Folding Middle Set

[RISEorFall 0]

Full Tilt Pot-Limit Omaha, $1.00 BB (9 handed) - Full-Tilt Converter Tool from FlopTurnRiver.comSB ($163.40)BB ($94.70)UTG ($127.20)UTG+1 ($57.35)MP1 ($174.85)MP2 ($40)MP3 ($28)Hero (CO) ($98.55)Button ($85.60)Preflop: Hero is CO with 8 , 9 , 9 , 10 UTG bets $3.50, 4 folds, Hero calls $3.50, Button calls $3.50, SB calls $3, 1 foldFlop: ($15) 2 , 9 , A (4 players)SB checks, UTG checks, Hero bets $8, 2 folds, UTG raises to $25, Hero...thinking i could have checked flop. its really dry, but i didnt want to let someone catch a draw that could beat me. i bet like 1/2 pot because theres not much that calls a pot bet, and this is a perfect spot for AAxx to slowplay and i didnt want to lose too much if i got c/r.played one pot with this guy, where i raised in MP, got one caller and he called on the button. i check/called his pot bet on the flop of 569 and c/f the 9 turn when he bet like 2/3 pot

[rrumsey 0]

would prefer a check raise on this flop then it makes it a little easier to get away from but frankly, i hate fold a middle set on a flop on a dry board. it is a way ahead way behind situation so idk

[BaseJester 1]

That looks like the way to win the the minimum if he really has top set. I disbelieve.

[rrumsey 0]

i mean it is a way ahead way behind so we are either crushing or just screwed

[SwolyswoND 1]

Rumsey, what are you talking about? How can we check raise the flop? The PFR already checked.And this is not WA/WB. We lose to exactly 3 combos and destroy like a million.

[bdc30 0]

And this is not WA/WB. We lose to exactly 3 combos and destroy like a million.

Dickhead, do you know what the term WA/WB means?"and destroy like a million" <---Way Ahead"we lose to exactly 3 combos..." <---Way Behind

[trystero 0]

I fold itEP open, C/R = top setI really don't know what we're beating here. we obv block middle set so we're going to depend on some random PLO dude overplaying bottom set which I don't even see at the micros. we have like $11 invested when feasibly if we put anymore money into the pot we're drawing to one out.I also bet the flop in case villain's tryng to pot control w/just top pair, and we don't want to give free cards obviously to a million players

[SwolyswoND 1]

Dickhead, do you know what the term WA/WB means?"and destroy like a million" <---Way Ahead"we lose to exactly 3 combos..." <---Way Behind

Okay, what the hell brought that on? That was uncalled for.And I know exactly what WA/WB means. Even though this might fit the actual definition of those terms, it is not the typical "WA/WB situation" as discussed in a poker forum - that is a situation where we should never bet in position because we want to get to showdown cheaply. For example, holding KK in position on a flop of A93r. The combos we are ahead of and the combos we are beaten by are much closer together than this one. Yes we are way behind the 3 combos that beat us and are way ahead of the 410,000 we beat, but because there is such a disparity in the # of combos we still bet.

[rrumsey 0]

Rumsey, what are you talking about? How can we check raise the flop? The PFR already checked.

your right about that but the spirit of it was i don't like leading out. and yes it is way ahead way behind we crush bottom set, are even with a small amount of combo draws, and are crushed my top set. anything else is a massive overplay air balls into usi think check flop is the good play we just open ourselves up to getting is this exact spot. fire pretty much every turn thou imo

[dingas 0]

Well, villain should be bluffing here at least some of the time. As for me, when I raise pre and an ace flops, I almost always play as though I have top set even when I don't. He could be in there with A9 or A2, at least hypothetically. Idk, its a tough spot, since you're either going to win a small pot or lose a big one. I almost prefer checking back the flop.

[trystero 0]

Well, villain should be bluffing here at least some of the time. As for me, when I raise pre and an ace flops, I almost always play as though I have top set even when I don't. He could be in there with A9 or A2, at least hypothetically. Idk, its a tough spot, since you're either going to win a small pot or lose a big one. I almost prefer checking back the flop.

I'd take that to mean it's an easy spot, i.e. fold to his raise

[RISEorFall 0]

it is a way ahead way behind situation so idk

the board is really dry, so on the flop we're way ahead/way behind, but with 3 other players almost any turn card (except a 9 or 2) puts atleast one if not several draws. so this isn't really a true wa/wb situation (i wonder if there are many of those in omaha?). even HU with this dry flop i think id want to bet this, as any broadway card gives a hand like AKQJ a lot of outs.

[rrumsey 0]

the board is really dry, so on the flop we're way ahead/way behind, but with 3 other players almost any turn card (except a 9 or 2) puts atleast one if not several draws. so this isn't really a true wa/wb situation (i wonder if there are many of those in omaha?). even HU with this dry flop i think id want to bet this, as any broadway card gives a hand like AKQJ a lot of outs.

the problem with this board begin so dry that when we get check raised it is either the nuts or air IMO. So without reads we fold? that seems like a bad plan for the second best possible hand on this board. I guess it is kind of hindsight but because we are folding to the repot why don't we take the card and see what happens? I know it could make hands that beat us but a good amount of turns could induce weaker hands to bet and allow for some weaker hands to make something. we just need to read the turn right. is this a stupid idea?

[RISEorFall 0]

is this a stupid idea?

with 3 other players in...not stupid, but i dont think its a good idea

[rrumsey 0]

with 3 other players in...not stupid, but i dont think its a good idea

i just hate having to fold a middle set on the flop

[RISEorFall 0]

i just hate having to fold a middle set on the flop

me tooi had a bad feeling he had like AKQJ or A9TJ or somethingbut theres very few A9xx combos, and im not sure he'd c/r those rather than just lead out my big worry was that my bet looked kinda weak so he might have come over me with like AKxxbut again, im not sure he c/r those rather than just leading out

[bdc30 0]

I think if you just folded every single time you got checkraised at full ring plo with less than the mortal nuts, you'd come out waaay far ahead in the long run. This hand isn't that big of a deal, fold and get him next time.

[dingas 0]

I think if you just folded every single time you got checkraised at full ring plo with less than the mortal nuts, you'd come out waaay far ahead in the long run.

This is a pretty severe overstatement.And playing this way is totally exploitable. It's true though that at full ring you don't see a lot of check-raise bluffs. What about just calling to see if villain slows down on the turn? Once you call the cr, villain has to put you on AAxx or 99xx, so I don't think he is likely to continue with his bluff.

[MaxStPolish 4]

I think if you just folded every single time you got checkraised at full ring plo with less than the mortal nuts, you'd come out waaay far ahead in the long run. This hand isn't that big of a deal, fold and get him next time.

If you are going to play this tight, you shouldn't even be betting in the first place unless you have the nuts. That said, I get what you are implying here about full ring PLO in general.With respect to the actual hand....AKxx-A9xx are conceivably in range here. The check-raise he employs is actually a great play here because his storyline continues to be consistent with AA, while he could have had any number of hands. It would take sick stones here to bluff, because he's got to assume you have some sort of ace most of the time, meaning his story has to sell that he's got the last two aces. You have a full stack in front of you and are covered as well, which factors into this decision. If you call here you are in for the whole thing, as it's rare to never that he checks the turn, and no turn card is really going to effect your play here (even 3-5) (meaning if it's good enough to call this flop, it's good enough to call this river).22xx has no business raising pot pre-flop. I don't think even the biggest boner novice would pull such a stunt.If you plan on seeing this through though, I would wholly endorse calling the flop raise (prolly time-bank calling specifically). Because the times you are ahead here, the last thing you want to do is to run out AKKQ or AKQJ or whatever on the flop. If you are going for this pot, you are knowing that AA his crushing you a certain percentage of the time and will be getting your whole stack in, so the times you aren't against AA here, you need to do everything in your power to be playing for stacks as well. You want him to have control (esp. since you have position on him, and he's the aggressor), with you knowing you are getting it in on any turn regardless. If he then checks and you pot the turn and he folds, so it goes.As far as what to do in this hand.....without the read, I really don't know. You have got to assume AA......but then again that assumption is what makes great aggro PLO players a shit ton of money.I guess at a .5/1 full ring game though, I don't think anyone is that far above the rim that they check raised their non-AA on this flop to induce a bet and raise to further rep the AA line.....but actually not be holding it.

[bdc30 0]

yes it was obv an intentional overstatement

[SwolyswoND 1]

Bdc30, I notice you still haven't responded as to why you resorted to name-calling against me. If you're going to do it, at least sack it up, grow a pair and don't tuck tail and flee with your head between your legs when you get called out on it.

[bdc30 0]

who are you?If that offended you I apologize, it just seemed a bit rediculous for you to say this wasn't a wa/wb situation, then go on to describe it pretty much exactly AS one...I have honestly never seen you on here. It wasn't a personal attack

[rrumsey 0]

If you are going to play this tight, you shouldn't even be betting in the first place unless you have the nuts. That said, I get what you are implying here about full ring PLO in general.With respect to the actual hand....AKxx-A9xx are conceivably in range here. The check-raise he employs is actually a great play here because his storyline continues to be consistent with AA, while he could have had any number of hands. It would take sick stones here to bluff, because he's got to assume you have some sort of ace most of the time, meaning his story has to sell that he's got the last two aces. You have a full stack in front of you and are covered as well, which factors into this decision. If you call here you are in for the whole thing, as it's rare to never that he checks the turn, and no turn card is really going to effect your play here (even 3-5) (meaning if it's good enough to call this flop, it's good enough to call this river).22xx has no business raising pot pre-flop. I don't think even the biggest boner novice would pull such a stunt.If you plan on seeing this through though, I would wholly endorse calling the flop raise (prolly time-bank calling specifically). Because the times you are ahead here, the last thing you want to do is to run out AKKQ or AKQJ or whatever on the flop. If you are going for this pot, you are knowing that AA his crushing you a certain percentage of the time and will be getting your whole stack in, so the times you aren't against AA here, you need to do everything in your power to be playing for stacks as well. You want him to have control (esp. since you have position on him, and he's the aggressor), with you knowing you are getting it in on any turn regardless. If he then checks and you pot the turn and he folds, so it goes.As far as what to do in this hand.....without the read, I really don't know. You have got to assume AA......but then again that assumption is what makes great aggro PLO players a shit ton of money.I guess at a .5/1 full ring game though, I don't think anyone is that far above the rim that they check raised their non-AA on this flop to induce a bet and raise to further rep the AA line.....but actually not be holding it.

beautiful summary of this hand.

[Frez 0]

First, this is clearly the very definition of WA/WB. If he doesn't have AA then he's drawing to at best 2 outs or some wierd runner-runner.Second:

I think if you just folded every single time you got checkraised at full ring plo with less than the mortal nuts, you'd come out waaay far ahead in the long run. This hand isn't that big of a deal, fold and get him next time.

is not that much of an exaggeration at this level. It may be exploitable IF you are always playing with the same players, and IF they know what you are folding, and IF you never do have a hand there. However the parlay of those three IFs is pretty small.I don't mind checking the flop for pot control. And I don't mind bet/folding. If you call his check/raise then you are really committing your stack. You'd only have one pot sized bet left. If you think you are ahead on the flop, then there are very few turn cards that are going to change your mind. So if you think you are ahead, shove the flop to price out draws. Think about that - do you want to put $90 in on the flop with middle set on an A high, unsuited, unconnected board against an UTG preflop raiser and flop check/raiser... The more I think about it, this is either check the flop or get it all in. There's little middle ground.