Gothicrow

Hi, good work with this PLO5 series. An idea for a later video could be to do something about donk betting flop or probe turn, I guess that with so many weak or medium posible draws that opponents should not c-bet our donk betting strategy should change from PLO4 to PLO5, but I'm not sure. Thanks for the content.

Hi Jack, tanks for your replies!!. You wrote a lot of usefull information to study, assimilate and analize my own game, I really enjoyed reading that.

Hi you need to figure out what is better for you and your mindset respecting bankroll managment; I mean, if you can have the discipline to go up and down in stakes when needed without throwing away money by tilt and improving constantly your game, you can have a much more aggressive aproach (e.g. 25BI of PLO5 and shoots to PLO10 with 5BI until you get 30BI of PLO10, or many other aggressive approach). I just want to leave you a thought: microstakes are to learn the game, study hard to have a solid play, and get out of there as fast as possible.

I'm not the perfect example of that, because I still play PLO25 with shoots to PLO50, so I haven't success at all to get me out of microstakes jejejeje, but I honestly think that having a more aggressive bankroll managment can help you to stay motivated to play hard and study harder.

Regards

@ Elterremoto: Why would you call with the str8 with a diamond blocker?, do you think he is capable of turning anything into a bluff?

@ EdgeKing: At this SPR I usually just pot the turn with most of my betting range (top 2 pair + draw or better), but this time I wanted him calling with any pair + GS and probably with a bigger size he would fold the weakest part of his range. I think that this size is big enough to leave a half pot river shove that he would call with any 2 pair+, but small enough to encourage him to call with almost any potatoes thinking that he can outdrawn AA or KK by the river. Probably I'm way too optimistic but man, it's just that he is so calling!!! What do you think about this?

Hi. As played, I would bet the river given that we have the best hand most of the time, but as I don't expect to get bluff raised at this stakes, I would bet/fold unless I know something about the opponent to bet/call.

Unless you know your opponent is pretty tight, he is going to call river with any 2 pair +, so definetly bet something like ~$1.50. On the turn, you have shown that don't have a str8 with your check back, so I think he can call wide a river bet.

Hi Jack, nice work!

About the hand that you analyzed on the replayer around min 9, I have some questions

1.- You said that you think a better play from the opponent would be to make a small cbet, but at the same time this board doesn't conect much with his range, so he would have to cbet/fold many hands; don't you think that in his shoes would be better to check/call flop? There are many cards that improves his hand on the turn (any 7, 9, T, J, Q, K, A, heart and spade) and in those cards he could let you potentially bluff again and check/call.

2.- In opponent shoes, if you make a small cbet, what would be the bottom of your range that you would cbet/call vs an aggressive player on that board?

3.- In that spot (SB vs BB), what do you think about 4betting from SB low and medium double suited rundowns for board coverage and balance reasons?

Thanks and regards!

Hi. Without history with the opponent, I would play it like you did. But if opponent likes to bluffcatch light often, I wouldn't bet the river. Regards

Hi, I think you play it perfectly. You can't fold on the turn with 3 pair + GS to split + nut flush draw. As you have a backdoor flush draw, opponent might pay you if you hit your flush on the river with his str8 just because you could be betting a set to make him fold on a diamond card, so I think you have implied odds sometimes.

Hi, 4bet and get the most money possible in preflop when your hand is still strong. Regards

Hi. With that hand, we don't have the necessary equity to get it in against a tight 4betor range with mostly AA. Against AA we have like 35% equity but we need something like 40% to be break even with an SPR of 2. If we had a backdoor flush draw, the decision would be much closer having something like 39%.

Lets wait what Stefan Says. By the way, very nice video! Thanks

Regards

Hi all.

About make or not a cbet on that type of flops, I think that against most people we should cbet air here. Imagine we are in the CO or BU holding a low roundown, and that str8 broadway flop hits, aren't we happy if he folds something like 689T? TQ99ds? 9955? complete air?, some of those hands maybe call 1 street, but has to fold to second barrel, even something like AK has hard time calling a turn bet on a brick unless they hit a backdoor flush draw. We need to consider that we can discount many strong broadway hands on blind's ranges because usually they would 3bet them preflop. As Kyyberi pointed out, almost half of the time, opponent's wouldn't hit a hand that could stand heat on 2 streets.

Suppose an oponent catch a read on us that we cbet bluff very often this type of boards and he is tired of let us win and starts to adapt by calling wide; that would be great!!! because now we can get at least 2 streets of value with top 2+ on those boards against a wider range.

In Omaha hand's equitites run so close, so an important part of our win rate comes from making others to fold their share of equity in the pot.

Even if we are against an overall nit from the blinds who only 3bet 2% on this spot, we can think on fight this type of boards starting by cbeting sometimes (when we have a str8 blocker, with 2 backdoor FD, etc); sure, he will hit this type of board on single raised pots more often, but a bunch of his hands would fold against a second barrel just because, he is a nit!

We can't blindly cbet, but doing it here most of the time, is a good start to make an overall +EV play.

I honestly don't remember where I read this, but someone wrote somewhere:"Poker isn't a game of cards, it is a game of bets" and it's true!, we should attack the opponent's range on spots that are an overall +EV play; and this is one of those in my opinion.

Regards

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.

I would bet half pot on river to make him fold his 1 pair + flush draw type of hands. With him folding those hands I think the river bet is profitable.

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

When there are no flush draw present on the turn, all depends on the oponent. But I think that the line ch/c flop, donk turn seems suspicious because we represent like you said nuts or air (and in my opinion mostly air), so I don't expect opponent raise anything, and he would call with everything but air (and if he is a tricky player, a lot of his range would call turn to probably try a move on the river). That's why that if I decide to run this play I woudn't have a polarize range. Practically I would do it with some bluffs, str8 and some sets, just because I think he would call at least once with almost everything that hits that flop in some way. And I like the play because most of the hands on opponent's range that wouldn't bet turn, could call the turn donk. In this case is almost the same that when we donk flop where opponent could call with everything but complete air at least once, but by donking turn we can potentially win also a cbet.

It's true that with a flop ch/r increases the variance, but I would do that play against people who cbets wide, has a low fold to ch/r, but tends to fold on turn or river once they call on flop. And here the play I think I would do it with something like blockers, something like bottom 2 (because we have practically 0 implied odds if we just call to hit our FH and also I could do a better hand fold on later streets), and str8. Also, if opponent has a high fold to ch/r on flop I practically wouldn't do it with a str8 until he starts to adapt.

About how I would played 2 pair?, well that depends a lot on the opponent, but against an unknown, I think wouldn't do the play we are studying. Probably I would ch/c flop and ch/decide turn.

yeah I agree that against a 3b range heavily on AA, we should fold and also we should fold against that range preflop if the pot was going HU and OOP (I mean if UTG folded) with that 2 into our hand, in my opinion.

ch/c flop and donk turn..... to be honest I hadn't considered as a play I would do with the nuts..... interesting.

I think that play makes sense when a FD is present on the flop, or if the flop is rainbow and the turn opens a FD (wich is going to happen almost 3/4 times). But without a FD present, I don't think that would be the best play with the actual nuts. With QJ I would prefer a ch/c flop to try a ch/r turn, or ch/r flop (a small raise, something like 2.5x), or donk flop.

When a FD is present, sure I like now the ch/c flop, donk turn, bet river; and would be a play to make with QJ, AA, KK (for value), blockers and probably some flush draws. I think the calling range from the opponent in the river is going to be wider if we play this way, because on opponent's eyes this play looks weird, so that's why I would widen my value range.

Interesting.....

To be honest, I would need to run some simulations to figure it out, but I don't have the needed software to know wich flop play is more profitable.

I'm still thinking that calling and shoving are viable options. On one side we are almost on a flip against his range that would call the shove. Given that the flop has low cards people are not going to believe that we have a 4 very often, so they would call the shove with his QQ, KK, AA and (4, cc, and 33) that are inside of the top 12%, also with OESD or wraps from low rundownds. On the other, by calling flop we can "safetly" fold on an A turn and maybe on a club. I don't know....

Regards

Thanks Mindset, it looks like a good aproach to the river.
Regards

Hi, well I don't have those numbers because from UTG I only have 23 hands and 45 hands from BB player. The only thing is that BB has 3bet from CO bad JJ's vs a tight UTG player on another table, but that's the only information that I had at the moment of play this hand. With this, I supposse BB is squeezing any AA, KKs, QQs, ABBs, rundowns at least single suited.

With this SPR I only need ~41% equity to break even and I have that vs his range to call the shove. But thinking again in the hand, with my actual holding I don't need to protect much against the part of his range that would fold to the shove. Probably better play would be to call flop, and donk shove any turn card that doesn't complete the flush or isn't an A. What do you think about that?

When I played the hand I decide to shove flop to avoid the situation when an A hits on the turn giving him the possibility to bluff that card with his draw. But in retrospective, the A is only hitting like 8% of time, and when that happends a big part of his range would hit that A. So, try to avoid this "problem" isn't a good reason to shove flop.

That leaves us with one thing: I have at least the equity nessesary to shove on the flop, but what is going to have a bigger EV, shove flop? or call flop and donk shove a "safe" turn?

Thanks for share, it looks very VERY useful!!

Hi Jimmy, thanks for the replay.

I had the doubt because as a bluff I would bet something like 65% of the pot, as I don't expect to be called that often by anything, but with the same reasoning, if I would actually valuebet something on a blank river, I would probably bet something like 33% of pot, to induce him to make a crying call. This are very different sizes, but now I guess I'm over thinking this because against unknown players almost doesn´t matter how I would play this specific spot, sooner or later I would have some read to play the hand in a different way, trying to explote an opponent's leak or playing it in a GTO way, depending on his playing style.