Poker Video: Pot-Limit Omaha by fslexcduck (Mid Stakes)

2 X 6: Episode One

This video is a two minute preview. To view the entire video, please Log In or Sign Up Now
Get the Flash Player to see this player.
 

2 X 6: Episode One by fslexcduck

In Episode one of 2x6, Vanessa takes you through an introduction to the importance of preflop hand selection, being able to make the nuts, and position, position, position.

About 2 X 6 Subscribe to

Vanessa shows whitelime how to not lose $300k playing PLO in this small stakes PLO series! The transition from NLHE to PLO is difficult, but it's a road Vanessa walked down herself. Watch her analyze whitelime's leaks and follow his progress. Can an elite high stakes No Limit player make the leap to Omaha? Tune in and find out!

Tags

plo vanessa selbst preflop ipod friendly omaha

Video Details

  • Game: plo
  • Stakes: Mid Stakes
  • 43 minutes long
  • Posted about 6 years ago

Downloads

Premium Subscribers can download high-quality, DRM-free videos in multiple formats.

Sign Up Today


Comments for 2 X 6: Episode One

or track by Email or RSS


PygmyHero

Avatar for PygmyHero

4246 posts
Joined 08/2007

Hey, I was just checking this series out for fun. I liked the first video and learned quite a bit from it. I'm not a PLO player so I may have made a mistake here, but I think some of the info about the high gap versus low gap (e.g. 8764 vs. 8654) is inaccurate. I know there was an error in the video but I think the correction in this thread is still wrong.

Imagine x is a non-relevant card (not necessarily a low card - it's actually easier for x to be a K although you'd really rather have it be a 2 on the T9x flop).

8764
53x: 13 outs (four 2's, three 4's, three 6's, three 7's), 13 outs to the nuts
54x: 13 outs (four 3's, three 6's, three 7's, three 8's), 13 outs to the nuts
65x: 17 outs (four 3's, three 4's, three 7's, three 8's, four 9's), 11 outs to the nuts (the 3's, 4's, 9's)
75x: 17 outs (four 3's, three 4's, three 6's, three 8's, four 9's), 11 outs to the nuts (the 3's, 4's, 9's)
85x: 13 outs (three 4's, three 6's, three 7's, four 9's), 7 outs to the nuts (4's, 9's)
T9x: 13 outs (three6's, three 7's, three 8's, four J's), 3 outs to the nuts (6's)


8654
32x: 13 outs (four A's, three 4's, three 5's, three 6's), 13 outs to the nuts
74x: 13 outs (four 3's, three 5's, three 6's, three 8's), 13 outs to the nuts
75x: 17 outs (four 3's, three 4's, three 6's, three 8's four 9's), 11 outs to the nuts (3's, 4's, 9's)
76x: 17 outs (four 3's, three 4's, three 5's, three 8's, four 9's), 7 outs to the nuts (3's, 4's)
87x: 13 outs (three 4's, three 5's, three 6's, four 9's), 3 outs to the nuts (4's)
97x: 13 outs (three 5's, three 6's, three 8's, four T's), 3 outs to the nuts (5's)


In total each hand has 86 outs. However, 8764 has 58 nut outs (~67% of the outs), while 8654 has only 50 (~58% of the outs). So the difference in hand values is actually much greater than what was posted in this thread. From looking at the above scenarios it's clear that the hand with the higher gap loses value more quickly as the flop cards get higher.

This doesn't take into account other flops that may be favorable. Since I'm not a PLO player I don't know what these are, but I suspect that top two + a straight draw is good. In that case it should be intuitive that the hand with higher cards (i.e. lower gap) will yield stronger combo made hands + draws.

And I think Vanessa's point about not getting re-drawn is very relevant. From looking at the starting cards and flops above I think it's pretty clear that when you hit a draw on the turn your hand will be more likely to hold up when you have 8764.

Posted about 6 years ago

Trix

Avatar for Trix

141 posts
Joined 01/2008

Thought it was a pretty good introduction and it definitely cleared up some things for me. Thanks.

Posted about 6 years ago

udownwithvpp

Avatar for udownwithvpp

1143 posts
Joined 04/2008

I loved the slide with the duck and the donkey. The only part that slowed the video down was the 8654 8764 part, but I got what you were trying to say (it wasn't that bad in the video). As far as I know, there's nothing out like this yet for plo so I can't wait to get through this series.

Posted almost 6 years ago

violtu

Avatar for violtu

120 posts
Joined 07/2008



In total each hand has 86 outs. However, 8764 has 58 nut outs (~67% of the outs), while 8654 has only 50 (~58% of the outs).



Yes im confused as well. I used to think that 8764 is better hand than 8654. However this in this video slide says:
"when the gap in the run is high, the hand makes many more nut draws". So unless its a typo, i dont understand how.
Also in other PLO vids (namely Mad Poter series) rbk said that he preffers gap at the upper side over lower. And that he preffers gaps over no gaps.
What the hell???

Posted almost 6 years ago

Cblanks

Avatar for Cblanks

102 posts
Joined 03/2008

Thanks PygmyHero, that really cleared it up

also series is gonna rock...

Posted almost 6 years ago

praetor

Avatar for praetor

1 posts
Joined 01/2008

so was it a typo in the video or what?

Posted almost 6 years ago

Mrrpb

Avatar for Mrrpb

332 posts
Joined 08/2008

Awesome.

69anything! sounds like a good sn imo.

Posted over 5 years ago

DirtBox

Avatar for DirtBox

14 posts
Joined 04/2008

What tracking programs support PLO? I notice when I have been testing out the PLO tables HEM doesn't work. Thanks.

Posted over 5 years ago

Neuroxic77

Avatar for Neuroxic77

1 posts
Joined 09/2008

chipwhacker

Avatar for chipwhacker

17 posts
Joined 11/2008

1st video i've watched on deucescracked. Excellent primer for low stakes plo.
It has already saved me a ton of money. Thanks.

Posted over 5 years ago

linuxrocks

Avatar for linuxrocks

4 posts
Joined 01/2009

4 choose 3 is equal to 4, not 6. Minor point.

Posted about 5 years ago

varianceowns

Avatar for varianceowns

2 posts
Joined 02/2009

Omahahaha

Avatar for Omahahaha

25 posts
Joined 05/2009

4 choose 3 is equal to 4, not 6. Minor point.



Yeah I was thinking about this as well, (Danglers when trying to make a wrap)
I think the maths does make a significant difference, however the main intent of the point being made was how bad Danglers are for the value of your hand.
This point is still valid, but I too believe that its only 4 times better no to have a dangler when trying to make a wrap.
Feel free to comment or correct me if I am wrong.

Cheers

Posted almost 5 years ago

Omahahaha

Avatar for Omahahaha

25 posts
Joined 05/2009

OK I think that I may have misunderstood the intent of the statement, but I am still not 100% sure.

It seems to be that there are not 6 times more combination that a KQJT that can flop a wrap draw (using 3 cards from your hand to have the wrap) compared with say KQJ3 (with a dangler)
EG: KQJ10 (since order does not matter, eg KQJ = JQK)
The 4 choose 3 options are: KQJ, KQ10, KJ10 QJ10
So 4 times more 3 card hand combination which can produce a wrap (compared to KQJ3 hand)

However there may be 6 times more flops which produce a wrap draw for a KQJ10 hand compared to KQJ3 hand. (HOW DO I DETERMINE THIS?)

Further clarification or insight would be greatly appreciated.

Cheers

Posted almost 5 years ago

DJ Sensei

Avatar for DJ Sensei

3281 posts
Joined 10/2007

OK I think that I may have misunderstood the intent of the statement, but I am still not 100% sure.

It seems to be that there are not 6 times more combination that a KQJT that can flop a wrap draw (using 3 cards from your hand to have the wrap) compared with say KQJ3 (with a dangler)
EG: KQJ10 (since order does not matter, eg KQJ = JQK)
The 4 choose 3 options are: KQJ, KQ10, KJ10 QJ10
So 4 times more 3 card hand combination which can produce a wrap (compared to KQJ3 hand)

However there may be 6 times more flops which produce a wrap draw for a KQJ10 hand compared to KQJ3 hand. (HOW DO I DETERMINE THIS?)

Further clarification or insight would be greatly appreciated.

Cheers



I don't really think you need to expend much energy to figure something like this out. You know that KQJT is awesome and KQJ3 is decent (depending on suits), so the exact numbers shouldn't affect your decisions one way or another. While these combinatorics exercises can certainly be interesting, its better to spend your time focusing on practical issues that will impact your game directly.

Posted almost 5 years ago




HomePoker ForumsPot Limit Omaha → 2 X 6 : Episode One