An interesting hand that took place on Crypto. It had a happy ending
but I wasn't 100% happy with the way I went about business here and
thought some other viewpoints might help me to resolve my feelings on
the hand. Overall I think my line was valid but I think most good
players would've gone about things differently (i.e. less aggressive on
the flop).

200 PLO, I've just joined the table. It has a pretty decent AP so it's
probably loose-ish, I can't remember the specific opponents involved,
however I had no specific reads on them at the time, typical 200 oppos
mostly, slightly loose and mostly passive. Everyone relevant has
somewhere in the ballpark of a full stack (one of the limpers who folded
may have had 100 or so).

I'm third to act with KQJTds. I don't normally raise early on but when
I do it's usually a hand that plays well multi-way, or a low wrap or
something for a bit of deception (rather than an AA hand or decent high
suited A). Here I decide to raise with this excellent hand with one
limper to me. I get 4 callers - two guys with position on me, one of
the blinds, and the limper, so I'm 3rd to act out of 5 on the flop.

Flop brings K54 rainbow. Not great but not bad. It's checked to me
and I decide to bet out the $40 or so. Normally I wouldn't touch one
pair (without even the nut kicker) on a raised flop with 4 in against
me, here I was thinking
a) the flop is so uncoordinated that there's a good chance I can buy it
with a bet, even if people think I have AA they're unlikely to try to
bluff/semi-bluff me out because I'd be approaching commitment with that
hand, and no-one is likely to have a set of Ks (as I have one) or a low
set (because I raised PF and 44/55 are unlikely hands to call a raise
with. Two pair is also unlikely as the K doesn't connect the 4 and 5
well enough for a raising hand, and I have decent equity against any two
pair anyhow so it's less of a worry.
b) if I get called it's very likely to be a hand I can play against
easily - it's most likely to be something like 67xx or 678x and so I can
give up or try to take a free card if something connected to that comes.
I fancy a two pair hand or set will almost certainly raise here. I'm
not sure what I'd do against a raise, I probably have to fold although
if I had less money left I'd probably call as I have a strong hand vs 2
pair, but I suppose the threat of a low set is too scary. So I'm in a
good spot to play the turn I guess.
c) I'm putting pressure on hands that have major equity if I check it -
basically any hand is very live against mine now, but only a handful of
them (str8 draws, sets and 2-pairs basically) can play against me as I'm
probably repping aces or a vaguely possible set of kings. If I can get
heads up against a guy with a bare open-ender and push out folks with an
ace, any pair in hand, any king etc etc it's probably a better result
than checking and basically giving up on this hand.
d) I don't give LP guys with a mediocre draw the chance to push me off
my very live hand by betting a semi-bluff.

Key to it was the fact that I had a plan for the turn but this is also
the drawback of this play in a way - I'm not sure (given my turn plan)
that the bet is good unless I have pretty significant fold equity -
probably over 30%. My plan is as follows:

a) if I get called by someone OOP and they check to me, if the board
blanks the low straight draw I'll push all in (there's one full pot bet
left) on the turn figuring my K is good more often than not.
b) if I get called by someone with position on me I'll probably check a
lot of turns, and check-fold any straightening card with the possible
exception of a 2.
c) if I turn two pair (which by the nature of my hand will also have an
open-ender, so I'll have a likely 12 outs against a low set) I'm all in
no matter what happens, pushing it first if I get the chance.
d) if I turn a flush draw which doesn't connect an obvious straight or
a 9 (both of which make me decent draws to go with top pair) I'm
probably pushing in most cases, though I'll probably fold some flush
draws that connect an obvious straight unless I can find a 3-way all in
or someone under-bets or something.
e) any straightening card gets basically insta-folded.
f) I'll probably take the likely free card if an ace hits, especially
if more than one oppo calls.

The problem with that plan is that IF I get called there's a lot of
turns I don't like, and a few that may induce me to push possibly as an
underdog. So I think I need to see 4 folds fairly often to make the
flop bet decent.

Anyhow, it didn't work out ideally because I got two calls from both
guys with position on me. This maybe isn't the worst scenario as I'm
still confident that in a three-way pot any K, Q, J or T is likely to
give me the best hand (and one I can push) on the turn, and any flush
draw or 9 gives me enough to potentially continue in many possible turn
betting scenarios. Getting called in one spot with position on me is
arguably vaguely worse (though perhaps not as if it's a guy with 67xx
I'm still ahead, whilst with two callers there's a good chance either my
hand isn't good or it's facing a ton of cards that can kill it).

The turn brought a T which is obviously ideal for me, though it did put
out a flush draw I didn't have. Obviously I pushed my two pair, got
called in one spot by a guy with a straight draw (I think it was just a
bare 67, he might've had one low pair to go along with it or something
giving him 10 outs) and won a nice double through. Again, as I said
before I push any K or 2 pair here, and check-fold any straightening
card. A 9 I'll probably push, most flush draws will connect the low
straight so I'd probably check them and try to get to a free or cheap
river, with a view to folding if one guy and only one moves all in. I'd
probably check-call if an ace hits, though I may open push one of my
suit.

Anyways, a long winded post about a fairly uninteresting hand but it's
one that's been on my mind as it's not that often I make a major betting
decision that I'm ambivalent about. In this case it was on the flop,
the turn is pretty obvious IMO.

I'm really glad you posted this, as this is the kind of play I was making routinely (usually in 3-way pots, though) during my losing spree at the 2/4.

I think I'm still a bit brain-dead, but I'll still attempt to comment.

First, I think it has to be a good play if your image is strong, as yours pretty much has to be if your opponents aren't oblivious, and/or if the table is weak. What I'm really wondering is whether it isn't a good idea to play like this in phases, although it's interesting that none of the PLO literature I've looked at talks at all about shifting gears (why not? it really seems to me like it should be just as good in PLO as in HE, possibly better).

Second, your logic here seems to me completely sound. There are quite a few possible hands to which you're behind but very few to which you're noticeably behind: Those are really just the sets, which should let you know immediately. And while you may be a little behind to monstrous wraps, I can't imagine being worse than 60-40, particularly not if you still have both runner-runner flush draws.

One potential problem is this: You get a flat call from a set and end up pushing a turn where you may be significantly behind. This problem is only resolved by knowing your opponents pretty well. You're supposed to get a raise out of them anyway, but I do often see bottom set just flat calling here very often, or a hand like 5567.

One thing about the 1/2, though: This board is usually pretty likely to get checked around, then you have a much better idea of where you're at on the turn.

I also don't particularly like a check-call to a pot-sized bet (if LP makes a passive bet, surely that's an easy call?) from LP, although I'm not sure whether that's a bad play either.

I really don't know about this one. I just can hardly see any alternative to the line you take. Check-fold just seems too weak to me, and check-call just seems much worse than betting out. But maybe I've gotten much too aggressive for my own good.

Here's my provisional view: One should have 2 different "gears" in PLO. In tight mode, you check-fold this one but are also happy to see a free turn if you can. In aggro mode, you play it the way you did. You use tight mode for long stretches until you're getting too many folds, then you go into aggro mode.

One aside to that: If the pot were 3-way, would this become an auto-bet even in tight mode?

Also, if I may semi-hijack: Would you guys be down for an extensive analysis of where I went screwball in the 2/4 this time? What it felt like to me subjectively (perhaps still a bit brain-dead after this fiasco) was that I was just always playing this kind of situation with the bet, although usually more in 3-way pots.

so any flop raise and you fold? what's your plan if someone leads into you on the flop or on a blank turn?

I think it's unlikely anyone will raise a draw or a pair of kings or less because the least I'm repping here is aces. Having put a good chunk of my stack in (about a 1/3) a majority of folks in this game probably pay off with AAxx so they're unlikely to try to force me off that hand I'd have thought, without 2 pair, a set, or a big draw (678x). But yeah it's a possibility and a worry.

Also of concern is that if someone raises two pair or 678x I'll fold incorrectly.

and the turn if someone leads into you on say a 9 turn? What about a 2 or a 4?

I really think folding incorrectly isn't so horrible. If someone is good enough to raise 5678 (4678, etc.), then they can have it. But I feel like it's a fairly small minority at the 1/2 who makes that raise.

I think AA would have tried betting this board in EP, but you're going to get an LP call if someone has AA. I really still like your plan for/analysis of the hand, although it's a pretty aggressive way to play it.