potentially a bigger leak than changing your LP PFR by a few % either way. Food for thought anyhow, and I certainly don't mean to discourage you from doing so!
I'm also not at all aversed to people buying in short (not mega-short but half stacks or something) as in general they don't play it that well and give you a lot more options against them.
I think in general erring on the side of aggression on most streets in PLO is no bad thing - btw, I also think if your KKJ9 was ss you could probably have taken a flop against AA for the re-raise but it's marginal as you said. As Ojingo very rightly said, raising can be a powerful tool as you'll win a LOT of pots uncontested from LP by CBing when an ace hits; even good players with 2 pair will think twice about continuing here, and if you DO have a single ace in your hand, even if you get called by someone on a draw you could well be ahead (and if not, have lots of outs) with position.
So certainly, in LP, and especially with a minimal number of limpers (IMO a huge % of the equity from raising in LP comes from maximising your positional advantage to steal pots when only 2 or 3 players take the flop) I'd go with the more aggressive option and raise if you're ambivalent about how to play a certain hand. It's also good for your image; most PLO players see a regular PFRer as a bit of a LAG (this, I think, is a common holdem-derived misconception) which might help you get action post-flop in situations when you might want it, and also (because people will believe that you're raising a potentially wide variety of hands) won't mean observant players automatically fold to flop re-raises, which can help get you paid off in set-over-set situations and the like. I've always subscribed to the rather unscientific view that good things happen when you raise!Statistics: Posted by Felonius_Monk — Sat Oct 14, 2006 11:56 am
]]>