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

Time Link to 00:41:57

IN THE NAME OF BALANCE is it alright to c/r the flop smallish like 2.5 the villains cbet here which we could also potentially do with say KK34 or 5789 and perhaps worse hands that will often just be c/fing the turn if he calls the flop since the board is not particularly wet and I would think he should have to fold a decent portion of his range to the c/r or is there a distinct reason for why donking is superior?
Also are you donking this flop with the hands I listed above or basically anything other then your monsters?

Time Link to 00:49:17

Just wondering if you'd have a c/ring range on this flop this deep (with an SPR of about 27) and OOP?
I think it would make perfect sense to me if you didn't considering we want to start building the pot and are fine with the deep guy folding but if you do could you name a single hand that would be in your c/ring range just so I can get an idea?
No problem if you don't want to.

Just wondering if you'd have a c/ring range on this flop this deep (with an SPR of about 27) and OOP?
I think it would make perfect sense to me if you didn't considering we want to start building the pot and are fine with the deep guy folding but if you do could you name a single hand that would be in your c/ring range just so I can get an idea?
No problem if you don't want to.

We are deep enough that we can check raise and fold to a shove, so you should be able to open up your check raise range to include some bluffs.

IN THE NAME OF BALANCE is it alright to c/r the flop smallish like 2.5 the villains cbet here which we could also potentially do with say KK34 or 5789 and perhaps worse hands that will often just be c/fing the turn if he calls the flop since the board is not particularly wet and I would think he should have to fold a decent portion of his range to the c/r or is there a distinct reason for why donking is superior?
Also are you donking this flop with the hands I listed above or basically anything other then your monsters?

Given the board texture I will probably have more c/r and c/c hands than donk betting hands. Our range for wanting to make plays at this board is going to be TONS of pair+draw type hands given the specific board texture (unsuited ace on two tone board) and so I think he will be able to play very well against donk bets (calling a HUGE part of his range and seeing a turn card).

DJ's play in this hand is very non-standard and clearly involves some degree of leveling.

I think c/r a hand like KK34 turns out hand into a bluff a lot of the time since we aren't going to have 2pr+ here particularly often and can be dominated by better made hand/FD combos a lot. I don't hate turning this hand into a bluff on a later street, I just want more information before I decide to do that.

I don't particularly like donking a hand like 5789 with spades. When I make donk betting plays I try to do them in spots where I have very good visibility and not a lot of RIO.

Given the board texture I will probably have more c/r and c/c hands than donk betting hands. Our range for wanting to make plays at this board is going to be TONS of pair+draw type hands given the specific board texture (unsuited ace on two tone board) and so I think he will be able to play very well against donk bets (calling a HUGE part of his range and seeing a turn card).

DJ's play in this hand is very non-standard and clearly involves some degree of leveling.

Ok yeh that explains a lot.
Thanks for the replies.

Time Link to 00:07:22

Isn't this contradictory?

If we bet big for value against a strong range, it's because we expect Villain to call more often. Doesn't that mean a bluff is less effective against a strong range?

If we think Villain will fold to a NF blocker more often, that means we shouldn't bet the actual NF big, right?

I think the bluffing big vs a strong range thing is dependent on certain other things.
Basically our only bluffing play vs a perceived strong range should be to bluff big as a smaller bet will likely be hero called and just end up losing us more $ when we could have just given up.
The better the villain i.e can hand read, has unlocked the fold button, understands relative hand strength etc the more likely our bluff is to work. Obviously vs the most show down bound we just vbet bigger lighter i.e with 2nd/3rd nuts too as their 'strong' range can involve a lot more stubborn shit that would of folded on an earlier street in the hands of a good player like flopped top+bottom pair that has turned into 3rd+bottom pair by the river.
Also board texture comes into it.
I would think we should often be more apt to give up if the river double pairs (assuming say we open HU in position and he calls 2 streets on a 449T9 board) compared to if a multiple draw completing scare hits the river and our opponent checks to us after having lead the turn in which case even vs somebody who can't hand read well or doesn't like folding we can make a successful bluff a decent amount of the time due to the scare being so obvious.
I'm sure lots of other concepts come into it too.
I hope that explains something (and is actually correct).

Isn't this contradictory?

If we bet big for value against a strong range, it's because we expect Villain to call more often. Doesn't that mean a bluff is less effective against a strong range?

If we think Villain will fold to a NF blocker more often, that means we shouldn't bet the actual NF big, right?

Well, we should be bluffing much less often against a strong range, because people are obviously less likely to fold a strong hand. But if we do think a bluff can work, it will need to be a big bluff because people simply don't fold strong hands to small bets. From a balance perspective (and probably more importantly, since we're mostly valuebetting against strong hands), we also want to be valuebetting big in these spots.

If we have the NF blocker, that means our opponent can't have that many strong hands, so we don't need to bet super big. This also helps with balance, because if we have the nut flush we probably aren't going to mash pot. And for what its worth, flush situations tend to play out differently than most other situations in PLO, so keep that in mind.

I wasn't sure what proper protocol for posting hand histories relevant to the video material was: here, or in PLO forum with link here, or just in PLO forum?

So I posted in the PLO forum with a link here:

Appropriate use of river x/r vbet?

I wasn't sure what proper protocol for posting hand histories relevant to the video material was: here, or in PLO forum with link here, or just in PLO forum?

So I posted in the PLO forum with a link here:

Appropriate use of river x/r vbet?

You did it right! (posting, that is. see other thread for strategic advice)