# Poker Video: Pot-Limit Omaha by n0whereman (Micro/Small Stakes)

## PLO by Numbers: Episode Two

Get the Flash Player to see this player.

### PLO by Numbers: Episode Two by n0whereman

N0whereman talks calling 4-bets, flop frequency, and connected-ness.

n0whereman takes you through the math behind PLO! In this comprehensive series, you'll start with a brief overview of basic poker math, then move into PLO specific topics including PF ranges, SPR analysis, 3-betting, draws, flop equity analysis and many other topics, including an overview of the tools you can use to perform your own analysis.

### Video Details

• Game:
• Stakes: Micro/Small Stakes
• 66 minutes long
• Posted over 1 year ago

## Comments for PLO by Numbers: Episode Two

or track by Email or RSS

#### rubbishaka80

549 posts
Joined 07/2007

I believe for the 3-card runs you have to take out the 0-, 1- and 2-gap rundowns like so:

akq- !\$0g !\$1g !\$2g

That would give you 6.47% frequency for 3-card runs.

edit: Unless a 4-card rundown is a 3-card rundown by definition. Which would be fair.

#### StraitBizness

817 posts
Joined 04/2011

You touched on it, but examples from these common scenarios in later episodes would be cool. The one in particular is the SPR of ~6 in a 3b pot 150BB deep like you said. Doesn't it kind of suck as the PFR who c-bets too? When they reraise I sometimes cry.

11 posts
Joined 05/2010

Thx for all the extra information about Propokertools. I use it fairly frequently, but haven't used the macros or extra 'wildcard' functions too much. You said this [t-5][t-5][t-5][t-5]\$ds type of hand is a hand that people like to 3-bet frequently. I was interested in what the hot-cold EV would be for a hand like this.

Against a random hand (****) it was only 53.95%! In NLHE, Q8o is pretty close, with 53.6%, or Q9o with 55.36%, against 1 random hand. In NLHE, neither of these would be considered 3-betting hands (not based on their showdown equity). In NLHE, hands that close to 50% equity are rarely 3-betting hands (you might as well be 3-betting 72o).

These 'middle rundown' hands ARE very "playable", depending upon how they connect on the flop. However, it just shows how these pretty hands have only slightly better-than-average equity.

11 posts
Joined 05/2010

This isn't "Call flop and fold"(?), but rather Call Preflop and Fold on the Flop (when you don't have enough equity).

11 posts
Joined 05/2010

I'm sure you'll be getting into discussions about this on future videos, but the key question here, unanswered, is "How do I determine if I have enough equity, 32%, on THIS flop, to call?"

It's really about counting outs, and I've been surprised at how weak I can be on the flop to get it all-in against an overpair. If I put my opponent exactly on AA** and I only flop a pair of 6s with 9876, then I have 11 outs(!), any 9876 to hit 2 pair or better. 11 outs already puts me at well over 40% equity, without include straight or flush draws I might have. I might hit my 2 pair and lose to an A on the river, but I am still waaaayy behind on the flop (pair of 6s vs As) , but with more than enough equity to get it all-in. (not like AA versus 66 on the flop in NLHE).

#### Entity

8233 posts
Joined 11/2006

Thx for all the extra information about Propokertools. I use it fairly frequently, but haven't used the macros or extra 'wildcard' functions too much. You said this [t-5][t-5][t-5][t-5]\$ds type of hand is a hand that people like to 3-bet frequently. I was interested in what the hot-cold EV would be for a hand like this.

Against a random hand (****) it was only 53.95%! In NLHE, Q8o is pretty close, with 53.6%, or Q9o with 55.36%, against 1 random hand. In NLHE, neither of these would be considered 3-betting hands (not based on their showdown equity). In NLHE, hands that close to 50% equity are rarely 3-betting hands (you might as well be 3-betting 72o).

These 'middle rundown' hands ARE very "playable", depending upon how they connect on the flop. However, it just shows how these pretty hands have only slightly better-than-average equity.

Hot and cold equity isn't nearly as important in PLO as it is in NLHE. In general you want to be looking at a combination of hot & cold equity + floppability, which can be simulated using the PPT graphs (look at the relative distribution of equity vs another range of hands).

Rob

#### chewchew

50 posts
Joined 09/2010

Pretty neat.
Was pretty surprised doublesuitedness only adds 2%, thought it would be more along the lines of 3-4%.

One thing about cold4betting, some people are capable of 3betting and folding to a 4b so there is that bonus to 4betting rundowns.
Besides the person with the "initiative" usually has added fold equity on dry, paired or ace high boards.

Also if I'm thinking correctly, you'll need 50% overall equity to breakeven, say you have 33%pre and call a 4b, you'll need 58% postflop or else you will be on the losing end.
33% of 66bb=22bb -> you'll need 78bb more
78bb of 134bb=58% equity needed for overall 50%
And that's just for being breakeven. This gets better if preflop equities are closer obviously, like with ds middle type runs vs AA.

Add in the many flops where we can't continue, wondering how many hands we should call depending on position and tendencies of opponent. Or rather which hands one should 3b. Like you said this should make us even more selective and conscious of our opponent's range, especially when we are only playing 100bb deep.
Say our opponent only 4b aces then middle type runs are obviously fine (straight curve), if he 4b dominating runs then it's obviously not as good, anymore etc etc

#### n0whereman

2916 posts
Joined 01/2008

I believe for the 3-card runs you have to take out the 0-, 1- and 2-gap rundowns like so:

akq- !\$0g !\$1g !\$2g

That would give you 6.47% frequency for 3-card runs.

edit: Unless a 4-card rundown is a 3-card rundown by definition. Which would be fair.

Nah I think you're probably right. Makes that theoretical dude even tighter!

#### n0whereman

2916 posts
Joined 01/2008

You touched on it, but examples from these common scenarios in later episodes would be cool. The one in particular is the SPR of ~6 in a 3b pot 150BB deep like you said. Doesn't it kind of suck as the PFR who c-bets too? When they reraise I sometimes cry.

I can try checking out the forums for a good example.

#### n0whereman

2916 posts
Joined 01/2008

Thx for all the extra information about Propokertools. I use it fairly frequently, but haven't used the macros or extra 'wildcard' functions too much. You said this [t-5][t-5][t-5][t-5]\$ds type of hand is a hand that people like to 3-bet frequently. I was interested in what the hot-cold EV would be for a hand like this.

Against a random hand (****) it was only 53.95%! In NLHE, Q8o is pretty close, with 53.6%, or Q9o with 55.36%, against 1 random hand. In NLHE, neither of these would be considered 3-betting hands (not based on their showdown equity). In NLHE, hands that close to 50% equity are rarely 3-betting hands (you might as well be 3-betting 72o).

These 'middle rundown' hands ARE very "playable", depending upon how they connect on the flop. However, it just shows how these pretty hands have only slightly better-than-average equity.

As long as you're saying all of this stuff with the mindset of "it's all neat to see, but I can't think about these hands the way I think about them in NLHE _because_ of the playability/etc factors", I'm cool with it.

#### n0whereman

2916 posts
Joined 01/2008

This isn't "Call flop and fold"(?), but rather Call Preflop and Fold on the Flop (when you don't have enough equity).

Yeah you're right.

#### n0whereman

2916 posts
Joined 01/2008

I'm sure you'll be getting into discussions about this on future videos, but the key question here, unanswered, is "How do I determine if I have enough equity, 32%, on THIS flop, to call?"

Yeah we'll revisit this in later eps.

#### n0whereman

2916 posts
Joined 01/2008

One thing about cold4betting, some people are capable of 3betting and folding to a 4b so there is that bonus to 4betting rundowns.
Besides the person with the "initiative" usually has added fold equity on dry, paired or ace high boards.

Also if I'm thinking correctly, you'll need 50% overall equity to breakeven, say you have 33%pre and call a 4b, you'll need 58% postflop or else you will be on the losing end.
33% of 66bb=22bb -> you'll need 78bb more
78bb of 134bb=58% equity needed for overall 50%
And that's just for being breakeven. This gets better if preflop equities are closer obviously, like with ds middle type runs vs AA.

Yeah I'm fine with all of this, my point is that generally speaking you can do even better by flatting with the rundowns. Other hands might be better for the situation you describe.

#### StraitBizness

817 posts
Joined 04/2011

Just finished the video with notes. Some good information in there, particularly with regards to the 4-bet calling example. I had read about calculating the area under the graphs in Donkr's PLO From Scratch article (Bugs was the forum member who wrote it), but he didn't delve into the details.

So...I pretty much could make a big exel calculator to do that for me quicker, but I'd just have to punch in lots of numbers like the bounds for each area, change stack sizes if need be and what not? Is that plausible?

#### n0whereman

2916 posts
Joined 01/2008

Just finished the video with notes. Some good information in there, particularly with regards to the 4-bet calling example. I had read about calculating the area under the graphs in Donkr's PLO From Scratch article (Bugs was the forum member who wrote it), but he didn't delve into the details.

So...I pretty much could make a big exel calculator to do that for me quicker, but I'd just have to punch in lots of numbers like the bounds for each area, change stack sizes if need be and what not? Is that plausible?

yeah you could do that - there's definitely a formula that can be made out of the stuff I wrote.

#### ichipd

57 posts
Joined 03/2010

Thoughts on this as a 7.17% 3b range say btn v co (it is simple and there are some double ups but I figured it would do)... also what would be the best way to add hand types such as AxKx*x*y and KxQy9x7y?

4%!RRRR!RRR, A[9+][9+][9+]!RRRR!RRR, [99-QQ][99-QQ]!RRRR!RRR, \$0g: xx!5, \$1g: xx!3!4!5, \$2g: xx!3!4!5!6

had to put a space in every : xx due to

#### n0whereman

2916 posts
Joined 01/2008

Thoughts on this as a 7.17% 3b range say btn v co (it is simple and there are some double ups but I figured it would do)... also what would be the best way to add hand types such as AxKx*x*y and KxQy9x7y?

4%!RRRR!RRR, A[9+][9+][9+]!RRRR!RRR, [99-QQ][99-QQ]!RRRR!RRR, \$0g: xx!5, \$1g: xx!3!4!5, \$2g: xx!3!4!5!6

had to put a space in every : xx due to

It's a good start, for sure. There's lots of not-as-well connected ss/ds hands (eg qt86) you could definitely throw in there too. If the CO is fairly loose, 7% is on the low side for a BTN 3b% imo.

#### ichipd

57 posts
Joined 03/2010

It's a good start, for sure. There's lots of not-as-well connected ss/ds hands (eg qt86) you could definitely throw in there too. If the CO is fairly loose, 7% is on the low side for a BTN 3b% imo.

Agreed this is from a micro/small stakes perspective... there aren't too many people 3b'ing 10% but I am sure I will just work through various ranges. Thank you.

#### n0whereman

2916 posts
Joined 01/2008

Agreed this is from a micro/small stakes perspective... there aren't too many people 3b'ing 10% but I am sure I will just work through various ranges. Thank you.

Oh I was thinking that this was you talking about what you would 3-b in that spot as the BTN. I do think that the range you have is pretty decent for a rando micro stakes guy 3-betting 7% otb.

#### DuckOff777

4 posts
Joined 11/2010

I'm sure you'll be getting into discussions about this on future videos, but the key question here, unanswered, is "How do I determine if I have enough equity, 32%, on THIS flop, to call?"

It's really about counting outs, and I've been surprised at how weak I can be on the flop to get it all-in against an overpair. If I put my opponent exactly on AA** and I only flop a pair of 6s with 9876, then I have 11 outs(!), any 9876 to hit 2 pair or better. 11 outs already puts me at well over 40% equity, without include straight or flush draws I might have. I might hit my 2 pair and lose to an A on the river, but I am still waaaayy behind on the flop (pair of 6s vs As) , but with more than enough equity to get it all-in. (not like AA versus 66 on the flop in NLHE).

a pair is a nobrainer. if you have the rundown, a gutter some backdoor wrap potential and two backdoor flushdraws are normally enough.
for example 6789 w/ 2 bdfd on K35 has 32 % against bare aces

#### TianYuan

63 posts
Joined 12/2007

Hm... can't we just make the EV calc:
Frequency of call * (Potsize * AVG Equity - Flop call) = X
Then compare it to how much we had to call preflop.

IE...
.69*(201.5*.55-64.5)=31.9~
31.9-24.5=7.4~~~~~ bb

Also, accounting for rake is just a question of removing it from whenever we won the pot right?

#### shuttle

3358 posts
Joined 11/2008

Also, accounting for rake is just a question of removing it from whenever we won the pot right?

usually this is the approach

#### nyehehe

77 posts
Joined 02/2010

Just finished the video with notes. Some good information in there, particularly with regards to the 4-bet calling example. I had read about calculating the area under the graphs in Donkr's PLO From Scratch article (Bugs was the forum member who wrote it), but he didn't delve into the details.

So...I pretty much could make a big exel calculator to do that for me quicker, but I'd just have to punch in lots of numbers like the bounds for each area, change stack sizes if need be and what not? Is that plausible?

Is there an easier way of calculating this with the oracle? It is so clever, it should be able to do it for us, right?

HomePoker Videos → PLO by Numbers → Episode Two