I don't know what to do on the river in these hands. If I get raised, its likely I have to fold but checking them down seems too weak.

Hand 1

Party Poker Pot-Limit Omaha High, $0.25 BB (8 handed)

CO ($33.15)
Button ($16.48)
SB ($24.15)
BB ($34.15)
Hero ($24.65)
UTG+1 ($42.01)
MP1 ($10.35)
MP2 ($5)

Preflop: Hero is UTG with , , , .
Hero calls $0.25, 4 folds, Button calls $0.25, SB completes, BB checks.

Flop: ($1) , , (4 players)
SB checks, BB checks, Hero bets $1, Button folds, SB folds, BB calls $1.

Turn: ($3) (2 players)
BB checks, Hero bets $2.85, BB calls $2.85.

River: ($8.70) (2 players)
BB checks, Hero bets $5, BB folds.

Final Pot: $13.70

Results in white below:
Hero has 2c As Ac 5d (straight, five high).
Outcome: Hero wins $13.70.

Hand 2

Party Poker Pot-Limit Omaha High, $0.25 BB (9 handed)

SB ($18.7)
BB ($92.56)
UTG ($24.25)
UTG+1 ($60.62)
MP1 ($15.54)
Hero ($27.11)
MP3 ($5.37)
CO ($25)
Button ($13.45)

Preflop: Hero is MP2 with , , , .
1 fold, UTG+1 calls $0.25, MP1 calls $0.25, Hero calls $0.25, MP3 calls $0.25, 1 fold, Button calls $0.25, SB completes, BB checks.

Flop: ($1.75) , , (7 players)
SB checks, BB bets $1.75, UTG+1 calls $1.75, MP1 folds, Hero raises to $7, MP3 folds, Button folds, SB folds, BB calls $5.25, UTG+1 calls $5.25.

Turn: ($22.75) (3 players)
BB checks, UTG+1 checks, Hero checks.

River: ($22.75) (3 players)
BB checks, UTG+1 checks, Hero bets $10, BB folds, UTG+1 folds.

Final Pot: $32.75

Results in white below:

Outcome: Hero wins $32.75.

I was a bit confused on what to bet on these rivers. Also, what do you think of the play, particularly on the turn for hand 2.

Also

Hand 3

Party Poker Pot-Limit Omaha High, $0.25 BB (9 handed)

Button ($19.25)
SB ($27.11)
BB ($23.29)
Hero ($27.55)
UTG+1 ($11.11)
MP1 ($11.42)
MP2 ($27.8)
MP3 ($21.15)
CO ($19.58)

Preflop: Hero is UTG with , , , .
Hero calls $0.25, 4 folds, CO calls $0.25, Button calls $0.25, SB completes, BB checks.

Flop: ($1.25) , , (5 players)
SB checks, BB checks, Hero bets $1.25, CO folds, Button folds, SB folds, BB calls $1.25.

Turn: ($3.75) (2 players)
BB checks, Hero bets $3.6, BB calls $3.60.

River: ($10.95) (2 players)
BB checks, Hero bets $10.45, BB folds.

Final Pot: $21.40

Results in white below:
Hero has Kc 9s Ks Jc (flush, king high).
Outcome: Hero wins $21.40.

Hand 1: why don't you raise preflop? That helps you define the hand of your opponent and makes it more likely on the river that he doesn't have 56. On the river there is only one hand that beats you, ans there is not many hands that will call your value bet. I think you should bet the river for value, but that the correct size is a bit dependent on the opponent. Against a weak opponent a smaller bet might be better, to milk him a bit, but against a tricky or aggressive opponent I wouldn't bet less than half the pot, because you might get bluff-raised.

Hand 2: I play this the same way. I don't know what they were calling the flop with. If you think they are both likely to bet out on the turn if they made their straight, then things change a bit. But you don't want to risk being checkraised here, so a check for a free card is fine. Since your opponents showed weakness on both streets, I'd make my value bet a bit smaller.

Hand 3: Unless your opponent is an uncurable slowplayer, it is clear that you have the best hand when he just calls the turn. He either has a smaller flush or a set and doesn't know what to do with it. On the river it is kind of player dependent, but I would make a smallish bet if I think this is more likely to get called. Although I've seen people call off big bets with the third nut flush, even at $100 games.

Pieter

There is absolutely no moral obligation to bet the flop if you raised preflop. (BTW, this is not just something which happens in limit but also in NL where you will bet most flops if you raised pf.) If you have AAKKds preflop and the flop comes 789 with none of your suits, then nobody blames you for check-folding against more than one opponent. Sometimes I see people play PLO like they play holdem, and it's great to have them at the table since they grossly overplay overpairs and it is very easy to trap them.

Of course many things depend on table texture, but in an average game I think you miss out on some profit by not raising. You know the reasons for betting preflop I'm sure. There are people (such as ATE) who recommend raising at least a bit with any hand you will play, so that you get maximum value if you hit. If you make better decisions on the flop than your opponent you hope that you can induce them to make a mistake on the flop, and you'd prefer that to be an expensive one.

I also find that if you raise more hands then your opponents will adapt to that, which makes it easier to define their hands, especially when you have notes on them saying what type of hands they reraise with or call a raise with. In LP I raise about half of the hands I play when there are only limpers in front of me, to exploit my position. In EP I will mix it up, sometimes raising, sometimes limp-reraising with premium hands. With medium hands like weak aces, I will sometimes raise full pot, and sometimes raise less than that.

If you ALWAYS limp with all your hands then your opponents will never be able to put you on a hand preflop. But you are not earning as much $ as you could. If you only raise your best hands, then you will not make much money from any observant opponent.

Pieter

But there is something to be said for people like me that don't raise preflop at all that people will have a hard time putting me on hands. If an Ace hits the flop and I limped where everyone else would normally raise with AAxx, I am likely to get a lot of action from people with second and third sets or two pair. I only play between 20-25% of hands total (probably about 15% out of the blinds) so I can see that people will know I only have good hands. However, the turnover is so great on these tables, that new people are constantly showing up and have no idea that I have nice hands all the time.

Also, I think it is not a bad strategy on the low limit tables where raises don't really get out the bad hands. Therefore, raising with AAxx and then getting a 249 flop doesn't necessarily mean someone doesn't have two pair or a set with the garbage they play.

I am relatively new to omaha and i also don't raise preflop. Ever. I think it cuts down the range of hands that players can put me on pf. Also i'm not that confident in my postflop play. So i just wait till after the flop to make any raises.

Huh I really have no idea whta these guys are playing, but calling stations they seem to be. On hand 2 I check the turn and really dont expect action on river so might as well make a small bet. On hand three the highest flush he could have is q-high, then 9-high (if we exclude a-high). I dunno but a set seems likelier to me than these holdings (3rd and 9th high-flushes). And I don´t think he is "keeping you honest" in case you are bluffing with the bare A. So again I dont see a big river pay off, bet small. If u had the A-high I would bet strong as a K-high flush would probably pay a decent bet.

I used to play a lot of 0.5-1 plo and it was incredibly loose-passive, big pf raises did narrow the field though. In my experiences there were usually about 2-3 players who could read hands, and since you can have a decent pf raising range without a headache in plo the better readers couldnt give me excessive headache. I think it is a good idea to play conservatively preflop untill you get comforfable with your postflop play, but I don´t think the edge from raising never vs raising few hands and "disguising your hand" is too big at this level anyway (and from what I ve seen not often even at higher limits).

I'm not saying that never raising preflop is a losing strategy. I think you can be a winning player at PLO without ever raising a hand preflop, especially at the lower levels. You can also be a winning player at NL without ever raising preflop.
But I am convinced it is definately a suboptimal strategy and that you miss out on a lot of money. And I also think (although I haven't played higher than $100) that against better opponents you will be in bad shape if you are never aggressive preflop.

Not raising any hand preflop will definately accomplish the goal of disguising your hand. But there are other ways to accomplish that, such as folding all of them, raising all of them, or just mixing it up. You should avoid becoming predictable against good opponents, but on most tables that means that you should avoid raising AAxx only.

It is true that if you don't raise preflop and you have top set that you might get a lot of action from someone with middle set. But you get the same action with a better payout if you raise many hands, so that he cannot put you on your top set. Assume you are playing a more or less sensible player X, and you just limped with AAxx to flop AT5r, and that X has TTxx. Now you bet the pot (4BB) and X raises the pot, making it 12BB to go. If there are draws on the board, you better reraise, making it 36BB to go. By assumption, X was more or less reasonable and starts wondering now. He might call the 36 but you're not getting much more out of him.
Now consider the case where you raised to 3BB before the flop and got 3 callers. Now the pot is 12BB; you bet pot, opponent raises pot (to 36BB) and now you can reraise allin. If he calls you get his entire stack. If not, you got 36BB. The best outcome in the first scenario is the worst outcome in the second.

There are situations where I like to see a cheap flop. For example, when I have a really marginal hand that needs to hit a very specific flop to win. If I have a hand like a 3-6 wrap or a pair of queens with not-so-good sidecards then there is not much benefit in raising.
Another situation is when there are many short stacks, in which case the stacks are not deep enough to play poker on the flop. (This is of course different in holdem where your hand can be very dominating.) But then, I don't like to play in a game where the majority of players has less than half a buyin.

Finally (sorry this turns into a bit of a rant), I agree that in the smaller games a raise will not necessarily weed out the crappy hands. But there are many other arguments to raise preflop than just weeding hands out. You want to take the initiative, manipulate pot size, and make people with weaker hands pay to see the flop. Imagine this scenario (which is far from uncommon): you have AQJTds, and your opponent has AKJT, but not suited. (Here you want your opponent to call of course.) Now the flop is KQ6. You both have a straight draw, but if the flop has one or two of one of your suits you're in such a better shape because of your extra draws and redraws. If you read your opponent for the straight draw you want to get as much money in as fast as possible (before the flush hits and he sees he's beat). Everytime you have the same draw/made hand but you have a freeroll to your opponents stack you need to be able to push it in as fast as you can.

Well, I'm curious what Monk and other experts have to say about this, but I think that the advantages of raising are much, much bigger than those of limping.

Pieter