Online Poker Forum at Full Tilt Poker

Salinar · High Card Joined: 23 Dec 2005 Posts: 8

I had to do something crazy to change my poker momentum so after losing another $500 on RCC I reloaded $2000 from neteller and jumped into the highest stakes game I know ... the $40/$80 Pot Limit Omaha on Prima. I had the smallest stack @ $2038

Check out this beauty:

I have:

[dQ] [d2] [c10] [c8]

Madcow posts SB $40.
RobertDinero posts BB $80.
Salinar Calls $80.
tony_2_times raises for $240.
madcow11 calls for $200.
RobertDinero raises $960.
Salinar went all in for $1,958.
tony_2_times folds.
madcow11 folds.
RobertDinero calls for $998.

The deal:

[s7] [h10] [h9] [sQ] [cQ]

RobertDinero shows:

[hA] [cA] [d7] [dJ]

Salinar wins pot $4554 with a full house Queens full of Tens. Rake $2.

Not a bad haul.

On the surface this looks like a complete donkey play but I actually don't think so. I know that RobertDinero has AAxx. On the straight odds I'm 41.9% to win while putting in 44.8% pot equity but I have to figure tony_2_times for Axxx or at the very least high cards because of the raise and madcow has to have something good too to call out of SB so I think the play is probably even money if I assume Robert is unlikely to improve on his Aces. Since I gotta assume these guys are better than me (for now) then I should gamble it up on anything this close.

OK, done with $40/$80 for now. Hopefully this is the spark I needed.

Edit:

Somebody said that madcow11 is Marcel Luske. Can anyone confirm that? I stole a small ($240) pot from him too the next hand before I left for good. I knew I was in over my head but jeez! 8)

- Saruon

Kloaked Spirit · Royal Flush Joined: 03 Nov 2005 Posts: 869

1) You made a fairly big assumption that you could get this heads up. Had a 3rd player stuck around with a nice rundown looking to crack what may have been perceived as AA vs. AA, the odds would've diminished. What if madcow or tony stuck around with AAxx or a high rundown?

2) You made another big assumption that AAxx didn't have at least one of your suits covered. After all, you figured with the skill level of these players, they know not to get too crazy with a naked AAxx. You could've been as bad as 80/20, and even if just one suit was covered you could be a 70/30 dog depending on what XX was.

3) Take a look at what you had. You had 2 suits that may have been counterfeited by a higher draw for the suit. You didn't even have 3 connecting cards, and then you had a sad little half-dangler on top of that. That hand qualified as pure garbage.

Even 6-handed, by the time it went raise and re-pot, you should've been gone. Instead, you decided to really gamble and scored. Congrats.

Salinar · High Card Joined: 23 Dec 2005 Posts: 8

Kloaked Spirit:

Thank you for your input. Here is what I think:

First, let me say we were 4-handed not 6 handed ... there is a big difference.

(1) There is no way a third player would hang around assuming AA vs AA in a 4 handed game. First, that anyone would assume this isn't likely. I'm a new player @ the table... they don't know me ... I could literally have anything. Also, remember that I'm all in. The player who potentially calls is facing a re-raise from the button for another $7K I think. Given that, they will not call period and I know it.

(2) 2 and 3 are essentially the same. What if he has a monster on top of his AA? I felt that was more than offset by the fact that he must have dead aces because it went Pot size raise/call before it got to him. If anything, being 4 handed he is more likely to have weak aces.

Yes, of course I got "lucky" but the question is was this a +EV play. It comes down to this:

Risk: $2038
Return: $4554

Kloaked Spirit · Royal Flush Joined: 03 Nov 2005 Posts: 869

I thought it was 6-handed, and read the history wrong. For that, I just have to say whoops. Embarassed

As a result of my misreading, I'll agree that you're right about the button probably pushing a 7k bet, so I concede point 1. You would be likely to get this heads up.

So now we have to figure out if this was a good gamble or not. In certain situations it is. This is based on the assumption that you put in 2k to win 4.5k, and RobertDinero isn't folding his hand (from your own read and the action I'd say that's almost a certainty based on odds alone.) This means you have to win 44% of the time to make this +EV.

*Note: This also assumed that your suits were valid at all times, since if the suits weren't valid you'd only have fewer +EV situations.*

If you assumed he had a naked AA, then yes it can be +EV. This is dependent on what the xx is. (AA37 is +EV, AAQ3 is -EV, etc.) If you could pin a 3rd Ace on someone, this becomes even more of an +EV move. Once again it depends on what xx was (in some cases you're almost 50% to win.)

If he had just 1 suited Ace, it will probably be -EV. There may be a setup that makes it +EV, but I can't find it. If you can pin the 3rd ace on someone, then it will still be -EV most of the time. If they have pure garbage to go with the AA, then there are some areas where it's still +EV.

Two suited? Nope. There's not a single instance I can make where this is +EV, and that's even with a dead ace. If you can find one of those, let me know.

So could you have put him on naked AA? Granted, I don't play high stakes omaha, but I'd suspect that people wouldn't get that wild with a naked AA enough times to warrant the play. Perhaps because it was 4-handed you had a better read on the situation. However, given the fact that you really just wanted to gamble it up on something that was close, you'd be "close enough" (only off by a few percentage points) often enough for you to justify the play on that regard.

Once again, congrats on the nice pot.

Salinar · High Card Joined: 23 Dec 2005 Posts: 8

Kloaked Spirit:

Thanks for your input. I have to agree with everything you said in the last post.

I usually play 2/4 and 3/6 PLO this was a one time thing. I win consistently but the last 2 months have been lousy.

For me it really came down to this:

I needed to do something to reverse my negative thinking that was causing me to not win and for me this was the way to do it. Like you said, I wanted something that was +EV or close to it as I had no reason to believe I could outplay these guys post-flop. If you can't spot the fish ... you're it!

I agree that in many cases it may be better to wait for a better time to get my money in but if I just kept folding the blinds would eat me up. I played 4 more hands ... saw the flop on one and hit A high flush but got paid nothing but the blinds. So even if a great +EV situation comes along there's no assurance they'll call and by that point I'd have less money seeing as I'm paying $120 in blinds every 4 hands.

- Salinar

johanlj · High Card Joined: 23 Mar 2006 Posts: 2

I played the same guys a couple of weeks ago...at least madcow and Robertdinero was in. I had also had some bad weeks and was tilted...stupid as i was i tried the big game to get it all back. This is how bad i played and how lucky i was:
I sat down with 800 and got to 1.5k. Madcow was preflop raising like 50% of all hands. I looked down at 3s4cKsKh and madcow made it 240. I made it 800 and madcow and 2 other called.
Flop: TJ2 rainbow
Im all in and everybody calls.
Turn: 3
roundcheck
river: 2
roundcheck

and i won 6k.
Then i left Smile

	Full Tilt Poker is licensed by the Kahnawake Gaming Commission. © Copyright 2004 - 2005 FullTiltPoker.com., All Rights Reserved