Are PLO players better at NLHE? This lady is giving me fits...
Seems like I have a hard time ranging PLO players in NLHE games, due to what I think I've observed as PLO players' tendencies:
1. They seem to not have much if any 3B'ing range. They might open for a raise, but if there's already a raise, they'll flat with AA and 75o. They don't seem to care how multi-way the pots go, or have much if any regard for position or pre-flop configurations.
2. Post-flop, they seem to mostly check-call or bet small for value if checked to, and not start bluffs in spots where most NLHE players would think it's natural. They make pretty light calls, some pretty tight folds, and seem to show up with some surprisingly strong hands on the river, after checking, when most NLHE players would be betting for value.
In short - they do a lot of weird $hlt that doesn't make sense to NLHE players.
Friday night, Parx Philly, 1/3, $500 max, 9-handed.
Lady on my direct right is a 2/2 PLO reg. From the conversation I had with her, and hearing her talking up the dealers, I got the sense that she was a winning PLO player, and from what I could see, she was pretty decent at NLHE. She always seemed to have a winning hand at showdown, and humble-bragged that she was good at sniffing out bluffs.
A couple hand histories of note, by way of example...
H1 -
V1 (PLO lady) limps from EP/MP. I open from LJ for my normal $20 raise over a limp. Don't remember my hand, but it doesn't matter.
V2 is a whale on the BTN. He's VPIP'ing around 90%, calling my PFR's around 95%, donking a lot of flops with any piece of the board, stabbing nearly 100% when action checks to him, and check-calling big turn bets, then dark-checking the river with what seems to be his entire range. He calls.
V3 in the BB calls. Not really relevant here.
She calls. Flop comes KT5rb, and she over-bet donks. I whiffed, and I know she's never bluffing, so I fold. As the whale is cutting out chips to call, she announces that she's jamming the rest of her stack on the turn. He shrugs and calls. BB folds.
Don't remember what the turn was, but she jams. I think she might have had her stack over the line before the card was even on the felt. BTN folds. She shows 55 for bottom set.
H2 -
The whale open limps from EP/MP. 2 more limps. She's in the SB and starts to look at her cards. I try to make it a habit not to look at my hole cards until it's my turn to act, so I don't give up any tells, but I start to look at my cards as she's looking at hers. She limps. I've got 99, and put in a pretty healthy raise to $35, hoping the whale calls and we get HU.
Action folds back around to her, and she puts in a pretty healthy 3B to $125. I started the hand with $425. Against most NLHE players, especially LAG's, I'd say this is the most FOS line ever, but I'm not loving this spot, at all. I'm in the tank, no idea what to do, and eventually fold.
She shows QQ, and leans over to tell me that she was watching me as I peeled my cards, and saw me reach for my chips, looking like I was getting ready to raise. I think I was just reaching for chips to shuffle, but whatever. Lesson learned (again). No more looking at my cards or touching my chips until it's my turn to act.
As nice as it was for her to tell me that, I was thinking about it, and realized she could have gotten more value out of me if she opened for $15-$20 and I 3B to $50-$70, or if she opened to $25-$30 and I flat called. She could get at least one more street of value by c-betting or checking to me and letting me bet my hand for value and protection, especially on a low board.
I don't know if she was soft-playing me, the way she soft-played that hand where she flopped a set, or if that's her idea of getting max value with a strong hand. Like most PLO players, she's a mystery to me.
OTTH...
Around $500 eff.
She open limps from EP/MP. I open AcTc for $20 in the LJ. Whale calls on BTN. BB calls. She calls.
($80) Flop is 943rb, with one club, and checks through.
($80) Turn is 943rb 2x adding a BDFD (not clubs). Action checks to me.
I figure BB would have lead the turn if he had any sort of value, and the whale would have stabbed the flop with any piece of the board. I have no idea what she's doing here, but I figure she's just waiting for someone to bet so she can fold.
I've got two overs, I could credibly rep A5s or 65s here, as well as a ton of over-pairs that want to get value after the the flop checked through, since I've been checking almost every flop as the PFR when I'm OOP to the whale and it's multi-way.
I bet $35. Whale and BB fold, and she calls.
($150) River is 9432 Ax (no flush completion), giving me top pair. She checks.
Hero?
Before I respond fully, how well do you know PLO? I have both games in my repertoire (though I consider myself much better at NL) and I feel like her actions in the prior hands were understandable to me.
Before I respond fully, how well do you know PLO? I have both games in my repertoire (though I consider myself much better at NL) and I feel like her actions in the prior hands were understandable to me.
I understand the basics of PLO, having watched enough of it, and discussed it with other players, including some who play PLO, but without ever playing it myself.
I understand the strat of not being overly aggressive with a wide range of hands, because the equities in PLO run so close, and the nuts can quickly change from street to street, and people have a lot more possible hands when they're playing four hole cards.
It's not that I think her actions in prior hands weren't understandable. It's that people who only play NLHE would typically play these spots differently.
Like, it makes sense for her to donk flop with bottom set when we're multi-way, at least sometimes, but not as much in H1, when I'm likely to c-bet as the PFR, and the whale is likely to call, whereas if I raise her donk, the whale is more likely to fold. So she makes more value by checking her set on the K-high board that favors my range as the PFR.
If she's going to donk the flop, I'm ambivalent about her over-bet sizing, but I don't see how it adds to her EV by declaring she plans to jam turn. A NLHE player might donk bet the flop, but often for a smaller size, not an over-bet, and most NLHE players are more likely to go for the check-raise on the flop.
I understand her thinking in H2, if she's convinced I'm going to raise. But if she thought about it more, she'd realize she'd make more money by just raising herself, to a small size that I can 3B, or to a large size that I'm going to just call.
Most NLHE players aren't going to take a chance that they're wrong about the "tell" she thought she saw. They're just going to raise QQ in the SB, so they don't have to play a four-way pot first to act.
Once I raise, and the other two fold, I think some NLHE players are likely to change their plan, and just smooth call, to hopefully stack me post, rather than take a chance that I'll find a fold when they 3B big.
It's not just those two earlier hands. I've seen a lot of similar stuff with PLO players. Like, I've seen PLO guys slow play AA all the way to the river on super-wet boards, but turbo fold KQ on a 9-high board to a 1/3 pot c-bet in a SRP. NLHE players don't slow play AA on wet boards, or auto-fold two overs to small c-bets on top-pair dynamic flops.
I think where I'm struggling is that I don't understand PLO well enough to understand the way PLO players approach NLHE. Like, I'm never giving a guy AA when he just flat calls a raise pre and flat calls three streets on a wet board. I'm never expecting a guy to turbo fold KQ on a 9-high board to a 1/3 bet.
I'm not expecting NLHE players to check-call with a draw, make their hand on the river, and take a chance that the PFR will check back when the most obvious draws come in. And yet I see PLO players checking pretty nutted hands in spots where the river is going to get checked back a lot.
Bet 50, let her “sniff out your bluff” with pocket 8s.
I don't understand why you are complicating this.
To me she looks like a garden variety loose passive who plays value more strongly and overcalls. She seems like an excellent face up player except for preflop in which again, she's leaking left and right. If she's flatting with monsters, she's missing value and if she's playing crap like 75o, she's bleeding money.
The adjustment is to get out of her way when she shows aggression and expand your value range. Just don't try bluffing if she has shown any strength.
As for your hand, it's a bet fold on the river. I am more iffy about whether it's a bet on the turn given that it's multiway and your hand is probably going to be good by the river. But ok, since no one has shown they got everything, a small bet might deny equity to crap that can hit on the river. It's important to understand this, because you aren't bluffing with this hand.
yeah i dont really understand what her playing plo has to do w anything. she just seems like a fish that wants to protect her hand. if u dunno how to beat someone limp calling 7x and donking for more than pot when she hits a set multiway on kt5r idk what to tell you. bet when she checks and fold when she shows aggression, why is this complicated?
i think turn stab with at is not great 4 ways
you would do well ignoring anything the dealers have to say re peoples play as well as anyone talking about how well they do lol
You'll find out why it's complicated when I tell you what happens next.
it can't be complicated. the actual hands dont matter. once you see the first hand, including her telling someone when she has bottom set that she is going to jam the turn before he acts on the flop, you really don't have to spend much time thinking about this player. let her be loose passive pre and just bet whatever when she is uninterested. you can probably bet near 100% (on every single street) in hu pots with her because she never has top of range and probably never slowplays and is too wide
we're sitting here analyzing 2000 words like she is a reasonable player
if you're looking for advice exclusively on the last hand despite the thread title and the mountains of text otherwise, i would bet something like 20$
you gotta post more succinctly though. u dont need a player description of the whale in hand 2 when he doesnt factor into the hand at all, and no one cares that you don't look at your hands before the action is on you (its 1/3, not the main event don't do this). just make it easy for people to read the hand with any actual relevant information. itll be easier for people responding and probably easier for you as well
In as much as some tight-aggressive PLO players might have certain tendencies that work well in their plo game, and those players do not adjust their play for the fact that NLHE is a different game, you might see more:
- pot sized bets with strong made hands and big draws
-betting out rather than checking to the raiser
If that is what this opponent is doing you have a fairly easy exploit which is fold marginal hands to the pot sized bets and bet more widely when checked to.
However, I would not generalize too much to player population of "PLO players" (some will have a different style in NLHE)
I may have given misleading info with the two prior hand histories. There were other hands in which she check-called with a strong hand, rather than betting or raising for value.
There were also hands that she check-hero-called with weaker value, hands that I'd have expected to fold out on earlier streets.
clearly you must have edited out the pertinent info for brevity
she just seems like a fish. i think the actual hand your hand stregnth and equity don't really make much sense to stab 4 ways (i think its likely just about every better hand calls you and its murky what to do unless you hit exactly a T), the texture isn't great for doing what you did, and the sizing ott is probably too big given multiways though likely doesn't matter against this bunch. ap otr, i think the ev of a small bet is fairly good (id guess you have the best hand idk 70+% of the time so i would bet?, maybe more because she seems like she may lead 5x) , and i don't think you need to worry about being exploited by randoms at 1/2 that are giving speeches about why they did what they did and telling people what they're going to do on subsequent streets (a large reason why you may not see tiny bets ip like this at equilibrium)
if the way you post is your actual thought process in game, you're overthinking way too much while not actually considering the important things
if she regularly plays small stakes plo live, she probably doesn't bluff and just waits to hit good hands then take advantage of people playing way too loose (ex the 55 hand). the qq strikes me as basically similar where they try not to have uncomfortable spr for aa - thats why you see people not really rr them preflop. things like thin valuebetting, balance, "playing poker", etc don't really exist in equity driven games that go 5+ ways to the flop often.
After she called turn, just check back river.
On the other hands, yeah, she's bad. It can be frustrating, but at the end of the day when she is being super face up, she saves you a ton of money.
I do think that *bad* PLO recs tend not to get some holdem concepts, particularly when it comes to bet sizing.
I apologize if my op gave the wrong impression with the prior hand histories in my OP. Those were the hands that stood out in my memory, because they were so unusual, and I wondered if they made some sort of sense to PLO players. There were plenty of other hands she won in ways that didn't make a lot of sense to me.
For instance, there were a few hands where I thought a river bluff would fold out everything worse than top pair, but I didn't think she'd get to the river with worse than top pair for value. Yet sure enough the river would go check check, and she'd win with bottom or middle pair, or her opponent would bet, and she'd snap it off with something pretty marginal, like a low pair with a busted draw.
After she called turn, just check back river.
On the other hands, yeah, she's bad. It can be frustrating, but at the end of the day when she is being super face up, she saves you a ton of money.
I do think that *bad* PLO recs tend not to get some holdem concepts, particularly when it comes to bet sizing.
You think it's too thin to bet river with AT, against all NLHE players, or against her?
I had no trouble folding when she took aggressive action, other than when she put in that weird back raise with QQ. I still folded, but not quickly.
Where I think I struggle against PLO players isn't when they're being aggro. It's when they're showing up with hands that don't make a lot of sense, or when they otherwise do things that seem counterintuitive in NLHE.
They seem to get to the river with so many more hands than the typical NLHE player that I don't know if I can bet thin for value or get a bluff through. Like I said, I think it's hard to hand read against them because they seem to take so many passive lines with such an insanely wide range. It's almost impossible to cap their ranges based on early street action.
IME most PLO players are bad, but sometimes difficult to play against at NLHE with a bunch of bad randos thrown in.
Number 1 rule: They don't care about the money.
If they are playing 2-5 PLO and getting in 2k pots a decent amount ... they just don't care about spew calling a few bb at even 2-5 NLHE.
From this it usually follows that they'll be harder to bluff, because they'll just massively overcall pairs if they think there's a chance your bluffing.
Too much PLO: They'll be more hyper-aware of board dynamics and board changing cards. Eg. Will probably play a lot of very strong NLHE hands weak on AQT, and be a lot more likely to fold A8 in that spot than random bad regs. This kind of explains the 55 donk on KT5 two tone (doesn't mean she'll always donk bottom set).
Sometimes both of these combine which means they'll sometimes make bluffs that very few other people will, because the money is nothing if they get called and they understand the board has changed from when you liked it.
On to the hand you are fighting both of those things, the A obviously changes the board and all NFD hands make top pair. But also one pair hands don't exactly love the board and lots of high cards have nothing.
If I haven't seen her x/r big on rivers I'd be tempted to bet like 85 and maybe she'll shrug call (50 might well be better, but I think 20 is too small). Will also call any of her NFD hands that will often be worse top pair.
If we've seen (or suspect) she can get savage with 87s/76s/whatever then I'd bet 20-35 (planning to call) or check.
PLO players are as bad at NLHE as NLHE players are at PLO. Dark jamming a set is just chef's kiss.
To be honest, I'm not sure how the preamble is relevant at all top the HH?
We're 4 ways to the turn on a board that we shouldn't have any piece of cuz our AK has obviously missed. Awesome bet when we haz an overpear cuz any any pear is calling. But a poor one when we don't, imo.
As played (i.e. luckboxing the river), I now make an extremely small bet of like $35 hoping she can't pass up those odds even though our AK obviously got there.
GcluelesspreamblingnoobG
IME most PLO players are bad, but sometimes difficult to play against at NLHE with a bunch of bad randos thrown in.
Number 1 rule: They don't care about the money.
If they are playing 2-5 PLO and getting in 2k pots a decent amount ... they just don't care about spew calling a few bb at even 2-5 NLHE.
From this it usually follows that they'll be harder to bluff, because they'll just massively overcall pairs if they think there's a chance your bluffing.
Too much PLO: They'll be more hyper-aware of boa
I think the "don't care about the money" insight is likely why I find it hard to range PLO players. More than once I've found myself on the river, unsure if a bluff would get through, or if it made sense to value bet TP+.
I haven't yet seen much bluffing from PLO players playing NLHE. Not that they don't bluff. I just haven't seen much of it.
This hand is an example of a river decision made tougher because I think I know how most NLHE players get here, but I'm not sure how to range a PLO player.
So, again, I think I probably used the wrong hand examples in my OP. Sorry.
Aside from the two prior hand histories, what I saw of her NLHE play generally aligned with what I've seen from other PLO players, in that they seem to get to the river with a wide range, and they tend to play that range pretty passively.
Spoiler
When she checked river, I was mostly putting her on 9x, or 66-88, maybe TT that didn't raise off pre, since she didn't seem to have much of a raising range. Thinking a big bet on the ace river would look bluffy, after I bet turn, I bet out for $125.
She goes deep into the tank, before eventually flicking in the call. I turn over my hand, assuming I had the winner after she tanked for so long. She shows 75o, no clubs, for the rivered wheel.
I did a double-take, not understanding how she tanked for as long as she did. It felt like I got nit rolled. She said she was contemplating a fold, because she thought I had 65 when I bet turn, and the only reason she called was that she had the 7, hoping the river would be a 6.
Talking with her some more, I got the sense that it never crossed her mind I might bluff the turn when the flop checks through and action checks to me again, or that I might just check back river on the ace, if I had been bluffing with something like KQcc. She didn't seem to get that NLHE players are rarely if ever folding her hand, and if I have 65, they're just paying me off.
I get that not everyone here likes my turn bet, but I'd take the same line with A5, 65, 55, all my over-pairs, and any flush draw I picked up on the turn. Maybe not all the time, when it's multi-way, but with the reads I had on the other two opponents, I thought it was a good spot to start a bluff, in case I didn't improve on the river.
I dunno. I guess I over-played my hand on the river, but I don't think most NLHE players are going to check river when they make the wheel and I take this line. Once I check flop, I could just be betting the turn with 66-88, 9x, and TT-KK, and I'm not going to bet the river on that ace.
yeah i mean you got all this text in here for a hand that probably shouldn't stab the turn (i could have good hands even if my opponents don't realize that so i get to bet all of my air into 3 people isn't how ranges work) but having bet you have a (very) thin valuebet otr so you should size down. 125 is likely a bad size vs anyone except the most stationy of all the whales. i dont think her playing plo or any of the previous hhs are remotely relevant or matter here. don't really think you gotta write all this man.
there really isnt anything complicated about the hand beyond you wanting to inject narratives into every hand you play
i would imagine shes thinking about raising the river when she tanks for so long not folding
yeah i mean you got all this text in here for a hand that probably shouldn't stab the turn (i could have good hands even if my opponents don't realize that so i get to bet all of my air into 3 people isn't how ranges work) but having bet you have a (very) thin valuebet otr so you should size down. 125 is likely a bad size vs anyone except the most stationy of all the whales. i dont think her playing plo or any of the previous hhs are remotely relevant or matter here. don't really think you gotta
She said she was thinking about folding, worried that I had 65s, which is one of the hands I was repping when I bet turn, and the sort of hand I was repping with my bet size on the river. So, at least that much adds up. A little while after the hand, she asked if I thought she slow-rolled me. She definitely wasn't thinking about raising.
The fact that she called anyway just shows that she understands I can have some bluffs on the turn and river. That she didn't expect me to value-bet AX shows she doesn't really understand thin value betting, or that I could be bluffing on an earlier street and value-betting on the last.
I'm not "wanting to inject narratives" into every hand I play. In game, I'm thinking about my opponents' past play when considering my own actions. I think knowing the whale is likely to stab the flop with any piece of the board, and that the BB is going to donk turn with any value that needs protection, makes my turn bet reasonable, if a river bluff has any chance of getting through.
And the fact is, she was pretty stationy, in past hands. I'd seen her hero-call pretty big river bets with bottom or middle pair, or weak top pairs, and usually she'd win. She'd called off turn jams with just TP, weak kicker, in spots where her opponent could have many better hands. No matter the situation, she always seemed to show up with the best hand, just often a hand most NLHE players aren't going to have in that spot.
I thought it was very likely she'd look me up with 9x, and worse Ax. She seemed to have a lot of weak Ax in her range in a lot of hands, and if she's limp-calling pre with 75o, she will certainly have plenty of 9x here.
It's kind of dickish to say my opponents don't realize I have good hands in my range as the PFR. If my opponents don't have anything at all, I don't need a strong hand to get them to fold. But the fact is I do have many strong hands here - all the over-pairs, as well as 65, 55, and A5s. It's not like the turn 2 is likely to improve my opponent's ranges much.
She said she was thinking about folding, worried that I had 65s, which is one of the hands I was repping when I bet turn, and the sort of hand I was repping with my bet size on the river. So, at least that much adds up. A little while after the hand, she asked if I thought she slow-rolled me. She definitely wasn't thinking about raising.
The fact that she called anyway just shows that she understands I can have some bluffs on the turn and river. That she didn't expect me to value-bet AX shows she
regardless of what you think your range might be, i am pretty sure people are not putting u on overpairs when u x the flop and bet 35 here.
why do you think she will have 9x here? she might from pre but i think its reasonable to expect those hands to bet the turn esp given player read (protector)
i think in general your hand is not strong enough to bet large here as everyone keeps telling you. it'd be a little different if the turn isn't 4 ways but even then i think you'd do better sizing down
its just alot of they know i know they know type stuff when in reality you are playing 1/3 vs clueless people you've played 2 hours with
regardless of what you think your range might be, i am pretty sure people are not putting u on overpairs when u x the flop and bet 35 here.
why do you think she will have 9x here? she might from pre but i think its reasonable to expect those hands to bet the turn esp given player read (protector)
i think in general your hand is not strong enough to bet large here as everyone keeps telling you. it'd be a little different if the turn isn't 4 ways but even then i think you'd do better sizing down
its
I'd checked flop and bet around 1/2 pot on the turn in this exact spot with over-pairs, at least half a dozen times prior to this. If they're not good enough to remember and realize I had over-pairs in those other hands, they're not thinking at all, and therefore won't be thinking, "he never has over-pairs here."
If they don't think I have over-pairs, what do they think I have? A5? 65? A back-door flush draw? No idea at all? You seem to know what players you've never laid eyes on are thinking. What do they think I have here?
If they think I'm bluffing, then they'd call with their value. So, they either thought I had over-pairs, and folded value, or they didn't have any value, and might have thought I was bluffing, but they didn't have a strong enough hand to call, so my turn bet is fine, since I probably had the best hand.
I didn't describe her as a "protector". She was mostly check-calling with a wide range, in line with what I've seen other PLO players do at NLHE. If it's reasonable to think she'd bet the turn with a 9, then it's reasonable to think she'd bet the river with a straight, no? If she's not betting the river with a straight, she's not betting the turn with a 9.
Betting turn with a 9, when I could have over-pairs, or a straight, is a bit different than donk-betting the flop with bottom set on a two-Broadway board. Some random 9x here isn't nearly as likely to be the best hand. If she thought a 9 was strong enough to bet, why not bet the flop, before the turn brings in 65 and A5?
I said I over-played my hand on the river, by betting as large as I did. Already conceded that point.
You can say my opponents are clueless. That doesn't preclude us from noticing that they're clueless, and adjusting accordingly. It doesn't take hours of observation to notice what opponents are doing in a 1/3 game full of rec-fish, if we're paying attention. She was the only one I couldn't figure out.
Dude, seriously, you really need to work on your people skills. You can say you're not going out of your way to be a jerk, but it looks like you're going far out of your way with the tone of your replies. Like, why do you even bother reading the OP and posting comments if you're just so above it all and annoyed by it all?
No one is putting a gun to your head, saying, "read this, and reply, but feel free to be as condescending as possible."
You think it's too thin to bet river with AT, against all NLHE players, or against her?
I had no trouble folding when she took aggressive action, other than when she put in that weird back raise with QQ. I still folded, but not quickly.
Where I think I struggle against PLO players isn't when they're being aggro. It's when they're showing up with hands that don't make a lot of sense, or when they otherwise do things that seem counterintuitive in NLHE.
They seem to get to the river with so many mor
I think it is too thin in general with 4 liner to a straight. It is hard to get called by worse even if an Ace is going to be good a large % of the time. When you get called you are going to run into 2p+ a fair amount of the time.
Your post reads like a joke. Obviously the lady is bad. Not all PLO players are bad. She doesn't seem to understand the underlying math in poker and thinks of things much more like they are in PLO. In PLO she actually wiuld be running into a straight on the turn a fair amount of the time. And in PLO you have odds to call off draws a lot more often because you tend to have way more outs. And then she bets the maximum amount with sets - in PLO she would just pot it.
That said, it isn't an insane call off on the turn with an open ender even if she is not getting direct odds. But limp calling 75o is bad and it is silly to tank in the river with the 2nd nuts.
