Really great video! As someone who plays pretty much exclusively PLO and hasn't played almost any NL cash in years I'm struggling a bit to know what the "standard play" would be in some spots, but I'm really surprised to see the lack of protection raises in NL these days. Of course, I get that it's much more important concept in PLO, and you don't want to weaken your check-call range too much by taking the best combo's out of it and want to add deception value, but still some protection is needed. So I'd like to ask about the following spots in the video:
Hand 2: 4d3s
I get that you don't want to have a check-raising range on this flop, but is this really the case for the turn also? More protection is needed as the board turns draw-heavy, and also there is more valuecombo's you can have now: J8, 88. Maybe 38 and 48 would be overplaying as a raise. It has to become pretty tempting as the button to barrel tons of turns if there is zero chance of a check-raise. You never deny him of any equity. Of course, having a check-raise range on the turn will weaken the check-call range, but is it generally accepted that it's better to have no raises at all here? And I'm talking more of set of 3's and 4's than 34, but since you had all the 33 and 44 combos as a possible value combo's for a river raise with this line, it's implying that you will never raise the turn?
Hand 5: 9c7c
Is it standard that button doesn't have a raising range on the flop? I'd get that HU, but 3-way that seems a bit strange. Or do you think his plan was to raise the turn if it was a total blanc? I guess that would only be offsuit 3 and 4. Offsuit Q, K and A might be the other options for a raise as they complete no draws, besides pocket QQ, KK and AA which are in your range obviously to beat his set of 7's. But still his hand should want a lot of protection by raising, especially 3-way on the turn when at least SB is so often drawing.
Really great video! As someone who plays pretty much exclusively PLO and hasn't played almost any NL cash in years I'm struggling a bit to know what the "standard play" would be in some spots, but I'm really surprised to see the lack of protection raises in NL these days. Of course, I get that it's much more important concept in PLO, and you don't want to weaken your check-call range too much by taking the best combo's out of it and want to add deception value, but still some protection is needed. So I'd like to ask about the following spots in the video:
Hand 2: 4d3s
I get that you don't want to have a check-raising range on this flop, but is this really the case for the turn also? More protection is needed as the board turns draw-heavy, and also there is more valuecombo's you can have now: J8, 88. Maybe 38 and 48 would be overplaying as a raise. It has to become pretty tempting as the button to barrel tons of turns if there is zero chance of a check-raise. You never deny him of any equity. Of course, having a check-raise range on the turn will weaken the check-call range, but is it generally accepted that it's better to have no raises at all here? And I'm talking more of set of 3's and 4's than 34, but since you had all the 33 and 44 combos as a possible value combo's for a river raise with this line, it's implying that you will never raise the turn?
Hand 5: 9c7c
Is it standard that button doesn't have a raising range on the flop? I'd get that HU, but 3-way that seems a bit strange. Or do you think his plan was to raise the turn if it was a total blanc? I guess that would only be offsuit 3 and 4. Offsuit Q, K and A might be the other options for a raise as they complete no draws, besides pocket QQ, KK and AA which are in your range obviously to beat his set of 7's. But still his hand should want a lot of protection by raising, especially 3-way on the turn when at least SB is so often drawing.
Nov. 12, 2015 | 2:23 p.m.