[Coaching] PLO Buffet

Not all at once! Stay in line with the requests! :f_biggrin::f_biggrin::f_biggrin:

Hey, Kyyberi! Cool thing when we get to choose what's on "the menu"

Concept I've been personally struggling with the most lately is playing SB vs various stealing ranges and sizings. When we're in BB it's rather more simple: we usually have options of calling/3betting and oftentimes they both seem fine; when we're in SB however usually both these options appear to be bad We can't just go ahead and fold all but top range (or at least don't want to). Espetially considering how bad our opponents are at low stakes.

So I guess my request would be to give some theoretical insight on playing in SB vs CO/BTN RFI and look into different situations. What do we do vs 25% range? Vs 50%/80%? How to counter 3bb steals and 2bb ones? What hands to squeeze with if CO opens and BU calls? How to change ranges if BB is agro/passive?

P.S.: Is it gonna be one time thing or series of coachings?

Originally posted by Zolotarsp
P.S.: Is it gonna be one time thing or series of coachings?

That depends on the interest.

It will be greath as a topic 3bet pots, when to stack off, when to fold, there are some spots that i think its close to fold to call to raise since the low SPR is hards in some spots

Thanks david1345, if you have any examples or hand histories it would be great.

I would love to see some calculations/explanations of fold equity and what equity/spr I need to stack off.

Thanks eatrawmeat.

So for now we have blind defense and equity stuff on the Menu. The later one includes some 3bet situations on the flop. If david1345 sends some hand histories it would be great, then I would know what are his "close spots" as they might be totally different than mine.

Thanks for making this project, Ville!

Though I won't be able to attend specifically next Thursday, I'd still like to ask for an addition to the menu for a further episode, namely, discussion of adjustment to maniacs [non-HU]. As the topic is too broad, let's concentrate on playing IP because blind defence is already on the menu.

I often find myself at a table where there are 1-3 maniacs (with stats like 80/70/60) and others are regs who (I think) play quite weak-tight (maybe because they feel underrolled when, say, a table at their normal PLO25 stake plays more like PLO50-100 variance-wise) - flat a bit wider than their normal range, but seem to not widen 3bet and squeeze ranges by much, which allows me to isolate all day long with hardly ever getting punished. The reason why I classify this as a prominent case is that often the presence of a single maniac justifies being present at the table depending on how terribly they play, whereas if the fishes are passive, I prefer to have at least two of them on the right or three of them in any position and the strategy is less player-dependent.

I've been thinking of a looser approach when the maniac is on the immediate right - folding total junk (like Q♦:9♠:6♦:3♣: ), flatting with non-premium decent 'pulling' hands (those that play multiway better than HU - are nutty, though probably lacking high cards, e.g. K♦:K♠:7♦:2♣: or A♦:7♠:6♦:4♣: ), 3-bet-isolating with premium and decent 'pushing' hands (those that play HU better - often flop decent non-nutty equity, like K♦:Q♠:8♦:7♠:; king-high suits are actually OK when iso'ing a maniac who will pay off with worse flushes), squeezing with premium pulling hands (like A♦:Q♠:8♦:7♠: ). The guidelines for the choice between 3-betting and flatting are summed up pretty well in this 2+2 blog post by my old pal Jason (I believe it's based on Tom Chambers' teachings; note that other factors, like what kinds of players are in the blinds, are covered well too)

Fwiw, when the maniac is on the left (which shouldn't happen too often at small online stakes due to seat selection, but might happen live or at HS), I've been told that limping decent non-premium hands is good (followed by either flatting or reraising, depending on the raw equity and the previous action).

The case when there are two or more maniacs who 3-4-bet each other also needs special consideration - I think it's OK to enter the pot with a wider range of pulling hands and raise premium pulling ones up.

In any case, surely, the postflop hand strength criteria should be somewhat laxer (to what extent?) when a maniac is in. (As said above, I can follow through with less nutty hands, like 2nd or 3rd FDs or sucker wraps, when I'm HU IP vs a terrible postflop player. Also, I suspect that e.g. KQ** is worth valuebetting into a bad loose player on the K♦:8♦:3♠:Q♠:4♠: board - they'll pay off with 8-4 and the likes.)

I'll submit HHs later if you wish.

Maniacs create problems to many players, so we will add that as a dessert. Meaning that we will cover that if we have time.

oh srry recently y delete my database in order to start a new one so i dont have many hands

Originally posted by david1345
oh srry recently y delete my database in order to start a new one so i dont have many hands

No need for a real hand history, you can just tell what kind of spots are the nasty ones. What kind of SPR and what kind of boards/hits for hero?

Added Menu to the OP.

4-6 spr oop 3pot blinds vs btn or cut off in board textures like 972r t83r with overpairs or overcards

Originally posted by tonypmm
Though I won't be able to attend specifically next Thursday, I'd still like to ask for an addition to the menu for a further episode, namely, discussion of adjustment to maniacs [non-HU].

Originally posted by Kyyberi
Maniacs create problems to many players, so we will add that as a dessert. Meaning that we will cover that if we have time.

I've had to cancel my initial plans, so I'm attending tonight's coaching!

As porridge and rice are best served with jam, I've decided to mix things up here too and provide 4 jam hands played two weeks ago where 1) at least one maniac was active, 2) (as almost a consequence) the pot was (mostly) 3bet (and sometimes the decision on flatting vs 3betting was nontrivial), 3) the equity calculation was nontrivial (partly because I entered pots with marginal hole cards). So feel free to use the examples for the discussion of the 'main meal'. I hope they're helpful because they show how weak some seemingly monster draws are.

Maniacs are highlighted in red and loose passives in green in the stack & stat lists for your convenience (the rest of players - those with black names - are presumably regs, except yours truly). My image was LAG (I overadjusted to their presence and played a ton of marginal hands IP). The hands are sorted by SPRs in the ascending order, so basic equity stuff comes first and deeper 3bet spots later. Feel free to criticise.

Hand 1 (flop SPR 2.3)

PokerStars - $0.10 Ante $0.02 PL Hi (6 max) - Omaha Hi - 5 players
Hand converted by PokerTracker 4

Hero (CO): $43.00
BTN: $10.19 (VPIP: 25.53, PFR: 16.84, 3Bet Preflop: 6.20, Hands: 389)
SB: $18.04 (VPIP: 26.09, PFR: 0.00, 3Bet Preflop: 0.00, Hands: 23)
BB: $38.53 (VPIP: 29.55, PFR: 20.45, 3Bet Preflop: 20.51, Hands: 88)
UTG: $146.62 (VPIP: 78.35, PFR: 45.36, 3Bet Preflop: 21.88, Hands: 99)

SB posts SB $0.05, BB posts BB $0.10, 5 players post ante of $0.02

Pre Flop: (pot: $0.25) Hero has 8♥ 7♣ Q♠ T♠

UTG raises to $0.45, Hero raises to $1.60, fold, fold, BB raises to $5.40, UTG calls $4.95, Hero calls $3.80

The gaps are at the top (so potential wraps are less nutty), and I also thought that the queen-high suit made the hand less playable 3-way than HU and hence opted to isolate.

Flop: ($16.35, 3 players) J♣ 9♥ 2♥
BB bets $15.66, fold, Hero raises to $37.58 and is all-in

If we assume that, potting into two players, BB repped strictly AA+NFD, the shove looks marginal (with 40%-ish equity because BB's flush redraw makes the 13 non-heart outs worth 4/5 of an out each), but he could have a few other rarer things like KQT* (which is a nightmare scenario - my wrap is dominated and I have only 21% equity), QT8+9/J (26% for me) or AA+OESD/GS or JJ/99 (which is meh for me, with 40% equity) or J/9+FD (30-35% for me). So the decision is marginal at best, a bit closer to a fold.

Actually, the shove was a spastic decision (my mind was wandering a bit in that session); as I had no fold equity, a better option was flatting the flop and calling BB's shove on all turns that are neither heart nor pairing. But as BB's squeezing range is probably 5-8%, I think that even this line is a slight mistake too.

Hand 2 (flop SPR 7.5)

PokerStars - $0.05 Ante $0.01 PL Hi (6 max) - Omaha Hi - 3 players
Hand converted by PokerTracker 4

Hero (BTN): $14.91
SB: $7.68 (VPIP: 37.50, PFR: 37.50, 3Bet Preflop: 33.33, Hands: 8)
BB: $14.36 (VPIP: 65.22, PFR: 4.35, 3Bet Preflop: 0.00, Hands: 23)

The provisional 'LAG recreational' label had been assigned to SB due to the 'random' initial stack size and the absence of limps (that would define a loose passive) during the 8 hands.

SB posts SB $0.02, BB posts BB $0.05, 3 players post ante of $0.01

Pre Flop: (pot: $0.10) Hero has J♠ 7♥ 3♦ 8♠

Hero raises to $0.12, SB raises to $0.44, fold, Hero calls $0.32

It's indeed hard to fold anything pre 3-max on the BTN vs loose blinds, but I should have limped to keep the pot smaller, there's of course no value to be had pre, and they don't adjust to unbalanced ranges anyway.

Flop: ($0.96, 2 players) 5♠ 9♠ Q♦
SB bets $0.92, Hero raises to $3.68, SB raises to $7.23 and is all-in, Hero calls $3.55 and is all-in

It's really hard to put SB on a range here... I thought I had just too many draws to fold, some fold equity, and the third nut FD is actually semi-decent against someone who presumably overplays lower ones. The absence of a pair in my hand really devalued its equity, though.

Hand 3 (flop SPR 8.9)

PokerStars - $0.10 PL Hi (6 max) - Omaha Hi - 6 players
Hand converted by PokerTracker 4

Hero (UTG): $10.99
MP: $11.10 (VPIP: 28.13, PFR: 22.92, 3Bet Preflop: 10.81, Hands: 96)
CO: $35.24 (VPIP: 81.25, PFR: 62.50, 3Bet Preflop: 27.27, Hands: 32)
BTN: $3.06 (VPIP: 41.18, PFR: 0.00, 3Bet Preflop: 0.00, Hands: 17)
SB: $20.71 (VPIP: 43.75, PFR: 18.75, 3Bet Preflop: 14.29, Hands: 64)
BB: $10.83 (VPIP: 17.50, PFR: 12.50, 3Bet Preflop: 7.14, Hands: 40)

SB posts SB $0.05, BB posts BB $0.10

Pre Flop: (pot: $0.15) Hero has J♥ K♠ T♣ 9♥

Hero raises to $0.35, fold, CO calls $0.35, BTN calls $0.35, fold, fold

This hand can be folded UTG at a tight or passive table, but here I thought that even 4betting CO for value would be fine. With a J-high suit OOP, I prefer to reduce the SPR as much as possible. Limp/3betting might have resulted in both a bigger SPR on average and a bigger expected number of regs watching the flop imo.

Flop: ($1.20, 3 players) Q♥ 2♠ 6♥
Hero bets $1.15, CO calls $1.15, fold

This cbet (potsize because of being OOP) felt rather marginal, as I didn't have much raw equity otf; but as the queen was the pivot card (i.e. the card filling the only gap in the rundown), I had enough backdoor equity and many turn cards would support my equity and allow me to fire the second barrel. Note that, because BTN had a short stack, we were already essentially HU with CO. In case of BTN's shove, I did have the option of coming over the top otf because $1.15 < 0.5 * $2.71 (BTN's remaining stack).

Turn: ($3.50, 2 players) 8♣
Hero bets $3.35, CO raises to $13.40, Hero calls $6.14 and is all-in

I was considering bet/calling smaller but thought that less-than-potting after the flop potting would have looked unconvincing. I relied on fold equity in addition to the raw equity (that got improved by the turned wrap, and vs a loose player, standards of draw strength can be lowered as he'll likely overplay lower FDs).

Hand 4 (flop SPR 12.1, more like SRP in terms of SPR but meh, w/e)

PokerStars - $0.05 Ante $0.01 PL Hi (6 max) - Omaha Hi - 4 players
Hand converted by PokerTracker 4

Hero (CO): $14.88
BTN: $15.93 (VPIP: 46.43, PFR: 3.57, 3Bet Preflop: 1.92, Hands: 84)
SB: $62.32 (VPIP: 93.75, PFR: 68.75, 3Bet Preflop: 44.44, Hands: 48)
BB: $5.00 (VPIP: 37.78, PFR: 33.33, 3Bet Preflop: 20.00, Hands: 45)

SB posts SB $0.02, BB posts BB $0.05, 4 players post ante of $0.01

Pre Flop: (pot: $0.11) Hero has J♠ 4♦ K♦ 9♠

Hero raises to $0.21, BTN calls $0.21, SB raises to $0.37, fold, Hero calls $0.16, BTN calls $0.16

SB was known to always choose the minimum sizing for 3bets So bloating of the pot wasn't a threat and my hand couldn't lose much value to such a 3bet; I tried potting pre to 'win the button' (with a marginal hand that would be borderline playable in the CO first in if facing regs), though the chance of it was rather low as BTN was loose-passive, which means that limp/flatting was again a very worthwhile option.

Flop: ($1.20, 3 players) T♠ 8♥ 8♠
SB bets $1.15, Hero raises to $4.60, fold, SB calls $3.45

I was surprised to learn that, vs a random 8*** hand, I had only 31% equity (I thought that the 15 outs, only 13 of which were devalued by the ten-out redraw - Q♠: and 7♠: were my straightflush outs - would be worth ~3/4 * 50%, but probably the thing is that there are a few dominating flushdraws and a few made full houses making my draw almost dead [my equity vs an 8 with no T is 37% indeed] and also a few hands that take my outs away or split on some of them). Vs the NFD, I had only 37% too. So I was relying on fold equity - a potsize cbet coming from someone who min-3bets pre and perhaps isn't bothered by sizing at all (just clicks the most convenient button) doesn't mean much. Flatting was discouraged also by the presence of the third player, albeit short, so the raise also had a 'promotion bet' component in it (folding out BB's dominating draws).

Turn: ($10.40, 2 players) 6♠
SB checks, Hero bets $9.90 and is all-in

I hesitated a bit longer on this decision, but in the end I thought that not getting bluffed otr and also defence from trips were the factors justifying the shove (as opposed to a pot-controlling check).

As for making a game plan beforehand, that's of course true, I'd just like to add that rake becomes a consideration, unlike when facing passive or tight opponents. My biggest mistake was probably that I followed the same hyperaggressive 'plan' attempting to cut regs off and make them instinctively overly tight (you've seen that I'm pushing way too much, though) at Stars as I'm used to on iPoker and Microgaming. The thing is that non-SNEs pay 2.5-3% effective rake at Stars, while on iPoker and MPN, players with Supernova equivalent volume pay 1.5-2%, which allows us to exercise a wider range of strategies - the difference in rake paid vs a maniac might be 5+ bb at PLO20-50 (a problem is that it's harder to get into such a crazy lineup there).

So the (ultra)tight style might be the best for Stars, FTP, Unibet and especially 888poker players and/or those who're playing at stakes 'adequate' to their bankrolls. As someone who's overrolled for all the online stakes that I can beat at all, I think I should seek as many encounters with maniacs as possible and hone my exploitation skills because that's what will give me an advantage over those who can't bear the variance involved. I still need to learn PLO better than the maniacs, though

Thanks for the buffet, it's very useful!

I knew I forgot something

When we were talking about equities I totally forgot the equity estimation based on our outs. Maybe we add that as a side dish for the next buffet.

Video was released today, you can find it in video section.

Great news, we have another Buffet at 19th Thursday! Time is half an hour later, you can see the details in staring post. We will use this same thread, so anything requested now might end up in 19th day Buffet!

Remember that all requests should be made before Sunday 15th of March.