PLO Two Pair + OESD, but Probably not a Good Spot Right?

[Syfted]

New to PLO... 100BB deep, if we're on the button and call a raise from MP with the,


and see a flop come,


We should probably be very cautious if we're facing action on the flop, right?
I say this because even though we have a number of outs (4 nines + 4 aces + 2 kings + 2 queens = 12 outs), only a few of those are to the nuts (the 4 aces + 2 kings), although we could count outs for the under full too ( + 2 queens = 8 outs).

Problems,
-our opponent may already have the made straight
-if a T falls, AK, AQ, AJ have made broadway
-if an A falls, hands similar to ours have made broadway, yielding only a split
-KK and QQ have us rather screwed
-Spades

If we were, for example, to face a pot sized bet after the flop from the MP raiser, what kind of action should we be taking? This is a very scary spot, isn't it?

 

[PC69]

only scary thing on that board to me is the two spades. iam callin till the river to fill up or hit my str8. Iam shipping on the river if i hit boat and if i hit str8 iam shipping too unless its a spade. I would say if u face pot sized bet on the flop u might also want to consider this MP with pp of aces.. Which means you got him crushed. Loyalers am i correct? Iam curious to know. Good ? from the op imo

 

[c9h13no3]

Your hand sucks. If your opponent puts in any significant action, you're almost always beat. You have 4 outs to get your money back, and 4 outs that might actually let you win the pot. So yeah, you tell me how awesome your hand is .

 

[Syfted]

Your hand sucks. If your opponent puts in any significant action, you're almost always beat. You have 4 outs to get your money back, and 4 outs that might actually let you win the pot. So yeah, you tell me how awesome your hand is .

This is what I was hoping to hear. My friend and I are trying to learn PLO and he was convinced that two pair + OESD was good enough to take action with. I think he's still in hold'em mode. Thanks!

 

[bubbasbestbabe]

The only reason you should be seeing a flop with this hand is you are the BB. Otherwise chuck it.

 

[c9h13no3]

The only reason you should be seeing a flop with this hand is you are the BB. Otherwise chuck it.

I don't think its that bad. 3 connected cards, double suited. I'd play it in late position at least as a steal. The dangling 5 is kinda lame, but I think it certainly falls into the realm of playable hands that aren't absolute trash.

 

[Syfted]

I'm not too concerned about gaps on the bottom of my runs in LP, gaps on the top are worthless though- ie 5TQK, not 5TJK.

 

[c9h13no3]

I'm not too concerned about gaps on the bottom of my runs in LP, gaps on the top are worthless though- ie 5TQK, not 5TJK.

You realize this only changes the nut wrap flop from J9X to Q9X. The gap in the top doesn't really matter that much. The main issue is that you have a dangling 5. So when you flop a hand like two pair, you don't have any additional redraws. That's why hands like 9TQK are stronger, they can flop an additional nut wrap, plus if they flop two pair, they always have a gutshot straight draw.

So yeah, the problem with 5TQK is that the only way you can have redraws if you flop the nut wrap/top two is flushes. And since you're double suited, I don't mind playing this hand. Rainbow, I'd think its value would diminish significantly.

 

[Syfted]

You realize this only changes the nut wrap flop from J9X to Q9X. The gap in the top doesn't really matter that much. The main issue is that you have a dangling 5. So when you flop a hand like two pair, you don't have any additional redraws. That's why hands like 9TQK are stronger, they can flop an additional nut wrap, plus if they flop two pair, they always have a gutshot straight draw.

So yeah, the problem with 5TQK is that the only way you can have redraws if you flop the nut wrap/top two is flushes. And since you're double suited, I don't mind playing this hand. Rainbow, I'd think its value would diminish significantly.

Thanks, I think I held a misconception from Hwang's book, where he discusses gaps at the top of four cards hands essentially turning them into three card hands.

 

[c9h13no3]

Thanks, I think I held a misconception from Hwang's book, where he discusses gaps at the top of four cards hands essentially turning them into three card hands.

Yeah, with a 4 card hand it matters a lot more. 69TJ > 678J