76s vs. OMC. Should I bluff 3 barrels?
5/5
~$500 effective
SB - OMC. His hands were shaking during the hand, and he looked nervous.
OTR he checked very quickly.
Hero(CO) 7♥6♥ opens to $20, SB calls
Flop($45) Q♦ 8♠ 4♠
SB checks, Hero bets $20, SB calls
Turn($85) A♥
SB checks, Hero bets $60, SB calls
River($205) 9♥
SB checks, Hero - ?
It's OK to give up on the river.
My hands shake, it's a medical thing that some unfortunate villains have interpreted as nervousness. I occasionally consciously extend my hand a little more when putting in chips which makes it more noticeable. Be careful assuming involuntary movements have anything to do with the situation.
I think you get snapped here too frequently to bluff if your read is right that he is OMC. OMC has a lot more Ax+ than he should that is never value betting but will snap you off. The river changed nothing, if OMC was good on the turn, he is still good now. Maybe KsJs folds, but I don't think an OMC is chasing other draws.
wouldnt check, dont mind all in but would bet large at least bottom of range no spades blah blah
turn i think u might be ok checking and betting the river esp if u dont want to run it on good river for u
I think you should bluff not blocking any relevant draw. If your image is fine can just go 150 and hope he folds AJ or QK or whatever.
In general OMCs like putting in big bets on their terms not ours.
Hand-shaking is far more often a physiological quirk than a tell indicating a monster. Hand-shaking is only a tell if a V's hands are normally steady but then shake while betting on a wet board.
I realize that c-betting against an OMC is in most situations profitable. However, here I would check the flop here. If anyone is watching you c-betting more than one-third of the time, you are giving away too much information, and they won't respect your c-bets. That means checking half the hands that you whiff. I'm always c-betting an OMC with some equity. Here, on the flop, I would guess that hero's low-ball inside straight draw lacks enough equity to bet against an OMC. If another heart was on the flop, and the hero had inside straight and backdoor flush draws, then I would c-bet.
Once V calls preflop and flop, I'm giving up on the hand. The flop call oop indicates strength. After OMC calls a 2/3 pot bet on the turn, just check back the river.
Hands shaking is a classic tell for a big hand, like maybe he has a set. I would shut down as soon as possible.
My experience with OMC in general is that like 90% of their range is Ax. It seems like they fold KJs and play A3o. So im giving up OTT because i would strongly suspect he has AQ A8.
As played I think jamming river is fine, but not great for above reasons
Yeah, I had a feeling I was doing something wrong throughout the entire hand. The tight OMC, the shaking hands, everything indicated trouble. But I hate life and bet $200, praying to the solver Gods. Suddenly, he folded.
I agree with Tomark about typical OMC ranges, and that I'm probably giving up on the turn. But IF we barrel turn, then I think we need to go for it and bet big on the river.
Also agree that we shouldn't read too much into hand shaking, especially with older folks, many of whom have hands that shake constantly. It's only a reliable tell when their hands suddenly start shaking on a nut-changing run-out, when they hit their draw and get a release of adrenaline.
That’s where I went wrong, I thought the A♥ was a perfect barreling card, one of the best in the deck. But when the OMC called me twice, it made me feel really uncomfortable.
I’ve learned it’s better to check the flop and exploit the OMC on later streets, especially when he checks twice, revealing even more weakness.
My experience with OMC in general is that like 90% of their range is Ax. It seems like they fold KJs and play A3o. So im giving up OTT because i would strongly suspect he has AQ A8.
As played I think jamming river is fine, but not great for above reasons
I think this is again a definitional thing. I think of OMCs as constantly folding pre; typically playing at their loosest 10/5/2, and frequently tighter than that, i.e. A3o is never in their range.
Older people *may* play random Ax, but I wouldn't call them OMCs.
My experience with OMC in general is that like 90% of their range is Ax. It seems like they fold KJs and play A3o. So im giving up OTT because i would strongly suspect he has AQ A8.
As played I think jamming river is fine, but not great for above reasons
I think this is again a definitional thing. I think of OMCs as constantly folding pre; typically playing at their loosest 10/5/2, and frequently more tight.
Older people *may* play random Ax, but I wouldn't call them OMCs.
I think a lot of bros assume that anyone who's fairly tight and looks 55+ is an OMC. To be honest, I've known some genuine OMC--and I think they're all dead by now. The rocks I run across in casinos come in all ages and sizes.
The days of the genuine "old man rock" who simply is there for the coffee and human interaction are likely gone, since most of the "old men" playing NL now are simply guys who've been playing (at least episodically) since the start of the poker boom.
I think a lot of bros assume that anyone who's fairly tight and looks 55+ is an OMC. To be honest, I've known some genuine OMC--and I think they're all dead by now. The rocks I run across in casinos come in all ages and sizes.
The days of the genuine "old man rock" who simply is there for the coffee and human interaction are likely gone, since most of the "old men" playing NL now are simply guys who've been playing (at least episodically) since the start of the poker boom.
Yeah, this. There arent any 10/5/2 in the poker room. My experience is the “OMC” players are like 20(+)/5/2, and whether the range is 10 or 20 or 30%, they seem to prefer Ax over broadway or SCs, with their looseness defining whether that means they are folding KQs and playing A8s as bottom of range, or folding QTo and playing A2o as bottom of range, i still expect an ace heavy range from them.
Suspicious of OMC read, esp. at 5/5.
Shaking hands can mean a lot of things without better reads.
Would lean towards check on flop with just a gutter (solver mixes everything, so we technically GTO I guess). Esp. with any read that V is tight, all draws are better than ours and a bunch dominate us.
Maybe everyone who doesn't just fire half pot with 100% range on flop is an OMC?
If anything turn is better for V than hero, and doesn't interact with 76 ... so would much prefer to use KJ/KT/JT type hands.
River is w/e we have nothing and unblock flush draws, but are probably bluffing way too much. SB likely calling too much on previous streets, but not sure that's great for us hoping he folds now on a brick.
That’s where I went wrong, I thought the A♥ was a perfect barreling card, one of the best in the deck. But when the OMC called me twice, it made me feel really uncomfortable.
I’ve learned it’s better to check the flop and exploit the OMC on later streets, especially when he checks twice, revealing even more weakness.
FWIW, I tend to under-bluff against OMC's, because they tend to be so trappy. If and when I bluff, it's usually going to be scenarios where I have the best blockers to the nuts, and the run-out is just terrible for whatever range the OMC was repping.
In this hand, I think the fact that he checked twice is less relevant than the fact that he called twice. He's probably not check-calling twice with air. I agree that we're better off checking flops rather than c-betting against OMC's. If you checked flop, and he had a hand, he'd bet turn for value and protection against the draws.
Yeah, this. There arent any 10/5/2 in the poker room. My experience is the “OMC” players are like 20(+)/5/2, and whether the range is 10 or 20 or 30%, they seem to prefer Ax over broadway or SCs, with their looseness defining whether that means they are folding KQs and playing A8s as bottom of range, or folding QTo and playing A2o as bottom of range, i still expect an ace heavy range from them.
That feels like a classic loose passive stats though.
I'd rather we keep the definition of OMC (however infrequently they show up) than redefine it, and call the new type of Senior that overplays Ax something else.
Cue @raiseannouunced to come in and start using OMCINO like it's a thing we all know.
I dont really know what an OMC is because everyone seems to have a different definition but he has some A-high that called flop if he's remotely competent.
My hands shake when I drink caffeine it has nothing to do with my hand strength.
Well, my 5/5 games are OMC fests.
These guys probably dominated poker in the early 2000s, yet they still believe they’re good.
90% of them play loosely preflop, calling with a lot of speculative hands, but they never go crazy with weak hands postflop. So it's really hard to extract money from them after the flop; I would say they’re quite disciplined.
That feels like a classic loose passive stats though.
I'd rather we keep the definition of OMC (however infrequently they show up) than redefine it, and call the new type of Senior that overplays Ax something else.
I mean thats cool that youd like that, and maybe i would too, but as best I can tell, what i described is by and large what people have meant when they say omc for like at least 7 years. Im not applying my own definition of OMC, i just post here often enough to know the player type OP is talking about, and its a little more than just LP, in fact i think Bellezza summed up exactly what I imagined him to mean:
Well, my 5/5 games are OMC fests.
These guys probably dominated poker in the early 2000s, yet they still believe they’re good.
90% of them play loosely preflop, calling with a lot of speculative hands, but they never go crazy with weak hands postflop. So it's really hard to extract money from them after the flop; I would say they’re quite disciplined.
So moving forward, i guess your options are you can either understand peoples new meaning of OMC, or intentionally misunderstand them and provide suboptimal advice due to the misunderstanding, or you can argue lexicography in the comments section. I dont think options 2 and 3 sound very effective.
LOL and here you go, if you want to try and popularize this go for it.
An OMC is a mega nit who barely plays any hands and only raises postflop with top 2 and sets. They often don’t raise AK or QQ pre because they want to see a good flop first. The goal is to make it through an 8 hour day and win one big pot off an unsuspecting out of towner.
I mark anyone 60+ who sticks to playing only strong hands as an OMC. Some OMCs raise only with QQ+; others will limp and call a lot preflop. But overall, their tendencies are the same, they never go crazy with junk hands.
Armenian, Iranian, and Israeli OMCs tend to play more loosely, while white OMCs are usually rocks. Asian 50/50.
