![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
peterbirksWell, one thing you can guarantee about Pot Limit Omaha that you cannot about limit hold 'em; you will usually have several hands to talk about! Played for another hour and a half tonight. Two "exciting" hands appeared and one "interesting" one. First, the exciting ones:
Birks is at seat 3 with $45.25.
Punter 1 is at seat 4 with $52.20.
Fish 1 is at seat 8 with $13.05.
The button is at seat 8.
Birks: 6h Jc 6s Jd
Pre-flop:
Birks calls. Punter 1 O calls. Punter 2 calls.
Fish 1 calls. Punter 3 (SB) calls. Big Blind checks.
Flop (board: 8c Js Kc):
So, here we are again. Middle set. Let's play it the BDD way!
SB checks. BB checks. Birks checks. Punter 1 bets $3. Punter 2 folds. Fish 1 calls. SB folds. BB folds. Birks raises to $15. Punter 1 calls. Fish 1 goes all-in for $12.55.
Turn (board: 8c Js Kc Qs):
Well, if T9 or AT is out there I am now an outsider, but I'm willing to bet here in case they aren't. Actually, looking at this, I wasn't aware that I was only getting just over 5 to 2 for my money if there IS a hand beating me out there. I thought that I had less in my back pocket and that there was more in the pot already. Lesson 1 here. Pause before going all in! Then again, I probably would still have done it.
Birks goes all-in for $29.75. Punter 1 calls.
River (board: 8c Js Kc Qs 9d):
(no action in this round)
Showdown:
Birks shows 6h Jc 6s Jd for three jacks
Punter 1 shows 3c Ac Ts 4c for a straight, ace high.
Fish 1 shows 9s Td 2h Kd for a straight, king high.
Punter 1 wins the main pot $38.65 with straight, ace high.
Punter 1 wins the side pot $63.40 with straight, ace high.
Clearly the only debatable plays here are whether I should call pre-flop (it had been a very passive game, so I wasn't as uncomfortable about this as I would be in an aggressive game, and what I should do on the turn. Pokercalc shows me as being 53.7% on the flop. As BDD said, one player drastically overrated his nut-flush draw, while the other called all-in with top pair and a 4-card straight that was half-drawing dead. On the turn I am a 25% shot, so a bet of $29 to win $111 is only marginally negative EV even as the cards lie. Since there's a good chance that I am still in front, I don't see how I can do anything but go all-in.
So, even though I ended up rebuying after this hand, I wasn't unhappy about it. I think that I played the hand far less badly than my opponents!
This table broke soon after and I found myself at a new table that was equally passive. My view is that as long as I am against passive opponents pre-flop (and I am willing to raise) I must have a long-term positive EV unless I play like a total twat post-flop (eminently possible, of course). But at least I have a non self-weighting strategy.
The next hand could be something out of Ciaffone. In fact, it's almost poetic, and not just because I win!
Fool 1 is at seat 3 with $20.65.
Fool 2 is at seat 4 with $40.10.
Birks is at seat 7 with $54.55.
The button is at seat 1.
Fool 1 posts the small blind of $.25.
Fool 2 posts the big blind of $.50.
Birks: 5h 6s 7s 7h
I like this hand already - the kind that Americans dislike and the English don't
Pre-flop:
Shrewd Player 1 raises to $1. Birks
calls. Punter 1 calls. Fool 1 (SB) calls.
Fool 2 (BB) calls.
Flop (board: 3s 4c 2s):
This is about as good as it gets. I have the nuts. I have protection against a 5 or a six falling, and I have a 4-flush. But I think that I can get these guys all-in when I am an even bigger favourite. So after the small blind bets, I decide to just call.
Fool 1 bets $5. Fool 2 calls. Shrewd player folds.
Birks calls. Punter 1 folds
Turn (board: 3s 4c 2s Jc):
This is just the card that I want to see. I am last to bet and I think I know already what is going to happen. And, sure enough, it does.
Fool 1 goes all-in for $14.65. Fool 2 calls. Birks goes all-in for $48.55. Fool 2 goes
all-in for $34.10. Birks is returned $14.45
River (board: 3s 4c 2s Jc Ks):
Showdown:
Birks shows 5h 6s 7s 7h for a flush, king high.
Fool 1 shows Qd 5c 6c 8d for a straight, six high.
Fool 2 shows Kh 6d 5d 4s for a straight, six high.
Birks wins the main pot $60.95 with flush, king high.
Birks wins the side pot $38.90 with flush, king high.
This is a classic example of players overrating a straight with no redraws. Fool 1 actually picks up a flush draw on the turn. Fool 2 has no right to be in the same country. But by not raising the flop I make it look like I might have 2-pair or a low set looking to pair up. The bet from Fool 1 on the turn (actually not that bad) lulls Fool 2 in (after all, he still has the nuts!) when his equity is so bad that it is unspeakable. As Iain wrote, it's a game when bad players often don't realize what trouble they are in.
God bless pokercalc. Here's the actual equity on the flop and on the turn:
On flop: Birks 60.36%, Fool 1 22.22%, Fool 2 17.42% My chance of not at least tying is a mere 10%, by the way, while Fool 2 has only a 2% chance of winning outright.
On turn: Birks 41.67%, Fool 1 41.67%, Fool 2 16.67%.
This understates Fool 2's dire position. He has absolutely no winning outs. A tie is his best hope (50% chance of 33% of the pot). Since Fool 1 is already all in, my raise on the turn is against a player who is drawing dead.
Of course, the hands between the two might be the other way round, but then it is just a 50:50 bet for the side pot and the main pot.
I'll be honest, I loved this hand. It showed so many things about Omaha. My only worry is that Fool 2 might learn from it!
The last hand was much smaller. I got AAJ8 single-suited under the gun. I raised pot and got one caller - a conservative player. By this time my stake is at about $124 against his $30. The flop came 833 rainbow. I bet 2/3rds of the pot. He raised me the pot. Could he have a three? I decided that he was more likely to have a big pair. Since I was by now playing quite fast and had been seen to raise with stuff like QJT5 double-suited, I liked my Aces in this situation (not least because I suspect that he would have flat-called me with a three). I reraised him the pot and he thought for about three seconds before folding.
Was this the right play? Well, it worked. The risk-to-reward ratio is such that I guess I have to be right here 75% of the time for me to win (unless the guy calls me with an overpair).
Birks is at seat 3 with $45.25.
Punter 1 is at seat 4 with $52.20.
Fish 1 is at seat 8 with $13.05.
The button is at seat 8.
Birks: 6h Jc 6s Jd
Pre-flop:
Birks calls. Punter 1 O calls. Punter 2 calls.
Fish 1 calls. Punter 3 (SB) calls. Big Blind checks.
Flop (board: 8c Js Kc):
So, here we are again. Middle set. Let's play it the BDD way!
SB checks. BB checks. Birks checks. Punter 1 bets $3. Punter 2 folds. Fish 1 calls. SB folds. BB folds. Birks raises to $15. Punter 1 calls. Fish 1 goes all-in for $12.55.
Turn (board: 8c Js Kc Qs):
Well, if T9 or AT is out there I am now an outsider, but I'm willing to bet here in case they aren't. Actually, looking at this, I wasn't aware that I was only getting just over 5 to 2 for my money if there IS a hand beating me out there. I thought that I had less in my back pocket and that there was more in the pot already. Lesson 1 here. Pause before going all in! Then again, I probably would still have done it.
Birks goes all-in for $29.75. Punter 1 calls.
River (board: 8c Js Kc Qs 9d):
(no action in this round)
Showdown:
Birks shows 6h Jc 6s Jd for three jacks
Punter 1 shows 3c Ac Ts 4c for a straight, ace high.
Fish 1 shows 9s Td 2h Kd for a straight, king high.
Punter 1 wins the main pot $38.65 with straight, ace high.
Punter 1 wins the side pot $63.40 with straight, ace high.
Clearly the only debatable plays here are whether I should call pre-flop (it had been a very passive game, so I wasn't as uncomfortable about this as I would be in an aggressive game, and what I should do on the turn. Pokercalc shows me as being 53.7% on the flop. As BDD said, one player drastically overrated his nut-flush draw, while the other called all-in with top pair and a 4-card straight that was half-drawing dead. On the turn I am a 25% shot, so a bet of $29 to win $111 is only marginally negative EV even as the cards lie. Since there's a good chance that I am still in front, I don't see how I can do anything but go all-in.
So, even though I ended up rebuying after this hand, I wasn't unhappy about it. I think that I played the hand far less badly than my opponents!
This table broke soon after and I found myself at a new table that was equally passive. My view is that as long as I am against passive opponents pre-flop (and I am willing to raise) I must have a long-term positive EV unless I play like a total twat post-flop (eminently possible, of course). But at least I have a non self-weighting strategy.
The next hand could be something out of Ciaffone. In fact, it's almost poetic, and not just because I win!
Fool 1 is at seat 3 with $20.65.
Fool 2 is at seat 4 with $40.10.
Birks is at seat 7 with $54.55.
The button is at seat 1.
Fool 1 posts the small blind of $.25.
Fool 2 posts the big blind of $.50.
Birks: 5h 6s 7s 7h
I like this hand already - the kind that Americans dislike and the English don't
Pre-flop:
Shrewd Player 1 raises to $1. Birks
calls. Punter 1 calls. Fool 1 (SB) calls.
Fool 2 (BB) calls.
Flop (board: 3s 4c 2s):
This is about as good as it gets. I have the nuts. I have protection against a 5 or a six falling, and I have a 4-flush. But I think that I can get these guys all-in when I am an even bigger favourite. So after the small blind bets, I decide to just call.
Fool 1 bets $5. Fool 2 calls. Shrewd player folds.
Birks calls. Punter 1 folds
Turn (board: 3s 4c 2s Jc):
This is just the card that I want to see. I am last to bet and I think I know already what is going to happen. And, sure enough, it does.
Fool 1 goes all-in for $14.65. Fool 2 calls. Birks goes all-in for $48.55. Fool 2 goes
all-in for $34.10. Birks is returned $14.45
River (board: 3s 4c 2s Jc Ks):
Showdown:
Birks shows 5h 6s 7s 7h for a flush, king high.
Fool 1 shows Qd 5c 6c 8d for a straight, six high.
Fool 2 shows Kh 6d 5d 4s for a straight, six high.
Birks wins the main pot $60.95 with flush, king high.
Birks wins the side pot $38.90 with flush, king high.
This is a classic example of players overrating a straight with no redraws. Fool 1 actually picks up a flush draw on the turn. Fool 2 has no right to be in the same country. But by not raising the flop I make it look like I might have 2-pair or a low set looking to pair up. The bet from Fool 1 on the turn (actually not that bad) lulls Fool 2 in (after all, he still has the nuts!) when his equity is so bad that it is unspeakable. As Iain wrote, it's a game when bad players often don't realize what trouble they are in.
God bless pokercalc. Here's the actual equity on the flop and on the turn:
On flop: Birks 60.36%, Fool 1 22.22%, Fool 2 17.42% My chance of not at least tying is a mere 10%, by the way, while Fool 2 has only a 2% chance of winning outright.
On turn: Birks 41.67%, Fool 1 41.67%, Fool 2 16.67%.
This understates Fool 2's dire position. He has absolutely no winning outs. A tie is his best hope (50% chance of 33% of the pot). Since Fool 1 is already all in, my raise on the turn is against a player who is drawing dead.
Of course, the hands between the two might be the other way round, but then it is just a 50:50 bet for the side pot and the main pot.
I'll be honest, I loved this hand. It showed so many things about Omaha. My only worry is that Fool 2 might learn from it!
The last hand was much smaller. I got AAJ8 single-suited under the gun. I raised pot and got one caller - a conservative player. By this time my stake is at about $124 against his $30. The flop came 833 rainbow. I bet 2/3rds of the pot. He raised me the pot. Could he have a three? I decided that he was more likely to have a big pair. Since I was by now playing quite fast and had been seen to raise with stuff like QJT5 double-suited, I liked my Aces in this situation (not least because I suspect that he would have flat-called me with a three). I reraised him the pot and he thought for about three seconds before folding.
Was this the right play? Well, it worked. The risk-to-reward ratio is such that I guess I have to be right here 75% of the time for me to win (unless the guy calls me with an overpair).
Tanita lives
Date: 2005-03-10 06:29 am (UTC)It would be interesting if she'd do an album of other people's songs. She's a better singer than songwriter.
Jonathan, near Barcelona