A question for Giggles about mucking the NUTS

ComaU

When you folded the NUTS to Sloth in that Omaha game, did you consider the fact that you could have just called his raise and been sure no spade fell on the turn and then commited the rest of your stack ($80) I think?

For those of you that haven't heard about the hand GIGGLES KNEW HE HAD THE NUTS AND STILL FOLDS!

You are way to tight.:)

Since I didnt see the whole hand can one of you post the entire hand on this thread as it is one ive thought enough about.

Jeremy

giggles

Here is a delayed reply. Action as best as I can remember is as follows:

I was the BB and we were playing 1/2 PLO (high only). At the start of the hand I have about 600, sloth has over 400 and G. has about 350. Everyone limps to me (4 way). You folded on SB I think (talk about tight ). I have A A K T double suited (red). I raise to 6 to go. Everyone calls. Flop was KQJ with 2 spades and 1 club. It checks to G. on the button and G. bets the pot (25). I raise it to 85. Sloth from UTG reraised it to 285. G. then goes all-in. I thinks for a bit and folds. I forgot that G.'s all-in is not large enough to reopen the betting on the flop. I was counting on Sloth to go all-in on the flop after G.'s all-in. In retrospect since Sloth can't raise again on the flop I should have called. Folding the nuts in PLO is not too uncommon now that I think about it. The bare nut trips/straights (with no defense - redraws) can be very difficult to play from out of position in some situations.

Axiom_1

I'm curious as to what you thought that you were up against? What sort of hands would your opponents have played this aggresively?

I'm a graduate student in probabilistic inference, and an avid poker player, and this sounds like it would be an interesting hand to do an analysis of. I haven't played pot-limit Omaha, so I can only guess as to what players might be this aggresive with. I would guess that each of them holds one or more of:
-Draw to the nut flush
-A set
-AT

Is that how you appraised the situation as well? Would they have needed even better than that? Let me know, and I'll run some numbers.

ScottyZ

Sorry if this spoils the math fun, but here's how I usually crunch the numbers.

http://twodimes.net/h/?z=555829

ScottyZ

Axiom_1

Actually, it doesn't spoil the fun at all. I use that site too, but it doesn't tell the whole story.

From the history you've given, it sounds like there was about 700 in the pot, and about 250 for you to call (let's call it 300, since you're expecting sloth to go all-in). After sloth's all-in, that would put around 1100 in the pot total.

With the hands the way you've entered them, your odds of winning were 32%, giving you an EV of 352 if you call the 300, which is clearly a call (unless you have a short bankroll). If we change the 2nd player's backdoor club flush draw into a low spade draw (http://twodimes.net/h/?z=557059), your odds shoot up to 43%, for an EV of 473. However, if we instead assume the third player is holding AsTs (http://twodimes.net/h/?z=557060), then your EV drops to 176 on a call of 300, which is definitely a fold.

The interesting part of the analysis is to determine, of the hands that your opponents would play the way they did, how likely are each of them to be dealt, and how much will you win or lose in each situation. This is known as applying a Bayesian Prior. It's done all the time for Hold'em, since the number of possible hands is relatively small. It would be an interesting challenge to do it for Omaha.

teach

I never want to play with Axiom. Scary, scary individual. Not a fun guy.

stpboy

teach wrote:

I never want to play with Axiom. Scary, scary individual. Not a fun guy.

Agreed!

Hork42

ScottyZ wrote:

Sorry if this spoils the math fun, but here's how I usually crunch the numbers.


ScottyZ

i've got my pocket abacus.

giggles

I think Sloth has about 420 to start the hand. So on the flop if I think he's going all-in I have to call about 330. My estimate on the flop is Sloth almost certainly has A T with the nut flush draw. So I'm almost certainlly being freerolled here. The problem is what G. has. With the way the hand played out I thought G. almost certainly did not have A T. My estimate is that he probably has 9 T with either 2 pair or a set or much less likely a flush draw as well. I think it all comes down to the likelihood of him having 2 pairs v.s. a set. How does the number crunch in this scenario?

arkose

i'm not an omaha player, but how often are you going to put someone on the absolute nut hand there? without one person holding exactly AT of spades, its a clear call given the pot odds...

also, if you are sloth, are you going to pump the pot that much on the flop? again, i'm not an omaha player so maybe i shouldn't even try to discuss this but....if you are holding a made str8 with the nut flush draw (one out for the royal even), dont you risk killing all your action with this move? given the second raise to $85, why not smooth call and see what G does.....G might decide to pot commit himself and you can go all-in afterwards when giggles gets stuck in the middle (giggles, if sloth just calls and G moves in, does your fold decision change?).....and if G doesn't (he just calls the $85), your stack size is small enough that you can go all-in on the turn to make sure you get the other 2 to pay the full amount

is this a bad line of thinking for this omaha situation? it just seems like much too good a hand to let the cat out of the bag so soon...and as it was, the made str8 folded........

so basically, what i'm trying to say is, doesn't it seem much more likely he held the nut flush draw with no made str8?

RoyalFlush

I think it was the right fold on Giggles behalf. He has no other redraws. The only thing that could help make him call is if he wanted to go running quads. Flopping the nuts in omaha is usually never the nuts on the river.

BBC Z

i'm not an omaha player, but how often are you going to put someone on the absolute nut hand there?

In Omaha, you have to. I would have figured sloth for the made straight with a raggy flush re-draw. Folding the nut straight with no backup protection has to be in your playbook or you'll bleed massive amounts of cash.

RoyalFlush

Adding a point..
I once held KJQA all double suited and the flop was 5KJ, Turn was a 10 giving me two pairs, nut flush draw and the nut straight. Some guy was holding AQ aswell and folded. I think I would of done the same in his situation aswell. He said his other cards were rags and if the board paired a KJ or complete the flush, his nut straight on the turn would be useless.

You always need to have backup in omaha.

giggles

arkose wrote:

i'm not an omaha player, but how often are you going to put someone on the absolute nut hand there? without one person holding exactly AT of spades, its a clear call given the pot odds...

As others have pointed out, it's almost certain that someone else also has the nuts here. Play some PLO (maybe on-line) and you'll see.

arkose wrote:

also, if you are sloth, are you going to pump the pot that much on the flop? again, i'm not an omaha player so maybe i shouldn't even try to discuss this but....if you are holding a made str8 with the nut flush draw (one out for the royal even), dont you risk killing all your action with this move?

It depends whether he wants my action or not. Had I had a set also, I don't think he would want my action anymore.

arkose wrote:

given the second raise to $85, why not smooth call and see what G does.....G might decide to pot commit himself and you can go all-in afterwards when giggles gets stuck in the middle (giggles, if sloth just calls and G moves in, does your fold decision change?).....and if G doesn't (he just calls the $85), your stack size is small enough that you can go all-in on the turn to make sure you get the other 2 to pay the full amount

That's another way to play it. I probably will get stuck in the middle in this case. It's probably a better play here. Though if you play this way and G. doesn't reraise the flop, be prepared to make the right decision later when the board turns against you, say by pairing up.

arkose wrote:

is this a bad line of thinking for this omaha situation? it just seems like much too good a hand to let the cat out of the bag so soon...and as it was, the made str8 folded........

A good hand in Omaha is different from a good hand in Hold'em. Try it and you'll see.

arkose wrote:

so basically, what i'm trying to say is, doesn't it seem much more likely he held the nut flush draw with no made str8?

Well, those who play their nut flush draw without a made hand this way in PLO need to be very very very rich to avoid going broke quickly. Sloth is not very very rich and he's not broke yet.

ScottyZ

Nice fold.

without one person holding exactly AT of spades, its a clear call given the pot odds...

Don't forget, this is Omaha. As Tx Xs Xx is equally dangerous and considerably more likely.

also, if you are sloth, are you going to pump the pot that much on the flop?

Absolutely. No free cards for a flopped set.

so basically, what i'm trying to say is, doesn't it seem much more likely he held the nut flush draw with no made str8?

It doesn't seem so to me. The naked nut flush draw is a *folding* hand there, not a raising (or calling) hand.

ScottyZ

ComaU

No need to talk about what sloth *could* have had since he had exposed his cards at that point in the hand.

Once G is all in Sloth showed As9sTo.

He did this NOT wanting anymore action then he was already getting.

Axiom_1

giggles wrote:

I think Sloth has about 420 to start the hand. So on the flop if I think he's going all-in I have to call about 330. My estimate on the flop is Sloth almost certainly has A T with the nut flush draw. So I'm almost certainlly being freerolled here. The problem is what G. has. With the way the hand played out I thought G. almost certainly did not have A T. My estimate is that he probably has 9 T with either 2 pair or a set or much less likely a flush draw as well. I think it all comes down to the likelihood of him having 2 pairs v.s. a set. How does the number crunch in this scenario?

Well, if you're confident Sloth has AT with the nut flush draw, then folding is the right move regardless of whether G has a set, 2 pair, or even just a flush draw. If G has 2 pair, your EV is still only about 150 out of a 750 pot (http://twodimes.net/h/?z=568322), which is definitely not worth a call. Even if all G has is a flush draw (http://twodimes.net/h/?z=568325), you're still only looking at getting 240 back from a 750 pot. So the relative likelihood of the three really doesn't matter.

All I can say is kudos for reading your opponents this well, and having the guts to lay down the nuts!

PhallicPhil

I'm loving the PLO discussions. I've been playing a lot of it lately and it can be quite profitable if you have the patience to wait for the nuts. Because the best possible hand is going to win the majority of most LARGE pots. The one thing to watch for, in my experience, is for players who overvalue hands that tend to win in hold'em. For example, I see a LOT of people willing to put all their money in on the flop w/ two pair. Two pair is pretty garbage in omaha -- especially against several players. The philosophy that money saved is money earned in poker really applies to PLO -- as sloth so nicely demonstated. It took me a long time (and a lot of money) to learn that you have to lay down seemingly good hands like bottom trips in the face of a pot sized raise.

However, PLO also has the potential to be quite frustrating because the luck element is increased once all the money is in the pot. For instance, I recently played a hand where I had Ac Qc Th 9h; the flop was 8c Jc 9s -- so I had the nut straight and the nut flush draw. I got all my money in w/ another guy who obviously also flopped the nut straight. Next two cards were: 7s 8d.
His hand was: Qs Td 7h 8h.
Thus, he went runner, runner for a full boat. Ouch. On the flop, I will actually win the hand 41% of the time, he will win 2% of the time, and we will tie 56% of the time. In this instance, he should have probably folded to my pot sized raise on the flop because he had "no" defenses. However, I don't think I would have folded either -- I'm not that good yet. Anyways, it's good to learn from you guys.
-Phil