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

Nice first video Orestto!
Some interesting spots & good explanations of what to consider & alternatives.
Don't want to comment too much on the content as I haven't watched that many PLO vids here to compare, so I'll leave the more detailed comments for others.
A few minor sound issues, but overall a good first effort on DC!

Finally!!!! An Orestto video! This makes my day. Do we get more than one episode of this, I hope?

Well done, both of you! Great to see such great forum contributors making a video.

awesome looks like a great watch

Time Link to 00:01:50

The small bet is a good idea in theory but I think in this particular situation he is probably not check-folding that much.

His 3-bet range is pretty tight here out of the BB, and most of the hands are either AA** or mid-high run downs which have smacked this board. I think he's capable of check-raising a lot of stuff just because he doesn't want to c-bet and get called and have a million board changing cards come on the turn, and there are only a few hands he would c/f.

Bet/folding small also makes me a bit sick because it's such a wet board, and we have a hand that still has equity a fair amount of the time, but probably just not enough to bet/call if we bet small, but it's high enough that it sucks to allow him to get us to fold that equity. It's 31% vs an AA** range, flipping vs a QJT type hand, still even has 36% vs a wrap with spades - he may not check/raise these necessarily but just giving you a baseline to how annoying it is to put money in the pot and have to fold getting better than 2:1.

Thanks for the feedback guys, keep it coming! Sorry about the audio quality, I definitely need to get a better mic.

Yes, the small bet in that hand is better if the SPR is slightly higher. Say there was no limper and we had opened from the BTN and faced a 3bet, in that case the call preflop and small bet on flop seem much more profitable*. With the limper, pot-iso-raise and pot-3bet the SPR is pretty low so the small bet might not induce that many change of plans from the 3bettor, and I agree with Teahuppo's check back.

* Easier to bet/fold, and worse risk/reward for 3bettor to check-shove, plus with more money left behind a weak player will certainly x/call against a small bet instead of correctly x/shoving, or x/folding a hand with enough equity to call. We'd also be able to use our positional advantage more effectively on turn/river.

Hey congrats on your first video Orestto!

Great stuff Mr. O

Oooooooooh help us Jesus. Good to see you making vids. Nice job.

Neat video. You kinda sound like Skjervoy.

Great job as usual, Orestto, and thanks for the session. A PLO series of yours would be an epic addition to the DC library.

Neat video. You kinda sound like Skjervoy.

Hahaha, do I?

Thanks everyone for showing your support. I really enjoyed the whole video-making process and look forward to putting some more content out there. Thanks again, Teahuppo.

Wow awesome! Makes me almost shed a tear to see this

Time Link to 00:20:12

I understand why he would bet this turn bigger.

But is there a need to be balanced?

BTN is a huge fish, I really doubt he is paying attention to your bet sizing. MP has 1 "fishy" player left to act and is in a really tough spot. So even if he was aware of your bet sizing "tell" he still has his hands tied a little.

It's not necessarily just because of balance, we'd be pretty happy if they folded, so we want to increase our fold equity, and if they do happen to call and fold on the river then we'd be happier getting more money in on the turn as well. I'd probably want to bet slightly bigger with all of my turn leading range, there's enough draws out there that you can get value from, and since you're repping the straight then on blanks you're almost always winning the pot and so the bigger it is the better, as long as we retain FE on the river with a decently big bet.

Time Link to 00:04:21

I would just cbet a polarized range with this SPR. Typically his c/shove range is going to be hands that are going to be more nutted and are less afraid of giving a free card, and we don't really put him in too tough of a decision when we have no room to 3 barrel.

Time Link to 00:08:13

Given that we basically always have the best hand here but have shown no strength at all, I kind of like betting like $14 on the river. I'd rather look polarized here than going for a milking bet, because I feel like his bluff catchers look a lot less strong against a wide range of milking bet-able hands (any straight, any K, any flush) whereas when we bet larger and look like we just have nothing I think he can potentially level himself into a call often enough to be more profitable in the long run.

Time Link to 00:13:10

In my experience, I just haven't seen too many players bluff raise river donk bet at PLO50/100. Especially against a complete unknown it seems a little optimistic to hope he ends up raising as a bluff. We also look pretty strong even to block bet the river just because similarly, people don't take that line particularly often without a hand they really like. If I had a read (ie hand sample, I mouseover and he is a scandi) I'd like the play a lot more. I also think a lot of his "strong" hands to get to the river like 77 and T7 that he would bet himself for value will often end up calling our blocking bet whereas they tend to bet rather big on the river themselves and we can get in more value that way.

Given that we basically always have the best hand here but have shown no strength at all, I kind of like betting like $14 on the river. I'd rather look polarized here than going for a milking bet, because I feel like his bluff catchers look a lot less strong against a wide range of milking bet-able hands (any straight, any K, any flush) whereas when we bet larger and look like we just have nothing I think he can potentially level himself into a call often enough to be more profitable in the long run.

Interesting, yea against players that can level themselves into calling here I agree. Against players that are just not going to think much about ranges and just see a small bet and call with whatever they have, and fold to a big bet unless they have a straight or something I still like a smaller bet.

In my experience, I just haven't seen too many players bluff raise river donk bet at PLO50/100. Especially against a complete unknown it seems a little optimistic to hope he ends up raising as a bluff. We also look pretty strong even to block bet the river just because similarly, people don't take that line particularly often without a hand they really like. If I had a read (ie hand sample, I mouseover and he is a scandi) I'd like the play a lot more. I also think a lot of his "strong" hands to get to the river like 77 and T7 that he would bet himself for value will often end up calling our blocking bet whereas they tend to bet rather big on the river themselves and we can get in more value that way.

Again pretty opponent dependent. This guy apparently bluff-raised the turn, so I think I still like my plan for the hand. I'm not just hoping he bluff-raises, I want to get value from a lot of the straights or flushes that get there on the river, that will check back a lot of the time if we check. I wouldn't agree that someone would just call with T7 on the river facing a blocking bet from what could very easily be a non-boat though, not with these stack sizes. Maybe 77 would, but that hand might not bet as big anyway, trying to get calls from our weak perceived range.

I also disagree with our blocking bet looking really strong. Yes, it looks stronger than checking, but it doesn't look like the nuts. I mean blocking bets are usually defensive bets with weak hands that don't want to have to call a big bet, not sure why an apparently aggressive opponent would interpret that as strong. If he was a scandi I'd actually be more willing to check, especially on blanks expecting him to put us on a draw and bluff/vbet worse a lot of the time.

Interesting, yea against players that can level themselves into calling here I agree. Against players that are just not going to think much about ranges and just see a small bet and call with whatever they have, and fold to a big bet unless they have a straight or something I still like a smaller bet.

He only needs to call the big bet ~33% of the time to make it break even vs. the small bet, but it seems like he can only have a bluff catcher here so a lot of times people are somewhat inelastic to bet sizing on the river to a certain point. Like he'll call half pot just as often as he will call one third pot, and he will call three quarters about 70% as often as he'll call half pot. Getting him to call a small bet with a hand we beat feels good but I think that the EV of betting bigger in a spot where he probably has a bluff catcher tends to be higher.

The only other thing to consider is sometimes he's x/calling with a straight so we do lose that extra money those times we bet bigger and value cut ourselves. But yea, if the board had run out like K984K, I'd like the bigger bet. Also if we had the nut straight ourselves a bigger bet would be also good, since we're pretty sure he doesn't have a flush or a boat here. Nice.

Are there going to be more episodes of this series soon?

Are there going to be more episodes of this series soon?

+1, top stuff

Time Link to 00:35:08

Would you ever c-bet here against 2 players or HU (IP and OOP) only with the straight draw and without a FD?

I think 4way the x/c is very good and pretty much the only option but if you are HU oop c-bet and get raised you are still in a ugly spot.

So far very good discussion, i want more!

If they're really passive I wouldn't mind c-betting against 2 players or HU in position. OOP I would probably c-bet only HU. The most important thing is not get raised, so as the likelihood of that increased you want to c-bet less. You will get raised more often with more players, especially if they're aggressive. If SPR is 4 or lower I would also probably not c-bet as it's pretty easy for someone to shove over with pair + flush draw. OOP you want to c-bet a stronger range because you can't check back on the turn when you don't improve, you have to check and basically give up. Thanks for commenting!

Btw AKT3ds is probably a fold pre thinking about it more. I'm not sure any Axxx hand is profitable call vs a very AA heavy range with these stack sizes, and we don't know yet that he isn't just pot/getting it in on most flops.

http://www.propokertools.com/simulations/graph?g=oh&h1=AhKhTd3d&h2=AA%2A%2A&s=classic

Haven't run the calculations but looks like our 33% equity pre and shape of this graph make it not so profitable.

Yep. We've been talking and agreeing about tons of preflop spots this month so here's one more. SPR is too low to maneuver post-flop even IP but not too low to get it in profitably even if we hit one pair considering his range is too AA heavy and so we have a dead sidecard a lot of the time. Fortunately in this hand he turned out to play super passively, but usually we'll face a big bet on that flop and we'd have to fold top pair or get it in bad. If the SPR would be higher, like we open BTN for 2.5x and he 3bets I think flatting is fine, but after the pot iso-raise and pot-3bet it sucks to fold but I think we have to as well unless we know he 3bets light.

Are there going to be more episodes of this series soon?

+2