PLO-Bad run...betting too fast/much? (1 Viewer)

Zajac

Pair
Joined
Mar 28, 2021
Messages
168
Reaction score
129
Location
Ohio
OK.....not going thru bet by bet.....but asking for an overall approach.....lost 3 big hands always ahead at the time facing draws. Is this the correct play and just live with the swings or should I play slower and bail when draw comes? examples

:ad::kd:xx on a board of :9d::5d::3d:.....get it all in with 2 other players holding :9c::9h:xx (short stack) and :3s::5s:xx (biggest stack). Of course the river is :3h:so I don't get either pot.

:js::ts:xx with a board of:qd::3d::ks: :ac:...all in after the turn vs :kd::kh: xx and river is :3c:

:9c::9s: xx on a board of :9d::7c::4c:...all in vs :ac::qc: xx and the river is a club
 
Standard PLO honestly. Nothing special here. Much worse bad beats will happen involving quads and straight flushes. If you can’t handel these things I’d suggest you pick another game. Play a few thousand hands and you’ll see these are so standard it isn’t worth discussing.

embrace the variance and move forward. FWIW you can also run equities on these and you’ll see you were ahead but not that far ahead.
 
Yeah, need just ride it out. You got the money in good, but can’t win every time. Reload and try again. :cool
 
Yup, what has already been said - these are standard situations in PLO. You want to get it in when you're ahead. You'll often find yourself on the opposite side of these types of situations.

One thought is you may want to be more selective with hand selection preflop. All your hands note just 1 hand combo involved. You want redraw possibilities in PLO. Blockers also help with decisions
 
Last edited:
Welcome to plo! I play ALOT of both 4 and 5 card. What u r describing is typical. The downswings suck for sure. Never slow play, just keep firing with the best hand. Sooner or later it will turn.
 
Standard PLO honestly. Nothing special here. Much worse bad beats will happen involving quads and straight flushes. If you can’t handel these things I’d suggest you pick another game. Play a few thousand hands and you’ll see these are so standard it isn’t worth discussing.

embrace the variance and move forward. FWIW you can also run equities on these and you’ll see you were ahead but not that far ahead.
I can handle it...just making sure play is proper
 
I can handle it...just making sure play is proper
If you want critique on play you’ll need to provide more info on how the hands played out street by street. Did you charge the draws the max? Did you call off after the obvious draws hit? What was your position and what type of players are your opponents. That stuff matters if you really want to improve.

Otherwise, and please don’t take this wrong, but it sounds like a holdem player saying “my aces lost to kings did I play it wrong”? My default answer to that is [insert “no but actually yes meme”]

The process is more important than results but you only shared results.
 
If you want critique on play you’ll need to provide more info on how the hands played out street by street. Did you charge the draws the max? Did you call off after the obvious draws hit? What was your position and what type of players are your opponents. That stuff matters if you really want to improve.

Otherwise, and please don’t take this wrong, but it sounds like a holdem player saying “my aces lost to kings did I play it wrong”? My default answer to that is [insert “no but actually yes meme”]

The process is more important than results but you only shared results.
I stated where the money got all in above....twice after the flop and once after the turn. I wasn't giving a crying bad beat story.....I wasn't looking for a step by step critique if you read the OP. Was only asking do you get it all in as fast as you can when ahead but facing draws. It was a philosophical question.....if you don't want to comment on my question, that's fine.
 
Getting your money in faster is generally better than slower, when you are ahead. Be mindful that holding the current nut hand doesn't always mean you are ahead - eg flopping a straight with no redraws.

Omaha can try your soul. Every contested hand is a chance for a draw to get there or not. When Hero is on the wrong side of these moments time after time, it is easy to lose faith in math / long term +EV decisions.

However, Hero can make one last decision to fold (when it is "proper") that will amount to a lot of money. -=- DrStrange
 
Getting your money in faster is generally better than slower, when you are ahead. Be mindful that holding the current nut hand doesn't always mean you are ahead - eg flopping a straight with no redraws.

Omaha can try your soul. Every contested hand is a chance for a draw to get there or not. When Hero is on the wrong side of these moments time after time, it is easy to lose faith in math / long term +EV decisions.

However, Hero can make one last decision to fold (when it is "proper") that will amount to a lot of money. -=- DrStrange

Thanks.....definitely know sets are very vulnerable......just didn't know if there was a certain equity % minimum to jam.......90/10 is obvious.....55/45? Ahead but at risk......was just curious if there was a point to not get it in right away.
 
Yeah and this is the other hidden "adjustment" for omaha from hold'em. "Safe" runouts after the flop are relatively common in hold'em. In Omaha, they are the exception. Hands changing leaders street by street is the norm. So even if you are the current "leader" you need to make sure you are picking hands that have redraws as well to take away your opponents ability to "improve" to go along with @TheDuke 's advice. The nuts are never known until the river, you should always be evaluating how many ways you can get there, and how many ways the nuts will disappear from your hand.
 
Last edited:
I stated where the money got all in above....twice after the flop and once after the turn. I wasn't giving a crying bad beat story.....I wasn't looking for a step by step critique if you read the OP. Was only asking do you get it all in as fast as you can when ahead but facing draws. It was a philosophical question.....if you don't want to comment on my question, that's fine.
yeah usually you want to get it in with the nuts on the turn. My only exception is maybe when I have a possible shared nutted hand like Broadway, with no redraws. Otherwise, you want to get as much money in the middle as possible in those situations. maybe a little more variance, but over the long haul you’ll make way more money that way.
 
Honestly the hands you shared to me come across as bad beat posts without much in the way of strategy to consider

In the long run you will make money on the 70/30 spots. In the short-run you may experience a lot of pain

If your room permits you to run it multiple times and you are typically getting it in as an equity favorite, running more than once is advantageous.

It'll be far less likely you'll get scooped, so the variance won't be as punishing

I have a guy in my games who only goes once and I've lost with 96% and 97.5% equity against him, and he's not even Cuban!
 
Honestly the hands you shared to me come across as bad beat posts without much in the way of strategy to consider

In the long run you will make money on the 70/30 spots. In the short-run you may experience a lot of pain

If your room permits you to run it multiple times and you are typically getting it in as an equity favorite, running more than once is advantageous.

It'll be far less likely you'll get scooped, so the variance won't be as punishing

I have a guy in my games who only goes once and I've lost with 96% and 97.5% equity against him, and he's not even Cuban!
It's not more advantageous, the equity is the same. Less variance sure, but there is no pleasure without pain.
 
It's not more advantageous, the equity is the same. Less variance sure, but there is no pleasure without pain.

It is advantageous to run multiple times while an equity favorite

Take as an extreme example when I lost with 97.5% equity. If my opponent ran it twice, he can never one-outer me two times, so at worst we will split the pot
 
It is advantageous to run multiple times while an equity favorite

Take as an extreme example when I lost with 97.5% equity. If my opponent ran it twice, he can never one-outer me two times, so at worst we will split the pot

Yes but the odds of him hitting his one outer double, so your equity is the same. I'm surprised you don't know this.
 
Yes but the odds of him hitting his one outer double, so your equity is the same. I'm surprised you don't know this.

Ok, let's run it three times then when he has a one-outer. Now I'm always guaranteed 2/3rds of the pot and will always profit. You sure have a hard-on for seeking me out to argue against anything I say.
 
Ok, let's run it three times then when he has a one-outer. Now I'm always guaranteed 2/3rds of the pot and will always profit. You sure have a hard-on for seeking me out to argue against anything I say.

Anything this is nothing personal against you, it's just a mathematical fact that the equity doesn't change no matter how many times you run it.
The variance does, for sure, but if you run it three times you're three times as likely to run into the one outer. Sure, you guarantee yourself a profit on that specific hand, but now you're increasingly less likely to scoop.

I'm really surprised that as a pro you don't know this.
 
OP, it reduces your variance by getting it in later, but also kills your action. A set might not pay your flush off when board doesn’t pair and a couple straights get there. That’s how I’d think about it at least

If you are trying to reduce variance so much that willing to sacrifice significant EV, probably find a different game. Playing low variance PLO is a terrible strat
 
You get all in while ahead.... Variance is a real b.... sometimes
 
Anything this is nothing personal against you, it's just a mathematical fact that the equity doesn't change no matter how many times you run it.
The variance does, for sure, but if you run it three times you're three times as likely to run into the one outer. Sure, you guarantee yourself a profit on that specific hand, but now you're increasingly less likely to scoop.

I'm really surprised that as a pro you don't know this.

It's also a mathematical fact that my post doesn't say anything about changing the equities, and mentions the variance instead.

I'm surprised as a professional critic of mr you didn't read my post correctly
 
It's also a mathematical fact that my post doesn't say anything about changing the equities, and mentions the variance instead.

I'm surprised as a professional critic of mr you didn't read my post correctly
You said it's advantageous. Over the long haul it isn't. Stop being a nit and you might get more action.
 
Although if your opponents are spewy, a case could be made for delaying those jams for safe turns. Much bigger equity advantage if only one card to come.
 
You said it's advantageous. Over the long haul it isn't.

I did say it's more advantageous, because it makes the variance less punishing, see my quote highlighted below

Also, perhaps you missed it, but the OP experienced a number of spots where he was an equity favorite and got the short-end of the stick, and it's obviously affecting his game somewhat that he's questioning fairly standard spots, and the variance of those all happening in a short span of time are taking their toll.

Honestly the hands you shared to me come across as bad beat posts without much in the way of strategy to consider

In the long run you will make money on the 70/30 spots. In the short-run you may experience a lot of pain

If your room permits you to run it multiple times and you are typically getting it in as an equity favorite, running more than once is advantageous.

It'll be far less likely you'll get scooped, so the variance won't be as punishing


I have a guy in my games who only goes once and I've lost with 96% and 97.5% equity against him, and he's not even Cuban!


Stop being a nit and you might get more action.

PLONewbie12345 is that you? I've been playing for a living for 2 years at the end of next month, I get plenty of action because gamboolers are gonna gambool. And it looks like trolls are gonna troll, so I'll just pop you on my ignore list and stop feeding you further.
 
I wasn’t trolling, just responding to the fallacy that ”running more than once is advantageous.” Sorry you can’t take a little criticism.
 

Create an account or login to comment

You must be a member in order to leave a comment

Create account

Create an account and join our community. It's easy!

Log in

Already have an account? Log in here.

Back
Top Bottom