1. Dont mind either way pre, hand has great potential
2. If I had A2 and extentions (flush or straight potential) I would snap pot it, as it plays out its a simple fold, villain is commited and at best you are playing for 1/2 pot, save your chips.
same old mistakes playing a hand last night in the fosp tournament a hand threw me the flop and the turn were twos and i played the hand as quads with an ace kicker after the hand my opponent asked if i knew what i had this puzzled me and i asked the table i got moved too if the ace counted i forgot the first thing you are told USE TWO HOLE CARDS it got through but appologies anyway
In Hold 'Em, if the board contains quads, Ace high wins. A lower pair - say, KK - would lose. In NLH, we can use ANY 5 cards - the entire board, 4 of the board & 1 from our hand, or 2 from our hand.
In Omaha, it's completely different - we MUST use 2 of our hole cards. So if the board contains quads, in effect it only contains THREE of a kind, not 4, as we must use 2 of our hole cards.
So, anyone with a pair in their hand would have a full house.
So if the board is 7-7-7-7-4, & we have A-2-9-9, we have a full house, "sevens full". Someone with a bigger pair would beat us.
^^^^ Hi Cheezy, This is where Hold 'Em & Omaha differ. In Hold 'Em, if the board contains quads, Ace high wins. A lower pair - say, KK - would lose. In NLH, we can use ANY 5 cards - the entire board, 4 of the board & 1 from our hand, or 2 from our hand. In Omaha, it's completely different - we MUST use 2 of our hole cards. So if the board contains quads, in effect it only contains THREE of a kind, not 4, as we must use 2 of our hole cards. So, anyone with a pair in their hand would have a full house. So if the board is 7-7-7-7-4, & we have A-2-9-9, we have a full house, "sevens full". Someone with a bigger pair would beat us. Posted by Tikay10
Thanks tikay I know that that's the problem I knew it was wrong we will call it a senior moment to make matters worse the hand display is on all the time in my defense I was multi tabling at the time it was just one off those things
This early with such deep stacks I would be looking for some pot control if possible in a DYM.
I would possibly raise the flop for 90 for a couple of reasons, #1 pot control, #2 it telegraphs your hand slightly less as many will think you don't have top set because you didn't pot it. This can result in some players protecting q9 for top 2 pair or mid or bottom sets and repotting at you. In that case I am happy to repot again as it will often chase out straight drawing hands and dry nut or king high flush draws and have you all in versus the type of range you are happy to play for stacks against here.
It is a subtle difference but amazing how often when you bet the full pot here that lower sets and 2 pair which you are happy to play against will flat call and then the scare cards hit and your left unsure how to procede.
As played, on the turn it is a check for me. Firstly for pot control and even if they pot back, with the added flush draw and possibility of 2 other players calling and implied odds you can call the 480 knowing you can fold on horror rivers to heavy action. As played I would have Tikay on the straight as he has a player behind him and you have made clear you have a big hand so I think he has to have the goods here, possibly with redraws (which he does). This leaves you really just drawing for the board to pair. It is fair to say you have some odds because you have 2 others all in but it has turned into a big gamble situation for stacks which is less than ideal in a DYM.
In a MTT it would be better as the added equity is worth more with a steeper prize structure than a DYM although I would still try have a bit more control. I would often make some kind of bet on the flop in a MTT and even here in a DYM; there is a case however for checking the flop to gather more information on how the hand will procede, instill pot control and underrepresent your hand. I would however be betting for about 90 chips most of the time on the flop and check/calling the turn in this spot.
As always, lots of caveats such as the players in the pot with you, table position etc etc
This early with such deep stacks I would be looking for some pot control if possible in a DYM. I would possibly raise the flop for 90 for a couple of reasons, #1 pot control, #2 it telegraphs your hand slightly less as many will think you don't have top set because you didn't pot it. This can result in some players protecting q9 for top 2 pair or mid or bottom sets and repotting at you. In that case I am happy to repot again as it will often chase out straight drawing hands and dry nut or king high flush draws and have you all in versus the type of range you are happy to play for stacks against here. It is a subtle difference but amazing how often when you bet the full pot here that lower sets and 2 pair which you are happy to play against will flat call and then the scare cards hit and your left unsure how to procede. As played, on the turn it is a check for me. Firstly for pot control and even if they pot back, with the added flush draw and possibility of 2 other players calling and implied odds you can call the 480 knowing you can fold on horror rivers to heavy action. As played I would have Tikay on the straight as he has a player behind him and you have made clear you have a big hand so I think he has to have the goods here, possibly with redraws (which he does). This leaves you really just drawing for the board to pair. It is fair to say you have some odds because you have 2 others all in but it has turned into a big gamble situation for stacks which is less than ideal in a DYM. In a MTT it would be better as the added equity is worth more with a steeper prize structure than a DYM although I would still try have a bit more control. I would often make some kind of bet on the flop in a MTT and even here in a DYM; there is a case however for checking the flop to gather more information on how the hand will procede, instill pot control and underrepresent your hand. I would however be betting for about 90 chips most of the time on the flop and check/calling the turn in this spot. As always, lots of caveats such as the players in the pot with you, table position etc etc Posted by markycash
A bet pre wouldve helped as well. Weaker hands will fold such as tikay and your pot lead on the flop may get called wider. O/w marky makes sense although there are a couple of geldmodes when i might follow your line. In all of those i fold to teeks raise except geldmode #666 which i sometimes use when teeks is being a bit of a pest.
Lots of great stuff in the thread although it has went quiet of late.
Tikay has prompted some interesting NLHE DYM discussion so thought I would give this a little bump with a general question which different players may have very different takes on.
PLO8 DYM 6max - We are 5 handed and the table is neither overly aggro or tight. We are halfway through the 150-300 level (levels are 5 minutes long).
Question: Lets assume we have 3000 chips and the other 4 players have relatively level stacks (around 2250 each). What should our general approach be here?
Some points to consider when deciding our general approach... What is our opening range? What size is our opening range? What is our calling range? What is our 3 betting range? How are these factors affected by position in each hand? Advantages/disadvantages of being either 'tight' or 'loose'?
Edit: I will hold back on my personal thoughts until hopefully we have a few others chiming in.
You should rename this The 'Marky's tell me your ranges and bet sizing thread'. The only thing I am telling you is, I will min bet my entire range except sometimes. I dont have a calling range at those blinds except sometimes. I know there is no ulterior motive here Marky, but I think you may struggle to get answers ;-) Posted by HENDRIK62
Ha fair point mate!
I am quite willing to divulge my thoughts if others are though so not a one way street
I personally don't mind because I would like to hope I can adapt if someone thinks I am playing x y or z way. Also a lot of the people who play the DYM's don't read the thread and there always seems to be a one upmanship versus some of the regs anyways
Also I am not really certain there is a 'correct' answer. Several very different approaches may yields similar results depending on the players style etc.
As a general rule given our normal pool, i try to loosen my range and keep bet sizing to a level where I can get away from a 3 bet, but big enough that any aforementioned 3bet commits the villian to my 4 bet.
Any change in table dynamic, if there are 'sticky' players my ranges and raise sizing changes
As a general rule given our normal pool, i try to loosen my range and keep bet sizing to a level where I can get away from a 3 bet, but big enough that any aforementioned 3bet commits the villian to my 4 bet. Any change in table dynamic, if there are 'sticky' players my ranges and raise sizing changes Posted by HENDRIK62
*updates notes on Hendo*
Joking Good to hear your thoughts mate. Hopefully a few more will reply and I will give my take on it. If people just want to talk generally about advantages/disadvantages of being tight or loose in the above situation then fine. If people are happy to talk in more detail then I will happily do that too.
I hope I never put people off posting here with my reply....it was lighthearted.
I think as a general rule, people play too tight on the bubble, hoping others will bust each other.
This can work at lower stakes, but if we have a bubble with 4 relatively competent players, I thinks its important to make sure we defend or go on the offense to stop being sucked back into the pack (this is of course easier said than done, we dont want to throw away a lock).
I wrote earlier that I don't call, however.....
I think we can probably profitably introduce a counterfeit calling range, its certainly something I have been experimenting with, due to the frustration of playing against people flatting (my rule of thumb being if it trips me up and frustrates me then it must be worth trying).
This does not mean any 4 cards, It is a very specific grouping.
Important to remember our reasons for doing this, and be prepared to give up when the flop is not favourable.
Some of the strongest players have a relatively lag approach and this makes them very, very tough opponents, so we need to be prepared to adapt our games.
Nothing Earth shattering, everyone knows I am a non believing loose station anyway ;-)
I don't doubt your motives here or your willingness to be open in your own answers either, it's just there is a fairly small player pool in OH8 here and quite a large proportion are forum regulars.
It feels a bit -EV giving up detailed range info to the advantage of many readers and likely few posters. While I play frequently I don't play high volume so I doubt many of the regulars have detailed notes on me and some of them will hopefully be misleading as I try not to play ABC.
So for any regulars reading I balance my opening bets between min raise and pot, but I always have a very strong balanced PLO8 hand.
^^^ DISCLAIMER: I might not be telling the truth.
The mid levels you describe are the toughest to play imo. Early doors, I am just trying to either isolate any weaker players at the table, or get involved cheaply in multi-way pots where I have scoop potential and ideally position.
End game pretty much plays itself as long as we know our DYM strategy so we do not get involved unnecessarily while taking appropriate risks when we have to. Pot/folding becomes very rare as the blinds go up, but sometimes of course we have to try and steal idealy with some decent equity in the hand.
Mid game is where we should be trying to accumulate chips and we definitely want to avoid multi-way pots as we can lose alot of chips playing for draws if we miss.
I am happy to be passive pre at times in the early stages, but I am never open limping at mid levels, always a raise and usually a min-raise for pot control. Position will definitely have an effect on ranges with the C/O and Button I may open with Hi only or lo only hands or w/o an Ace but a high pair and 23 or double suited combo hands, UTG/+1 I generally want both an Ace and some balance to the hand.
Knowing the table and adjusting is of course highly important, I dont think I am giving away anything to you there as we know there is adjustment going on from the tussles we have.
Spots where I might adjust range/bet sizing would be if an aggressive player to my left keeps repotting, or if there is someone behind who wants to see a flop with almost any 4 and doesn't like to fold post either. To the aggro player I would loosen up but keep to minraises and adjust my 4bet range. To the passive sticky player I would tighten up the range but increase the bet size to try and push them off pre or at least give me a better chance of still being ahead even if I do not smash the flop.
Where players to my left are super tight I might have to take advantage of that, just try not to be too obvious.
edit:Thinking about the above probably starts from 50/100-75/150, coming to the end of that by 150/300. Above there I am probably more likely to be potting every time I open.
I was hoping more when I asked the question for general thoughts on play at these stages and suggesting just to 'bear in mind' rages etc. I wasn't really hoping for exact ranges to be posted for the reasons you both pointed out My question could have been written much more clearly to be honest, so my bad on that one!
My own thoughts on this...
I agree with Phantom that this is such a tricky stage in DYM's. I also feel that there isn't a 'correct answer' or 'correct ranges', especially in PLO8 DYM's. I mean if we are playing a lot of the same players and sticking to the same shove/fold ranges then our hands are almost face up. Other players around us will obviously adapt if we are playing regularly together. So where in some instances you may get away with shove/fold chart type play long term in SNG's, I think this is much tougher to do in PLO8 DYM's with a lot of regs.
I think a more fluid style that adapts to whatever other players perceive your image and range to be is much more +ev than fixed 'rules' on what to play and when to play it. The drawback here though is obviously that much more thought is required on every action in isolation which makes playing mass tables a bit more difficult. I notice when I play the 'numbers games' and have 5 or 6 tables open or a few DYM's and a few MTT's that my roi starts to fall sharply. So I guess personally I need to play 1 or 2 less tables and play hands a bit more in a vacuum and try to play in accordance with my perceived image.
My own magic number for being able to do this is around 3 tables. I have 40+ tabled in years gone by but it just turns into button smashing and a bit like playing whack-a-mole. After tens of thousands of SNG's on other sites I noticed if I go over 3 tables then I can't follow the action as closely as is ideal and my roi starts to drop off sharply. This is something I think I need to keep in mind in future playing these...
I wasn't certain what others would say and thus posed the question but I was leaning more towards being aggressive generally at this stage when I posted the question. I still think this is 'generally' the case as stack maintenance is more important than sometimes seems apparent, even in DYM's. Otherwise with blinds rising rapidly we can end up with no fold equity, half our stack plunged in via the BB and having to call with any 4 due to the odds and hope for the best. Obviously though this strategy goes out the window if everyone thinks you are prepared to raise with 4 christmas cards and you are being called all over the place and are ending up all in too often.
I guess IMO it is more about adapting to every table individually then.
I think my own game is more suited to regular SNG's and MTT's though as I probably over emphasise the importance of stack building and stack maintenance which while it is still important in a DYM, it is obviously 'less important' in a DYM than when compared to a regular SNG or MTT.
I agree with you marky on the no of tables. I tend to have a much better feel for players and dynamics, even those I have good notes on, if I only have 2/3 tables on the go. I might extend to 4 and still play ok if they are all the same game type but performance definitely nosedives if I add more or mix up game types too much.
2/3 probably helps with boredom factor as well, as while single tabling should have us playing our best, not playing any hands for a while can induce the urge to get involved when you shouldn't.
Sometimes I am playing PLO8 and Turbo NL DYMs at the same time. While you can get away with a bit more autopilot in the Turbo NL DYMs it can definitely induce mistakes in both games.
I play for enjoyment, so having a bit of banter in the chat box is also important for me, but again that affects performance and the no of tables I can play effectively.
Comments
^^^^
Hi Cheezy,
This is where Hold 'Em & Omaha differ.
In Hold 'Em, if the board contains quads, Ace high wins. A lower pair - say, KK - would lose. In NLH, we can use ANY 5 cards - the entire board, 4 of the board & 1 from our hand, or 2 from our hand.
In Omaha, it's completely different - we MUST use 2 of our hole cards. So if the board contains quads, in effect it only contains THREE of a kind, not 4, as we must use 2 of our hole cards.
So, anyone with a pair in their hand would have a full house.
So if the board is 7-7-7-7-4, & we have A-2-9-9, we have a full house, "sevens full". Someone with a bigger pair would beat us.
I would possibly raise the flop for 90 for a couple of reasons, #1 pot control, #2 it telegraphs your hand slightly less as many will think you don't have top set because you didn't pot it. This can result in some players protecting q9 for top 2 pair or mid or bottom sets and repotting at you. In that case I am happy to repot again as it will often chase out straight drawing hands and dry nut or king high flush draws and have you all in versus the type of range you are happy to play for stacks against here.
It is a subtle difference but amazing how often when you bet the full pot here that lower sets and 2 pair which you are happy to play against will flat call and then the scare cards hit and your left unsure how to procede.
As played, on the turn it is a check for me. Firstly for pot control and even if they pot back, with the added flush draw and possibility of 2 other players calling and implied odds you can call the 480 knowing you can fold on horror rivers to heavy action. As played I would have Tikay on the straight as he has a player behind him and you have made clear you have a big hand so I think he has to have the goods here, possibly with redraws (which he does). This leaves you really just drawing for the board to pair. It is fair to say you have some odds because you have 2 others all in but it has turned into a big gamble situation for stacks which is less than ideal in a DYM.
In a MTT it would be better as the added equity is worth more with a steeper prize structure than a DYM although I would still try have a bit more control. I would often make some kind of bet on the flop in a MTT and even here in a DYM; there is a case however for checking the flop to gather more information on how the hand will procede, instill pot control and underrepresent your hand. I would however be betting for about 90 chips most of the time on the flop and check/calling the turn in this spot.
As always, lots of caveats such as the players in the pot with you, table position etc etc
Ha, interesting spot, that.
Love flops like that with my hand, especially with just 2 low cards by the turn, cracking scoop spot.
you can't let me have the last word, shirley.
Tikay has prompted some interesting NLHE DYM discussion so thought I would give this a little bump with a general question which different players may have very different takes on.
PLO8 DYM 6max - We are 5 handed and the table is neither overly aggro or tight. We are halfway through the 150-300 level (levels are 5 minutes long).
Question: Lets assume we have 3000 chips and the other 4 players have relatively level stacks (around 2250 each). What should our general approach be here?
Some points to consider when deciding our general approach...
What is our opening range?
What size is our opening range?
What is our calling range?
What is our 3 betting range?
How are these factors affected by position in each hand?
Advantages/disadvantages of being either 'tight' or 'loose'?
Edit: I will hold back on my personal thoughts until hopefully we have a few others chiming in.
I am quite willing to divulge my thoughts if others are though so not a one way street
I personally don't mind because I would like to hope I can adapt if someone thinks I am playing x y or z way. Also a lot of the people who play the DYM's don't read the thread and there always seems to be a one upmanship versus some of the regs anyways
Also I am not really certain there is a 'correct' answer. Several very different approaches may yields similar results depending on the players style etc.
Joking
I was hoping more when I asked the question for general thoughts on play at these stages and suggesting just to 'bear in mind' rages etc. I wasn't really hoping for exact ranges to be posted for the reasons you both pointed out
My own thoughts on this...
I agree with Phantom that this is such a tricky stage in DYM's. I also feel that there isn't a 'correct answer' or 'correct ranges', especially in PLO8 DYM's. I mean if we are playing a lot of the same players and sticking to the same shove/fold ranges then our hands are almost face up. Other players around us will obviously adapt if we are playing regularly together. So where in some instances you may get away with shove/fold chart type play long term in SNG's, I think this is much tougher to do in PLO8 DYM's with a lot of regs.
I think a more fluid style that adapts to whatever other players perceive your image and range to be is much more +ev than fixed 'rules' on what to play and when to play it. The drawback here though is obviously that much more thought is required on every action in isolation which makes playing mass tables a bit more difficult. I notice when I play the 'numbers games' and have 5 or 6 tables open or a few DYM's and a few MTT's that my roi starts to fall sharply. So I guess personally I need to play 1 or 2 less tables and play hands a bit more in a vacuum and try to play in accordance with my perceived image.
My own magic number for being able to do this is around 3 tables. I have 40+ tabled in years gone by but it just turns into button smashing and a bit like playing whack-a-mole. After tens of thousands of SNG's on other sites I noticed if I go over 3 tables then I can't follow the action as closely as is ideal and my roi starts to drop off sharply. This is something I think I need to keep in mind in future playing these...
I wasn't certain what others would say and thus posed the question but I was leaning more towards being aggressive generally at this stage when I posted the question. I still think this is 'generally' the case as stack maintenance is more important than sometimes seems apparent, even in DYM's. Otherwise with blinds rising rapidly we can end up with no fold equity, half our stack plunged in via the BB and having to call with any 4 due to the odds and hope for the best. Obviously though this strategy goes out the window if everyone thinks you are prepared to raise with 4 christmas cards and you are being called all over the place and are ending up all in too often.
I guess IMO it is more about adapting to every table individually then.
I think my own game is more suited to regular SNG's and MTT's though as I probably over emphasise the importance of stack building and stack maintenance which while it is still important in a DYM, it is obviously 'less important' in a DYM than when compared to a regular SNG or MTT.