Why villains suck at PLO

fuzzbox

5/10 full ring plo

You play the role of villain in this hand.

Your opponent(the real me) has just sat down, you dont recognise him, he posts in the co.

Preflop
folded to opponent who checks, folded to you in the SB and you complete with Ad9hTd5d, BB checks

Flop (30)
QsJd5c
you check, bb checks, opponent pots it (30), you call, BB folds

Turn (90)
8c - woohoo the nuts
you check (arent you tricky), opponent pots it (doesnt he suck) (90), you checkraise pot (evil cackle time) (380), opponent pushes (ohhh brilliant) (500 more), you call.


But what have you done wrong?

karlh

failed to predict that the hero will suck out on you?


seriously though, guessing you have the nuts too with even more weighty nuts to come. something like 9c10cQdQh?

ecksor

I do recall a very similar looking hand I played in omaha where I flop a set on a relatively dry board in position and bet the flop. Opponent calls and the turn card completes the most likely draw putting a possible straight on the board. Opponent checked to me and I didn't like my hand as much any more and checked behind him. River paired the board and he gave me a crying call on the river for a good chunk of chips. When I showed him a full house he moaned that he'd had the nuts on the turn and that I had ruined his plan by not betting for him ... So, potential free card given on the turn which could prove to cost the pot. I think that play can sometimes be justified if it means that you get paid by a hand with a bet on the river that would have folded to a bet on the turn by disguising your hand as long as the risks are taken into account and the player is able to get away from the hand if the river clearly beats them.

Other option, check-raising the turn gives the villians hand away? Since you pushed I'm guessing you were freerolling in some way with the made straight and a re-draw?

Lafortezza

QQ9cTc, lol.

pokenum  -o ad 9h td 5d  - qh qd tc 9c  -- qs jd 5c 8c 
Omaha Hi: 40 enumerated boards containing Qs 8c 5c Jd
cards          win   %win  lose  %lose  tie   %tie     EV
Ad Td  5d  9h    3   7.50    16  40.00   21  52.50  0.338
Tc 9c  Qd  Qh   16  40.00     3   7.50   21  52.50  0.662

Raise preflop.

ecksor

Is this hand worth getting involved with with just the open ended straight draw on the flop in the first place?

fuzzbox

lafortezza wrote:

QQ9cTc, lol.

pokenum  -o ad 9h td 5d  - qh qd tc 9c  -- qs jd 5c 8c 
Omaha Hi: 40 enumerated boards containing Qs 8c 5c Jd
cards          win   %win  lose  %lose  tie   %tie     EV
Ad Td  5d  9h    3   7.50    16  40.00   21  52.50  0.338
Tc 9c  Qd  Qh   16  40.00     3   7.50   21  52.50  0.662

Raise preflop.

Something wrong there lafortezza - how does the first hand win 7.5% of the time?

Lafortezza

offsuit K on the river.

fuzzbox

Oh yeah - forgot about that.

fuzzbox

Right - well what did villain do wrong.

Firstly - his hand is a bag of rubbish, and he completes oop, which isnt that bad in solation.
Second - the flop is reasonable for him, and its 3-handed with a BB and a poster - so why not fire out a bet as a semi-bluff. Opponents might fold Qxxx and or top and bottom pair or bottom twopair, which is good.
Third - he checks/and calls on a QJxr board - thus his hand is reasonably transparent
Fourth - he checks the card that makes him the nuts. Any sane villain with a good draw is gonna check behind here. So when I bet, I either have nothing, or something very strong. When he check/raises, he allows me to play for stacks with my good stuff, and drop my bad stuff. When I play for stacks here, I likely have him murdered.
Fifth - I push, and he makes the call. He cannot have good equity Vs my range of hands here. He asked me if I wanted to play for stacks, and I replied "YES".

He shoveled 1k into a nothing pot, where he could have zero wins.

This is precisely what happened ....

I had AcTs9c7c, for a total freeroll.
He had no way to win the hand, and put 1000 into the pot.

The river blanked and we chopped it up.
I'm spending the Sklansky bucks though.

Lafortezza

fuzzbox wrote:

Firstly - his hand is a bag of rubbish, and he completes oop, which isnt that bad in solation.

Nothing wrong with completing in the SB against 2 random hands (BB and LP poster). Raising is good too on occasion.
Flop bet is fine, betting draws in yamaha is good yamaha.

fuzzbox wrote:

Third - he checks/and calls on a QJxr board - thus his hand is reasonably transparent

OOP I think there's quite a few hands I'd check and call with. If I was in position I'd raise more frequently with QJxx, AKTx, 9Txx, bottom set, or a combination of the above.

fuzzbox wrote:

Fourth - he checks the card that makes him the nuts. Any sane villain with a good draw is gonna check behind here. So when I bet, I either have nothing, or something very strong. When he check/raises, he allows me to play for stacks with my good stuff, and drop my bad stuff. When I play for stacks here, I likely have him murdered.

If he bets he will likely get weak hands to fold that would have pulled the trigger if checked to. If Fuzzbox is pulling the trigger with air on flop and is likely to do so on the turn again, checking the turn isn't the biggest mistake ever. I would bet it though.

Fifth - I push, and he makes the call. He cannot have good equity Vs my range of hands here. He asked me if I wanted to play for stacks, and I replied "YES".

The amount of time that Villain will get all-in on the turn with the mortal nuts against some donk with QQxx overrules the number of times he gets free-rolled imho. The rest of the time the rake wins and its a chop. But I don't play this high.

I'm spending the Sklansky bucks though.

Buy some clubs.

fuzzbox

Consistently going for your stack in this manner is not good yamaha.

Lafortezza

fuzzbox wrote:

Consistently going for your stack in this manner is not good yamaha.

But its not a massive mistake either. Reverse the situation, you have the nut straight on the turn and there's a flush draw out there.
You check, villain pots, you raise, now Villain pushes all-in, so he's obviously got the same nut straight, but maybe he has a freeroll? Do you fold? Optimum way to play the hand might be to get to the river without getting all-in on the turn and see a safe river before pushing. For all you knew he could have had top 2 plus the same straight, or a set and the same straight. Should you have slowed down on the turn for fear of being freerolled? Maybe see the river for cheaper and make sure it doesn't pair the board?

I agree there was better way for Villain to play this hand but his pushing the turn isn't a terrible error.

fuzzbox

He played the hand in such a way that he would lose the max if he was destroyed, and win the least if he had me scuppered.
He also played in such a way as to give me a free card on the turn ... if, for example, I had nothing but a 7-high flush draw, or if I had top and bottom pair, or whatever.
Believing that I would regularly bet that particular turn card (without much hand) when he checks to me, is complete fallacy.

He should lead the turn, and strongly consider folding to a raise.

The turn check/raise is the major bad part of the hand, as this allows me to decide to play for stacks or not. Also - I can call here with a big strong draw (like a set and nfd for example), and he HATES a lot of river cards, but the pot is nearly 1k, and he has 500 left, and so he gives me great implied odds (if thats what I had).

Lafortezza

fuzzbox wrote:

He should lead the turn, and strongly consider folding to a raise.

I agree he should lead the turn, but strongly considering folding to a raise is nonsense, he has the nuts with one card to come.

If he bets the turn ($30), you raise the pot to $380, calling and seeing a blank river is correct. You don't give stack sizes at the start of the hand so there are degrees of correctness. You just can't fold the nuts on the turn fearing you're being freerolled every time.

The turn check/raise is the major bad part of the hand, as this allows me to decide to play for stacks or not. Also - I can call here with a big strong draw (like a set and nfd for example), and he HATES a lot of river cards, but the pot is nearly 1k, and he has 500 left, and so he gives me great implied odds (if thats what I had).

I'm not disagreeing with you that Villain played it badly, but personally I think you're overestimating the size of the mistake(s) Villain made.

As the hand played out, should you have been reluctant to get all-in on the turn because you don't know that Villain has top set as well as the nut straight? He could have been freerolling you.

fuzzbox

He cant be freerolling me if I hold the nut flush draw. He is not *free* rolling no matter what he holds, although he sure could have extra outs.

Having the nuts with one card to come, and an opponent who is willing to go to the felt, and having no significant redraws, is a recipie for disaster.

Lafortezza

fuzzbox wrote:

He cant be freerolling me if I hold the nut flush draw. He is not *free* rolling no matter what he holds, although he sure could have extra outs.

If you both share the nut straight and you have the nut flush draw, and Villain has top set, then you both have 'extra outs' to win. Is this not a freeroll?

As the hand played out, should you have been reluctant to get all-in on the turn because you don't know that Villain has top set as well as the nut straight? He could have been freerolling you.

??

fuzzbox

No - it is not a freeroll ... we would both have chances to win.

I had a total freeroll against him, because there were zero cards that would win him the pot, yet there were 8 clubs that would win me the hand. Thus - I had a FREE shot at winning his 1k. I would win it 8 times out of 40 ... or 20%.

Its free, because it can never cost me anything.

In the situation you describe, he can still lose to a flush, so he does not have a freeroll.

Lafortezza

fuzzbox wrote:

No - it is not a freeroll ... we would both have chances to win.

I had a total freeroll against him, because there were zero cards that would win him the pot, yet there were 8 clubs that would win me the hand.

You didn't know this when all the money went in on the turn.

pokenum  -o qc qd 9h tc  - ac ts 9c 7c  -- qs jd 5c 8c 
Omaha Hi: 40 enumerated boards containing Qs 8c 5c Jd
cards          win   %win  lose  %lose  tie   %tie     EV
Qc Tc  Qd  9h   10  25.00     8  20.00   22  55.00  0.525
Ts Ac  9c  7c    8  20.00    10  25.00   22  55.00  0.475

^^ Is the worst case scenario for you.

I still agree with you that Villain played the hand badly. I don't agree that 100% "Villains suck at PLO" as the thread title suggests.

Lafortezza wrote:

I agree he should lead the turn, but strongly considering folding to a raise is nonsense, he has the nuts with one card to come.

If he bets the turn ($30), you raise the pot to $380, calling and seeing a blank river is correct. You don't give stack sizes at the start of the hand so there are degrees of correctness. You just can't fold the nuts on the turn fearing you're being freerolled every time.

Do you agree with this?

fuzzbox

When the money went in I knew that I had the nfd. Thus I can never be giving my opponent a freeroll. I will always have some chance to win.

I will almost never be up against the worst case scenario that you describe, but if I am, then I am. Far more often, I will be up against a scenario like this - where I am freerolling, or close to it. On average, I will make a lot by getting the money in here. I am sure that you are not suggesting that I dont get the money in, but are trying to somehow play devils advocate for Mr. Villain with his nut str8.

Villain did nothing right at any street in this hand IMHO - and yes he sux, but thats my opinion.

Lets see - pot 90 + his bet 90 + my raise (380), he has to call 270 in order to basically get his money back (+ half the 90). ... but he does not know which cards might give me a freeroll - so he hates about half the deck. (AQJ9T8 and clubs).
If he knew 100% that I had clubs, then he loses 20% of the 270 on average (or 54). And he is trying to get his money back (135). So yes, it would be +ev, to call and see a turn card.
But if he will check fold to 50% of the deck, then he loses 135 (of the 270) on average, and so should fold now.

Calling a raise, and leading a scare card would be a better play for him ... but he would have to hope that I would not have the hand that he was representing.

Lafortezza

We've pretty much gone over everything by now.
The way the Villain played the hand sucks.
Folding the turn fearing you're being freerolled also sucks.

fuzzbox

In a vacuum - getting all-in with the nuts on, with one card to come, seems reasonable.

However - the pot was 90 on the flop, the turn card comes, and villain puts the other 950 in. It is the manner in which it is done that is the problem really.

If the pot was 400 when he went for his stack on the turn, then his play would be more than fine, as he can conceivable get called by worse hands.

In this case, he creates a situation where it is extremely hard for him to get played with by a worse hand, yet he still shovels his stack in.

RoundTower

I don't like villain's play either, but I wouldn't fold his hand on the turn if I led out and got raised.