God_of_War

I just would not check here since the hand is too weak to check-raise or to continue on most turn after a x/c and we´d have to give up too often aborting a big pot. At the same time we dont want to give a freecard to villains tons of draws. The board is quite wet we are not happy to play 3 streets so I´d prefer pot/folding rather than 1/2pot. If we pick up a decent turn-card we can turn our hand into a 2barrel allin semi-bluff generating tons of FE.

Flop fold is not a mistake since it is tendency of micro-regs to raise here top-2pair+ while underbluffing and we perform bad against such a range

Owning a poker site is not a real argument for taking a specific line. We should have enough bankroll so it does not affect our play on the tables.

you cannot check-call without flush or set.

either you stab oop (2pair+flush-blocker suits well for a bluff) or check-fold against the flop bet.

I think it is well played. Against KK, K9:cc, 99, QJT:cc you have 40% Equity. With 11 clean outs your hand performs well against a range consisting of top- and mid-sets.

If his x/r range is overly visible merged towards strong made hands only you better just call the flop.

You should learn the game when you make the transition and this may take some time.

After I got to PLO micros (plo2 & 5) from crushin NL100 I needed over 1 year to actually do better than break-even.

You cannot change the game and expect to crush it instantly.

maybe 75% bc of the bdfd.

alright see you at the tables

Your condescension just knows NO bounds. It's amazing.

Haha, had to laugh.

a double digit EV bb/100 over my past ~40k hands.

40k is pretty small sample, it might be a lucky upswing. just sayin.

[...] I'm not some random lurker [...] Okay?

You don't have to prove anything. I won't adapt my opinions according to your winrate. Okay, u r no lurker. But I did not even assume that. But okay.

Janda [...]

I have a janda book now here at my hands, it is called Applications of No-Limit Holdem. It's been some time but I also studied throughout this book but I just overlook it now for our purposes. so chapter 1 is indeed highly theoretical stuff that holds true to plo aswell, but it is, as the title say it just basics. chapter 2 preflop ranges do not apply. Preflop strategies obviously are different in PLO and have different frequencies.
and those discrepancies keep going on.. most of the remaining chapters are about postflop play, lines and ideas that obv cannot be applied. there are some quite abstract theoretical sentences that could be applied like "when we hold a strong hand, we rarely should check-back" but they are so vague, that they loose relevance.

HugO I pretty much agree with the argument made in your comment. It also took some time to see, that lines, sizings and especially balancing, which prevents you from losing against better players, it just does not work like NLHE.

And here's a point I haven't shared: a big reason I size down multiway
is that I think it's hard to design a good, balanced, equity-driven
potting range multiway. If we need to balance a PSB, I think we open
ourselves up to risking too much money too often with combos that have
too little fold equity and too little pot equity

And here's a point I haven't shared: a big reason I size down multiway
is that I think it's hard to design a good, balanced, equity-driven
potting range multiway. If we need to balance a PSB, I think we open
ourselves up to risking too much money too often with combos that have
too little fold equity and too little pot equity

Otherwise, we end up with a paucity of bet/folds and bet/calls OTF.
And everyone can just explo fold to us unless they have so much equity
that we're only ever flipping in these pots.

Those intuitions descend from NLHE and do not apply. You balance a PSB by just betting different Equity-hands with different frequencies. Exploits work different too: by expanding your range into more marginal hand-components not by adding random bluffs portions.

In NLHE you try to find value/bluff ratios making villain indifferent to call, in PLO you try to cover several texture runouts. You also dont balance your sizing be having some bluff/value portions in a constant sizing but by using multiple sizings which both contain a fair mix of range portion that have playbility and equity. important reason for those adjustments: there is no linear hand-strength distribution alike nlhe but as already mentioned the game is more equity-driven.

the overbet also has the epiphenomen to change the whole betting strcture not only concerning the bet sizing in order to deny equity.

as i said 2 different games.

so I need to respect my own time at some point.

sure, self-respect is important. time is a resource more limited and for this reason more valueable than any money on this world. so just take it. imo most people are lazy egoists. being condescending in discussions is always a good way to get things going, thats a kinda basic attitude i have. and i was pretty sure u've been holding back some thoughts. and it works, feelings get hurt but people start to come out of their nutshell. i am not intentionally trying to disrespect you btw. but i won't apologizing for my temper or perceptions neither. and i dont think im a condescending personality in general, i was condescending about your arguments so once again: dont take it personally, im still primarily refering to the threoretical objects here.

I recommend you not to mix it.

Mastering 1 game should be challenging enuff unless u are some sort of genious or at least super-talented. I played strategy game passionately since I have been to the kindergarten and spent all my youth playing strategy games and card games, but also games like chess and basically anything else. And obviously I was not talented enough to become a winning player after over an year despite being a successful NLHE Player for years, where I at the end stood at the decision between continuing and to aim for mid-stakes or completely switching to the promising game of PLO and basically to restart.

Even Top-Players like Victor Blom aka Isildur1 had troubles when switching and lost tons of money before acclimatizing. And he was not mixing both games, just transitioning. There are indeed professionals who kinda failed the transition at high-stakes level because they think it is the same game, you ever heard of Gus Hansen and how he went broke? Phil Ivey, Patrik Antonius, Daniel Negreanu .... there are some names I would think of who are real NLHE beasts and they think they have a similar skill-level in PLO. But if you take a look at their game, they are not as good as their stakes would suggest, they are sticking around PLO quite some time now but lack in improvement compared to the younger generation, they have serious weakness in their PLO game and it looks like they cant get rid of it with the tempo that'd be necessary. But they made their millions, they know where to play, so who am I to judge em. If you got it to the nosebleeds where you have to game-select to bumhunt millionares with 10k$ buyin it makes sense to learn how to do mixed-games but to beat online micro/low-stakes in order to learn the game properly and move up in stakes this is probably a waste of time and energy because you are splitting your capacities and lose the focus.

I don't know why you think poker knowledge is so game-specific

It is.. you ever played 7-card stud or Limit-Holdem? Completely different, same with PLO and NLHE. I played NLHE and somehow managed to beat NL100 Zoom with over 10bb/100 by reading some good books and playing around with snowie from time to time. But I studied PLO nearly every day since then and I dont think it helped me for my NLHE game at all, I prob would not even beat NL10 now, the stake where I started originally.

You're still not appealing to any specific Jnandez materials.

Afaik it is not allowed to make commercials here.

And by the way: for this PLO20 pot, I'd be interested in what a multiway multi-size solve would say

Solver would say POT x%. Because solver is both using half pot and pot size with different frequencies (but he always uses both in a mixed and balanced way and very frequently, at this specific hand it is possible solver would bet some top-sets half pot but without flushdraw or backdoorflushdraw I would estimate solver bets pot with a frequency of at least 95% and halfpot with a frequency of around 0-25% when he has an accompanying club-flushdraw aswell, which is probably slowplaying, in heads-up pots solver is using 90%-100% full pot in 3bet pots when there is an Ace on the flop). Yea you heard right close to 100% with the FULL RANGE, that means not only AAxx top-set but any other hand you've been 3-betting so any gutshot and any type of air-hand. Solver also does not differentiate between PLO20 and PLO100 because he always plays approxing GTO. You should have a picture now how solid aggressive pot-limit omaha play actually looks like. You get stacks in verrrry frequently.

Galfond and literally every RIO PLO coach would never bet more than half-pot multiway here" [...] you are just coming at me with such disingenuous, disrespectful non-debate that I have no reason to say anything more.

Well, if you feel like this I suggest we wait until some Coach or Pro joins this discussion and delay it till then. we all brought our points to the OP'S hand.

From my experience it is important for me to give transitioning players with serious ambitions the message on their way, that those 2 games are completely different and it requires tons of hours and content-relevant work on a regular basis to retain a professional skillset at the the particular game, I want to warn them and keep them off disappointments.

It is a hard way to make an easy living.
-Toby Keith

There is no way around hard work.
-Arnold Schwarzenegger

We are refering to the hand scenario by PacnyTuH0 which is quite specific. It is true Jnandez is betting pot in HU too but Jnandez is also betting pot multiway and I was also refering to multiway pots. So I dont know how you get to hu pots now.

Being constructive is good in general but in this case it is not, it does not make sense to add not applicable ideas from NLHE background around it, it inundates common accepted and straightforward solutions and this could confuse other players imo.

I dont know how your 3-bet range looks like but we should 3-bet a minimum of 5% and if utg opens light (14% or more) we can punish this by 3-betting even wider. KKQTss is within a 7% 3bet range so no big deal. Calling is usually bad because multiway we lose value and it sux to get squeezed oop. But with the specific hand it is ok to call because with the hight pair and 3 broadway sidecard I'd still performs kinda well mway and in 3bp oop. Primarily as an exploit bc players do not defend good against 3-bet from oop (they usually only 4-bet AAxx), 3-betting ip has much higher EV. Im usually not calling any hands from MP or CO.

I think all 3 lines are ok, as long as you dont fold your monster.
If he is aggressive it is better to trap by checking, otherwise just gii.

In contrast to Janda, Jnandez is a professional PLO-player who was absolutely crushin PLO500 zoom last year. And he also plays it like this. So thats not vague, thats just how you play it omfg.

Preflop mandatory 3bet 4value.

On the flop mandatory raise and allin. We should raise 4value and protection and we have best hand here as villain 4bets AAxx pre. Even if he calls his AAxx, we would gii.

7.5bb/100 in srp

I admit it is a little bit racist but it is funny so it is ok. Nobody's feeling is hurt, Asian have humour, they can laugh about it, they do it all the time, frankly nobody is going to start a Jihad now.

It is not absurd, best is you just ask Janda if this was his intention. Usually you start writing a book with some intention. Ask him if it was his purpose to educate PLO Players. If so, without PLO experience, he still has no qualification to talk about it. Big bet games are not the same, neither all limit games are. Lemons do not taste like oranges even if they have similarities.

Beyond that, I'm only going to clarify that I absolutely did not say that I only use one sizing multiway. I said that I don't exceed half-pot bets multiway

I know what you said. Not exceeding half pot is limiting your options in a way, that does not change alot in terms of EV. So your correction does not change any statement I made. Doing this is, I say it one more time, cutting down your value as hell.

I honestly don't think you've earned the right to be so condescending about the game.

Haha boy, I tell you sth. about "rights". Rights are not "earned" nor delivered, they are taken by force/violence. There is no divine justice, if you take a close look at human history. Talking in a way like this sounds to me like slavish babbling.
And people using the word "honestly" in front of their sentences are kinda dubious, because why should a honest person say sth. like this?
Im not condescending about "the game", Im about your arguments. So dont take it personal. Beside this, in a hostile environment like Poker, what do you expect from a
God of War?

Your racist argument is a strawman argument aswell. You probably do not even know anyone from Asia. Did you ever engaged for Asian communities? If not, it is basically trashtalking. You do it cause it comforts you and does not endanger your pink cloud of well-being. Just like with Poker. The reason it is dead here is because you dont get better from those discussion with players at the same or below skill level. For this reason you are sentenced to grind as a microstakes rakeback-slave on multiple zoom-tables for the rest of your life.

Im out here. See you at the tables.

I won't say anything because obviously you have everything you need to study PLO right there in your equity calculator.

Wrong. You don't say anything because you don't know any better candidates. You've been typing stuff without thinking it through.

We have much better non-AA 4bet candidates.

Really?
How do they perform Equity-wise?

Please dont say ds mid-rundowns.
JT98ds has 45% only, beside this im 4betting those as a default anyways.

With KKds we are 62% favourit (64% with AKKds) against the non-AA part of a 12% oop 3bet-range and 57% Equity against that overall range.

Please tell me, which candidates are better.

As a default such small sizings are common on
1. paired boards
2. monotone boards
As an exploitative strategy against certain opponents we can do it oop on
3. A-boards
4. Broadway-boards
5. mid-low dry boards

..basically any board that is not medium-heavy 2-toned.

We do have a slight polarity advantage as we are the preflop 3-bettor and our range is much stronger and big-cards heavy including stronger flushes, more overpairs and portion of sets are equal I would guess. But that is not the reason why I would x/r. I dont think this even plays a role in this spot. Polarity advantage is a concept more important when planning multiple-barreling lines hu.

Betting about 25-30% sizing puts SB and CO in a very tough spot
because they are deep with each other and deep with Hero.

Such a tiny bet is not scaring away any draw nor mediocre made hand that might improve against us. Against a raise we have to bet-fold giving up moderate Equity against any nut-hand. I like check-folding more than betting small cause there are reverse implieds aswell.

Getting value is no reason either cause you wont realize it oop, you are not going hit good cards later on because I personally would not go crazy when the turn is a Q. What do you do, check-call or bet-fold again? What do you do on basically ANY turncard? Investing money while planning to check-fold prob aint a winning strategy. Any KQxx straightdraw or good flushdraw will feel inclined to take a shot. If it is bare nutdraw they get the correct price to chase their hand. The pro is, they prob wont bluff u when 1 player is allin already. But your incentive to do is also also lowered.

Actually I am not fighting hard for the pots at all, I have the feeling, I'm playing best when I "just go with the flow and let the hands play them out by theirselves". Idk if you understand what I mean.

I am also playing only 2-3 regular tables so I am also very player-focused.
I played some months on Pokerstars last year Zoom-3-tabling with a winrate just around 4bb/100, on Micros that is neither fun nor profitable.

My overall AF is 2.0, while being higher in bad positions (2.3-2.4) and lower in CO and BU (1.9) where I have to play more hands. Flop and Turn AF also both are 2 but I guess the sample is not meaningful at all because the AF from MP is 12 otf and 0.5 ott LoL. My aggression heavily depends on table dynamics and perceived Ranges.

My WR cbetting flop in SRP ip is 500bb/100.
Cbet flop & check-back turn it goes down to 130bb/100.

devwil Muehlenzwick

Thankfully, I have a blanket strategic rule that I don't bet more than
HP multiway unless the SPR is extremely low.

This approach is already proven to have lower EV than any strategy using multiple bet-sizings. It does not make sense to bet smaller than pot with the best hand beside for the reason of disguising our handstrength which would be part of a balancing strategy. Doing so harms our overall winrate drastically, we are value cutting ourselves not only this street but all further street where the pot could be growing exponentially. In contrast to NLHE where overbetting is possible we cannot do this in PLO so we do have to build the pot with good hands early by ourself and top-set is the best hand you can have here. A strategy where a gto bot can bet only half pot on all 3 streets is losing around 140bb/100 in EV compared with a bot who has both half pot and full pot on all 3 streets available. And the EV increasement from two bots that would both have 2 bet-sizings on the flop but one of em has only 1 bet-sizing on turn or river is just around 10-20bb. 140bb for different flop-sizings, that's a lot. Betting half-pot only on flops is just incredibly bad.

As I already mentioned there is no need to balance or play tricky in multiway pots. When you have a strong hand, you should go ahead and bet it big. The more players, the more it is likely someone will stick around and make a mistake by either shoving a weaker hand or calling a draw against the odds.

.....Janda!?
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.

.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.

This guy is a Holdem-Player! If those concepts are from a NLHE book let me tell you those 2 games are different and you cannot translate theory content 1:1 due to completely different play structure. Anyways both points you mentioned do NOT apply here:

1. The whole game runs close in equity, we have as much as you can possibly get.
2. We have more equity denial by betting bigger due to more FE.

You will NOT be exploited easily cause people just dont bluffraise for stacks light in a 4way pot unless it is a (weak) maniac but he would make that move no matter what your sizing is.

I suggest to get some Pot-Limit Omaha content quickly.
You cant read a chess book and expect to be a good backgammon player.

I assumed that

what other reason would it be

yes 40% needed and you have that pretty sure against his range. he will probably bet more weaker than stronger hands then AA so otf it is a clear raise imo.

4-betting pre is also an option, usually BB will 3-bet a wide range here as your openraising range from the BU is wide aswell and KKxxds performs decent in an allin against AAxx.

It is kinda likely all those players are fish..

utg minraise (weak sizing)
utg+1 calls (weak line)
bb coldcall (weak line)

But even if they are regs, we never slowplay or use a weird sizing here in this spot. 4way as a rule of thumb we play 100% of our value hands straightforward. By making fanzy plays here (check-back, small bet-sizings) we are just shooting ourself in the foot. When you say to bet half pot here on a 4-way flop ip with naked Top-Set on PLO20 maybe to balance a minraise-call-reraise-call-call-call-check-check-check line which basically never happens, you have no idea what you are talking about.

Bet 90%-100% pot and not smaller to get max value and build the pot. Anything else is a crucial mistake as
1) they already checked to you so you cannot check-raise anymore
2) you'd miss to build a big pot for implied value on next street with a monster
3) you'd miss to protect your hand properly mway where odds get juicy quickly
4) you induce someone who stuck around to feel committed with a weaker hand

Maybe you are lucky and someone is check-raising you so you can gii instantly.

I started to play Pot Limit Omaha in September 2017 and started to win money in the year 2018. I played PLO2, PLO5, PLO10 and now PLO20. This sample is from the year 2019 excluding PLO2 which I played 2018 only. This year I won with 22bb/100 over 70k hands. Btw I just found to have negative winrates in BU and CO in 150bb+ pots which is certainly a leak! LoL!

1 & 2
Winrate in bb/100 in 20-40bb pots
BU 50bb/100
CO 18bb/100
MP -11bb/100
BB 49bb/100
BB 50bb/100

Winrate in 40-60bb pots
BU 109bb/100
CO 63bb/100
MP 141bb/100
BB 39bb/100
BB 145bb/100

I won with 8bb/100 over 330 000 hands last year 2018 where the order is messy aswell (only in the SB I'm usually having a negative winrate, I think I might have a leak here too.. but I in 20-40 bb pots from the BB I won 52bb/100 which is higher than in the CO where I had only -4bb/100 - Crazy!). If I would not have tilted so much, my winrate would be better I am pretty sure. :D For this reason I assume my winrate will be better than 10bb/100 when I move up to PLO50 and PLO100 next year, because my mindset is more stable now and I saw that the competition there is not tough neither whereas my skill improves more than it did last year. I am not making so much mistakes anymore in general.

3 I think healthy winrates would be like anything that is above 20bb/100 on average to be better than break-even, as we have to compensate all the blinds and call and fold flops we need more than just 10bb/100. I have -13bb/100 on average in 0-10bb pots. If you win like 80-100bb/100 on the button and lose not more than -20bb/100 in the BB you are on the safe side I would say. The better the position, the higher your winrate should be and overall the higher the better as it is all about maximizing profits. In a low sample like 50k hands, it is likely to be in a messy order due to variance, but the order of profitability should be like this:
BU most profitable
CO 2nd profitable
MP 3rd profitable
EP 4th profitable
SB 5th profitable
BB 6th profitable

4 SB and BB are positions where you are expected to have negative winrates but you should at least compensate those losses from other positions. In very weak environments it is also possible to have positive winrates in the blinds like me. If you have negative winrates in positions where you should be winning (MP, CO BU), you are likely to be an overall losing player (sounds logic). If you are losing in 20-60bb pots you can deduct it to your whole gameplay because small pot hands are played much more often than big pot hands and are the main income source (betting a good hand for value against a weaker players not-so-good hand). Ofc it is okay to have negative winrates if your aim is to play for fun and have a good time not so much caring about being a winning player. If you are new to this game, it will take some time and studies to get positive winrates.

A double-suited semi-connnected near-broadway rundown.

This hand is a 100% 3bet against any opponent from any position (!).

Agree with fuzzbox, to stack-off at this flop spr you basically need a 13-wrap, middle-set or better.

There are not many semi-bluffing hands that would start bluff-raising here. And more important you cannot expect someone to react in a way you have not even observed yet. This is wildly speculative. And if your read would be true, you would not induce with a hand like top-pair. What you just said makes no sense.

The innocent looking preflop call is a big mistake imo. If you play a hand, you should try to think what flops you can hit that are good for you at given Flop-SPR. With 8766ss you basically hope to hit 88x, 77x, 54x or 6xx. First, those occasions alltogether are rare, second with those hits your hand is unlikely to be far ahead in all-in confrontations while especially 66's are not able to hit an invulnerable top-set and often cause serious domination issues (as I can see, this hit is going to make indeed troubles later on). Normally this hand is a fold. Stronger versions like 9887ds are speculative/deceptive 3bets ip.

On the flop I would also just fold it, the flushdraw weakens the already weak oesd. Also we do not have a lot of cards that push our equity so playability to float is poor aswell.

As played I would just raise allin on the turn to protect the hand if you think villain is capable to double-barreling very light oop. With the 7 blocker you block straights now and might fold out moderate equity (flushdraw, 2pair+weak draw, ...). If you get called you probably still have decent back-up equity (8 outs to full or 6-8 outs for a straight on the other side). Against a solid regular I would fold here too as we have reverse implieds with bottom-set and the naked sucker oesd.

On the river it is a hard decision without reads and it also relies on villains perceived range ott (where we would have raised against a loose turn-betting range). If he continues to triple-barrels with the same frequency and ratio like ott, I guess it is a call as we block his straights and have reverse blockers to his busted flushdraws. But the trend is to play more tight and value-heavy oop. There are plenty of Lag-regulars that have high flop/turn frequencies that runs into an straightforward river-strategy which is a common exploitative gap or who play very loose in position but quite different when oop. Especially on the most expensive river-street most player play pretty straightforward. Also be aware that making huge hero-calls is rocketing variance and enables costly mistakes we could be making if our assumption of a light barreling strategy by villain is wrong. If you are not sure wether to call or fold better fold.

I showed the hand to a mate he also would check it. :-)

2019/11/10 - PLO10

My account: $1101

Nearly forgot to update. Yesterday sick downswing 10 stacks beyond EV. But this month I won 2 out of 3 tournaments namely the 5$-Omaholic, rank nr 1 wohoo. I will move up at the end of the month with a solid 60 buyin bankroll.