On PLO Variance

Big Dave D wrote in his blog http://internetpokerpro.blogspot.com/ that he knew of some players who had survived on the live pot limit omaha scene for years, solely buoyed up by occasional vast wins that hid the fact that they did not really know what they were doing. Such is the swinginess of PLO.

It's also worrying. How do you know that you know what you are doing? My only comparison is with Limit Hold 'Em, where I DO know that I know what I am doing. So I guess it's a bit like the unhelpful advice you get from computer engineers when you ask how you know that something has slotted in correctly. "You'll know when it has", they say. Wow, thanks a lot, gumbo. Meanwhile you wonder how much force you should apply to your expensive graphics card without breaking it, because at the moment you don't "know that it has" clicked in properly.

Anyway, I'm pretty sure that in the $100 sit-down yesterday, I didn't know what I was doing. In Limit, knowing what you are doing is like looking at a road map where you know all the short cuts and precisely what route you are going to take to get from A to B. With PLO at the moment I often am not sure where I am going and wherever that might be, when or how I shall arrive there. So, some serious hand analysis is in order.

I have more control at the $50 sit-down, and a quick study of my standard deviation indicates that this is roughly on a par with $2-$4 limit in terms of variance. This is a good parameter to work with. Quality of play in the long term is, I think, closely correlated to the standard deviation in a game. So the $50 an hour SD in $2-$4 limit equates closely to the SD found in 25c-50c antes ($50 sit down max) in PLO. This probably means that in the $100 sit-down I was playing players of a standard close to $3-$6 in limit (allowing for the generally lower standard of PLO play in the US). This is far from weak.

Perhaps I should stop worrying about the swinginess and attack the games on a Friday night, when the games are noticeably looser and weaker. Just rock up and wait for the sets and made hands on the flop. Then try to play them correctly.

Knock 'em (dead)

Sometimes you just get it right. It isn't just a matter of nice cards falling. You know that you are playing your top game and you squeeze every additional bet that you can out of your good hands. I just pummelled them for $122 in just over an hour, and I don't think that I missed a trick. These included an inspired fold with QQ pre-flop IN THE BLIND (the eventual winner, who had reraised pre-flop, had KK) and a check-raise with four sixes both on the turn and on the river, when I had a hunch that my foe had filled his flush on the river (and he had). On top of that I won two hands with calls on the river with nothing more than Ace high, because I was pretty sure that my opponent was on a draw and had missed. And, yes, right both times. Sometimes it's sweet.

Here's another one that went right and where I probably did as well as I could.

Powered by UltimateBet
Started at 14/Apr/05 17:09:09

west tex is at seat 0 with $308.50.
TDCOLTS is at seat 2 with $62.25.
cupcake1980 is at seat 3 with $265.75.
Love64 is at seat 4 with $81.25.
Birks is at seat 5 with $304.25.
ernsta is at seat 6 with $197.
bms1ajd is at seat 7 with $115.25.
capmatt is at seat 8 with $249.25.
swtwtr25 is at seat 9 with $54.25.
The button is at seat 7.

capmatt posts the small blind of $1.
swtwtr25 posts the big blind of $2.

Birks: 6h 5h
ernsta: -- --
bms1ajd: -- --
capmatt: -- --
swtwtr25: -- --

Pre-flop: Love64 calls. Birks calls.
bms1ajd calls. capmatt calls. swtwtr25 checks.

Flop Jc Qh 4h

Not a great hand for me, but playable. Depends on who bets whether I raise or not.

capmatt checks. swtwtr25 checks. Love64 bets $2.
Birks calls. bms1ajd calls. capmatt folds.
swtwtr25 folds.

With the bet from the player immediately on my right, I prefer a call here.

Turn Jc Qh 4h Kh

So there's the flush. But (and this is why it's not the greatest hand on earth) I might be losing to another flush, and other players might have a draw. I am also now out of position.

Love64 checks. Birks checks. bms1ajd checks.

River Jc Qh 4h Kh 8s

Love64 bets $4. Birks calls. bms1ajd calls.

One of the plusses of the check on the turn is that I might elicit a bet from a hand that's behind, which could have folded the turn. This is what happened. My call (rather than raise) is automatic. Firstly, I'm just as likely to get a call from the player behind me as from the initial bettor (who might be bluffing), and secondly, a raise leaves me open to a reraise if the initial bettor is slow-playing a better flush.


Showdown:

Love64 shows Td Kc.
Love64 has a pair of kings.
Birks shows 6h 5h.
Birks has a flush, king high.
bms1ajd has Ks Js (two pairs, Kings and Jacks)

Birks wins $26.75 with flush, king high.

I'm surprised that the player with KJ did not bet the turn, although Sklansky does advise a check at this point (on the grounds that with 2 pair you have to call a raise, even though you might have only 4 outs).