---

Poker Video: Pot-Limit Omaha by DJ Sensei (Micro/Small Stakes)

First! I hope it's as good as the 1st episode!

Time Link to 00:07:32

Your comment about the semi-fish player in this spot confused me a bit. Yes, he is a straight forward fit or fold kind of player, but betting the turn would be helpful, because we get to bet for protection when our hand is best and fold our his share of the equity. On top of that, when he does have us beat, he will often let us know, by x/c'ing or x/r'ing us. If we check, he won't bluff on the river with weak holdings very often, because he isn't very tricky or fancy. By checking the turn, don't we just let him have a free shot at his equity?

I guess the problem with what I am saying above, is that how much of his range is 9*** vs. flushdraws, overpairs, and straight draws?

Missing some Outkast intro music.

Sorry to spam this thread, but I guess I'm going to.

In the beginning of the next episode, could you have a couple slides to summarize thought process for turn barrels in a general sense? Doesn't need to be a complete guide, but includes the main things we examined in each hand just to have it all nice and neat in one place. I have notes, but you probably can articulate the main points to take away better than I can.

Your comment about the semi-fish player in this spot confused me a bit. Yes, he is a straight forward fit or fold kind of player, but betting the turn would be helpful, because we get to bet for protection when our hand is best and fold our his share of the equity. On top of that, when he does have us beat, he will often let us know, by x/c'ing or x/r'ing us. If we check, he won't bluff on the river with weak holdings very often, because he isn't very tricky or fancy. By checking the turn, don't we just let him have a free shot at his equity?

I guess the problem with what I am saying above, is that how much of his range is 9*** vs. flushdraws, overpairs, and straight draws?

I think with the semi-fish its a very close spot, which of course means there isn't a big difference in value between betting or checking behind. The more passive they are the more inclined I am to bet, since they will bluff me less on the end and also check/call more when they actually have a 9 on the turn. But I think the worst-case scenario (getting checkraised) is bad enough that I want to avoid it whenever there's much risk, so I'll default to checking back against most players with any sort of aggressive tendencies. Even passive players will often bluff in 'obvious' spots like this one, because a) they'll have missed draws a lot and b) I'm obviously not happy about the 9 on the turn.

I think with the semi-fish its a very close spot...

I thought about this spot a little more yesterday as I went about my day and sort of came to the same conclusions. Depends which semifish we are playing against. Was a good hand for illustrating a lot of points. Good stuff.

Looking forward to the rest of the series. I'm going through the earlier series, could someone define a wrap for me please as it isn't defined in any of the earlier series. I mean I know roughly what it is, but does it have to contain a pair, or is it 2 OESD, or certain number of outs?

Looking forward to the rest of the series. I'm going through the earlier series, could someone define a wrap for me please as it isn't defined in any of the earlier series. I mean I know roughly what it is, but does it have to contain a pair, or is it 2 OESD, or certain number of outs?

A wrap in PLO is usually a SD bigger than an OESD. So 9-20 outs is what is possible in PLO from straight draws alone. They can have a pair in them and a flushdraw. There are lots of different wraps, but the main ones are the 9-card wrap, 13-card wrap, 16-card wrap, 17-card wrap, and 20-card wrap. Studying wraps will be important if you want to play PLO. 13-card/16-card wraps are the most valuable, because they can be comprised by all nut outs.

Jeff Hwang's book PLO Big Play has an excellent breakdown of wraps. I basically just regurgitated his amazing knowledge and pawned it off as my own...anyhow.

Time Link to 00:32:51

eeeeagle...(hem player rating )
I think it's kind of interesting that on such boards, we don't have a bet bet c/c range almost ever. So lets say we are up against that a aggressive or over aggressive player type and we check this particular hand I guess that's fine. With AA**,A4** and that turn we could probably do the same because we don't have to be scared. Although I'm not sure if the player type might stab at the pot if we do so or if it's good because of the following. But let's say we have a weak 4, whyever we have it, would you put it more into the inducing range on the turn or go 4 value on 3 streets by knowning that you can't really bet bet c/c? The same thought might be appliable for 52**.

eeeeagle...(hem player rating )
I think it's kind of interesting that on such boards, we don't have a bet bet c/c range almost ever. So lets say we are up against that a aggressive or over aggressive player type and we check this particular hand I guess that's fine. With AA**,A4** and that turn we could probably do the same because we don't have to be scared. Although I'm not sure if the player type might stab at the pot if we do so or if it's good because of the following. But let's say we have a weak 4, whyever we have it, would you put it more into the inducing range on the turn or go 4 value on 3 streets by knowning that you can't really bet bet c/c? The same thought might be appliable for 52**.

I'm a little confused about how a weak 4 hand would want value on three streets, or want to induce anything. Also, I think hands like KK, TT, and some other decent made hands could go bet bet c/c here.

ah right, maybe I put the time link a little bit too near to the end of the hand I meant.
I meant the 443A3 board before.

Time Link to 00:26:22

What about having the A here? Any thoughts (worth mentioning) on that for deciding to bet or not vs various player types?

What about having the A here? Any thoughts (worth mentioning) on that for deciding to bet or not vs various player types?

I'd probably lead out more often without it, because NFDs will be a more decent part of their range and our AK should be ahead of those. But I'd still lead more against passive players and check more against aggressive ones.

Time Link to 00:09:27

If the river is a heart, do you still look him up?