Recently in a middle position at nine handed high Omaha, I held the jack of hearts, ten and nine of spades, and seven of clubs. Although this beauty (18+ in my point count system) is a clear raise in a late position, I just called so that the players after me would ease in. As it happened only one player in back of me called, and the first blind raised. Two players in front of me called the raise. I considered reraising, which might get the player in back of me out, but the solid aggressive raiser would probably cap it, and I would rather have more company (and less investment) for my possible straight draw.
A “mother flop” (a flop that only a mother _ could love) hit the table, the nine of hearts, five of clubs, and two of spades. The raiser, who almost always has a high pair for his raises, opened the betting and both players in front of me folded! When you are considering chasing after the flop on a pair and little else, you should think ahead as to whether you are merely in for this one card (ie. you must improve) or whether you have some aspirations to go all the way.
So I considered calling with my high pair since there were only three players left, but clearly raising is better. A raise here tends to drop the third player, and may well get me a free (double-size bet) fourth card. My raise had the desire effect; the player in back of me folded, and the bettor checked to me after the fourth card, which was the very unimpressive queen of diamonds, negating my prospects of a secondary (two card) straight or flush draw.
So I also checked, since I still could not beat his probable aces or kings and now he might have a queen and be ahead of me. Note that if he actually had a big hand he might well be checking to me also. In last position on toss up hands, especially where you have more knowledge than your opponent, it is usually cost effective to check and see the last card free (I would have to fold a raise), rather than increase the stakes and commitment, by going for a bluff which would cost two more double bets. The “commitment” principle says that on a marginal hand it is best not to increase your own or your opponent’s commitment. After a nothing last card, I would bet about half the time (although I conceivably might have the best hand), expecting to be called and writing it off to my advertising budget.
The last card was the jack of spades and he instantly bet. He usually does not “thin bet”, so he either had the goods or perhaps nothing. Since I had come this far and now could finally beat a high pair, I felt that the odds of a bluff were justified by the potsize. I called and caught him with aces double suited, ace queen of hearts and ace eight of clubs. My two pair beat his aces, just like in the (chasing) movies. As he looked at my cards, he sarcastically ask if I always chased with a mere pair in Omaha.
In this situation the answer is a clear yes! The raiser often has just the high pair and not much else to work with the flop. As it was he also had two secondary (two-card) flush draws (at about 4% each), to my one. All I had was my pair and some two-card straight draws (at about 6%). Was this a hold’em like chase situation, where you can get buried chasing after a high pair with a low pair? When I ran these exact hands (after the flop) on Mike Caro’s Poker Probe software, it turns out that my hand wins about forty percent of the time! Amen.
But, note carefully the general concept here. When a low pair and little else (ie. secondary draws only), chases a high pair and little else at Omaha, the high pair is (in round figures) merely about a three-to-two favorite. Thus, in the above and similar situations, which arise fairly often at Omaha, where there is a healthy pot (raised before the flop), and a likely high pair bet, certainly one-on-one chasing on a pair is clear, especially when you have position.
No related posts.
