This hand worked quite differently than I had expected. My opponent here is an extreme LAG, who I'm sure thought of me as nut-peddler deluxe--which was actually quite true at this table. I think I've become quite leaky in many ways by NOT sticking to nutpeddling with just some very selective "moves" thrown in.

My mini-raise on the flop was an attempt to do several things (not sure whether it was good or bad). First, I thought he might bluff re-raise me, which I wouldn't mind at all. I also wanted to build the pot a little so that I could check-raise a blank turn. And I also wanted to see if he had any kind of hand. So, those were my reasons for this kind of strange bet here.

The flush, however, made the turn check-raise idea completely absurd. I mean, at that point even a LAG is only going to call a check-raise with a flush, and I'm in trouble. So, this made my river situation again pretty difficult. On the river, I finally figured that his pot-sized bet, particularly against me (he had been pounding on me and some other tight players quite a bit; I was indeed playing pretty nut-peddly, and he obviously recognized that fact and had forced me to lay down several possibly/probably good hands in small pots that I wasn't going to lose a lot of sleep over), simply wasn't any kind of value-bet on a flush but a bet that wanted me to laydown. And, aside from flushes, my hand is good here.

So, here's the hand:

PokerStars Pot-Limit Omaha High, $2 BB (8 handed)

SB ($57)
BB ($226.95)
UTG ($367.20)
Hero ($342.40)
MP1 ($154.45)
MP2 ($266.40)
CO ($51.90)
Button ($569.60)

Preflop: Hero is UTG+1 with , , , .
1 fold, Hero calls $2, MP1 raises to $9, 5 folds, Hero calls $7.

Flop: ($21) , , (2 players)
Hero checks, MP1 bets $10, Hero raises to $20, MP1 calls $10.

Turn: ($61) (2 players)
Hero checks, MP1 bets $30, Hero calls $30.

River: ($121) (2 players)
Hero checks, MP1 bets $95.45 (All-In), Hero calls $95.45.

Final Pot: $311.90

Results in white below:


Outcome: Hero wins $311.90.

Villain had AhTh7h8c for nothing more than a gutshot on the flop.

i hate the min raise. what does that prove to him? it just gives away that you like your hand enough. Against a true idiot lag, i check raise the max and may be willing to get in on the turn no matter the card if i have no respect for him.

nut-peddling is fine in certain games, but i think there are some caveats that have to be included to play a "good" game (some you mentioned):

- game must have some calling stations

- got to be willing to push hard when you have a +EV situation, even if it's only a draw for a smalklish +EV (e.g., 5-10%). there is a caveat to this in certain contexts (e.g., waiting for the turn to jam against certain opponents).

- got to be willing to make image raises and bets pf and on the flop with (almost) any four if you've been card dead for a while (one type of move).

- occassionally bet on scare cards (another move)... needs the right villains and context (e.g., fewer players better).


as for playing a LAG, i think you hit the nail on the head... let them do the betting for you, and pop the river for a min raise or something like that if you have a strong hand (you have to define that yourself, but the nuts works). the real issue is to figure out how wild the LAG will be. for example, will he bet only with a flush (probably a weak one) on a flush board or does he bet anything? does he come alive on scare cards only or is any board OK? will he go nuts with trips, or will he bet a flopped two pair (on a paired board)? once you get a feel for the LAG's preferences, yeah, i think you can call down if you think you're ahead.

nice call down.