of your draw on the turn by checking behind?. Opponent's ch/c flop range has a lot of Ax, and some of those would probably fold to a second barrel. You have the nut FD + a str8 blocker, isn't better to bet turn and river? he could ch/c turn with AQ, A+draw, etc, but even AQ would have a bad time calling a big bet on the river, in my opinion. I'm not saying that the check behind on the turn is bad or something, in fact you keep worse FD's in his range and you will extract money of those on a spade river, or make them fold with a bet when a spade doesn't hit. So the question is, why to do one thing instead the other?

thanks for the reply

Jack Mitchell 9 years, 8 months ago

Alright mate, very good question! I think spots like this are ones that get overlooked a lot (generally because the pot is small) but are still important to consider.
As you say, there is some merit to checking back turn, but I think a lot of that relies on us hitting our hand. It would be hard to credible rep too much on brick rivers against someone we don't have any history with, and opens us up to being bluffed by weak hands that would've just folded to a barrel.
I think therefore that keeping betting would work out much better for us. So, pros of barrelling are that we build a bigger pot for when we hit and can set up a bluff when we miss. Given he just flatted the bb pre and c/c flop, I don't expect our opponent to have too many strong made hands in this spot (I think his stronger high card combos would 3bet pre and we would hear something on the flop from made hands that want value/protection), but as we only have a pair of 3s getting him to fold anything on the turn is a good result for us. Barrelling also allows me to remain uncapped, I don't think I'd be checking back too many 2pair+ hands here so my range is significantly weakened and allows him to bluff us pretty well.
I think in game, my thoughts were that I didn't block any pairs on board, I had 3spades and so weighted him more towards having some sort of hand that may get sticky on a few streets as it wouldn't get overly expensive. Obviously however that's the purpose of 3barrelling so we can bloat the pot and hopefully blow him off his hand further down the line.
From a psychological standpoint (I think it's Galfond that talks about this sometimes) people get way less attached to small pots and play less tough because subconsciously they don't have the financial incentive or as much ego involved as there would be when there is more money in the middle and more action has taken place.
Obviously our aim is to make as much money as possible, we should be going after any spots we can maximise value or get bluffs through. I think that in itself may have been a reason why I decided to check back and hope to get lucky or just give up as there wasn't much out there, which is something I shouldn't be making a habit of doing!

JimmyGlass 9 years, 8 months ago

spaz for the fans! (c)

upd: nope, that wasn't me. but I was also honored by taking part in the video

Jack Mitchell 9 years, 8 months ago

haha I'm presuming that was you sir! Because of that comment I potted the river thinking my opponent might think I was messing around, which as I say in game is pretty bad with any hand in that spot...so you kind of got your wish, ask and you shall receive! It did make me chuckle though

Gothicrow 9 years, 8 months ago

Thanks Jack!

It's true that usually players don't fight for pots when are small, and from my point of view, an important source of our overall income comes from attack those pots in the right times. Keep doing the great job! Regards.

Be the first to add a comment

You must upgrade your account to leave a comment.

Runitonce.com uses cookies to give you the best experience. Learn more about our Cookie Policy