Uncoordinated boards

[Aisthesis]

I don't know whether this will end up having much potential, but I thought it might be interesting to examine betting on various kinds of boards--and I think it's possible to actually enumerate all of them.

Easiest one to start with is the completely uncoordinated board, having no straight draw and no flush draw possible. There are only 3 of these, as I see it, namely 27Q, 27K, and 38K, all rainbow obviously.

The question is how you bet and what you bet.

I think these are potential half-pot boards and also, if you raise, don't require pot-sized raises.

I note also that in EP with decent hand selection, you're pretty much always going to have AA (which I think should be bet here) or top set. In BB, obviously, you can have anything, so various 2 pair, middle and bottom set are clearly also possible, and I suppose top 2 or middle set are also POSSIBLE as side-cards to a big pair, hence possible but rare in other positions.

Ok, I think this is my EP plan: Bet out half pot on any set, top 2 or AA. If they're very aggressive, one might want to pot on the weaker of these hands, although I think even there, betting half pot, then folding to a raise on the weaker hands has some intangible value.

With top set, I'm also for calling a raise rather than re-raising. One can then check-raise the turn.

I'll leave it at that for now. Thoughts?

[Felonius_Monk]

I think you want to REALLY up the ante in terms of stealing on these boards, simply because there aren't liable to be any draws out (even boards with minimal draws, 48Q rainbow etc). This is especially appropriate from LP when a couple of folks check to you; you make a pot bet (or perhaps sometimes slightly less, though I prefer pot as that's how I'd play a set usually) and unless someone's setting a trap with a set you win it. As you bet pays you 1:1, as long as no-one has a set more than 50% of the time (which will be the case against 2-4 opponents) you'll make good money doing this.

You can do it to a lesser extent from EP of course, but it's nice to know everyone's checked first, you make a fair bit of money in PLO by stealing these "orphan" flops as I call them (because nobody wants them; dunno if someone's already coined that term, it wouldn't surprise me ). One or two of these every half hour or so can keep you afloat on a tight table whilst you wait for that one solid hand that'll finally make you a few chips...

[Aisthesis]

A few remarks, first the easy one: Doesn't half-pot here mean that you only have to take it down 1/3 of the time to make a profit, hence a better bet?

Secondly, your Q84r board, which I'm calling a double 3-gapper. This is a little more complex, but it also has something to do with where I'm trying to go with this analysis of flop structures. I think that's a super LP board, and would be even better ss.

In actuality, there are a MAXIMUM number of scare cards in the deck (namely 24 not counting whatever is in the drawer's hand) on that kind of board, but the best possible drawing hand you can actually have (namely QJT9, similarly on the lower gap) has only 9 outs.

Hence, you never have enough of a drawing hand on that board to want to bet out from EP, and even a check-call is incorrect unless you think you have some implied odds.

But in LP, it's a great board to call with a very wide variety of holdings (against good players) because even rainbow, you have your real outs plus a LOT of bluffing outs.

One thing I was thinking about in LP on straighty type boards like that is that it's a good spot to draw to nut flush with nothing (if it's ss) or to either straight (should you have your 9 outs) because you can also very easily rep all the other draws, which are enormous.

These are also some lines I'm thinking about when calling pot with top 2. True, it's probably not good if EP is betting out, and, particularly if it's mutli-way (where someone else is going to have some of the draws), it becomes better just to lay down. But it might be worth considering a call against good players simply for the sake of bluffing draw-heavy boards. The obvious question is just how far one wants to take these bluff plays... maybe top 2 is going too far since you don't have a draw there... But I don't know, you take away 2 boating outs for any set, have 2 outs of your own against middle set. The board is unlikely to pair, etc.

Just a thought anyway for now.