Thank you to everyone who has commented and analyzed the situation thus far in Hot Hand #1. If you haven't yet had the chance to read the first three Parts to this post, you can follow those links to do so now, because I think this particular hand does a great job of making one of the most important points I can think of regarding Pot-Limit Omaha high games, both cash and especially in tournaments. For a very quick recap, this was a hand where I had the nuts after the flop with a two-card inside straight, I bet the pot and got called by one player. The turn card gave me a higher straight, but now the second-nuts as opposed to the nuts I had after the flop. I checked the turn with this, the second best possible hand at this point, intending to checkraise to chase my opponent off from whatever draw he likely held, and when he did bet, I went ahead and checkraised him. In Part III of this post, you saw that he then reraised me the size of the pot again, and I asked for your thoughts on what to do in this situation:

As always, I received a number of thoughtful comments on this question. A few of the posters agreed with my thoughts, that I did not really see how I could put this guy on holding exactly AQ in his hand, the only hand that is currently ahead of mine, given that he had already called my pot-sized bet on the flop before an AQ would have represented a holding worth calling with. More than half of the posters, however, expressed concern with calling any more bets at this point in the hand, as I could be up against that AQ, and since even if I am still ahead right now, my hand is clearly very vulnerable to redraws on the river. And therein lies the rub, and lies probably the single most important lesson I have ever learned (and continue to learn) in playing PLO, either online or in live action: In Omaha high, when facing big bets you want to either have the current nuts or at least a draw to the nuts in order to put a lot of money at stake.

What exactly does that mean, and how does it apply in this situation? Well, I'm sitting here now with the second-nuts after the turn card, and I am facing a reraise that will essentially put me all in with my tournament life on the line. But I do not have the nuts. I think I make a very compelling argument, given my opponent's call on the pot, that I had good reason here to believe my opponent did not have AQ in his hand right now. In fact, I thought that argument was so compelling that I actually went ahead and got in all in here, putting myself allin on the assumption that I was likely ahead heading into the river, with my opponent probably dead to a flush draw and a higher straight draw as well, for a likely 12 outs or so with one card to come. This made me the favorite in the hand by around 3-to-1, so I reraised him allin with my perceived favorite hand, based on solid reasoning that he would not have called my flop bet with AQ. Call it with a flush draw, maybe. But not likely with AQ. So I got it all in here, he called my small all in re-reraise, and showed this:

Yes he did have the flush draw on the flop that he called my smallish pot-sized bet with. But he also had AQ. And I'm drawing dead to an Ace which could give me a tie in the hand, or otherwise I'm done. I didn't hit my Ace and I was eliminated from the tournament early as a result. What went wrong here? I forgot the cardinal rule of Omaha: Omaha is a game of the nuts. I know this, and I am learning it more and more, getting it more and more ingrained into my head every single day I play poker. In Omaha high, if you're facing a very large bet, in particular a large reraise, doubly in particular an allin reraise early in a tournament, odds are very high that you are up against the nuts. Period. With four hole cards instead of two, it seems sometimes that the possibility of someone holding the stone nuts at any point in the hand increases exponentially, far more than just doubling along with the doubling of the number of hole cards for each hand as compared to Holdem. The bottom line is, I've played enough Omaha high to know, when you're going to get all your money into the middle in Omaha, you better have the current nuts, or at least a draw to the mortal nuts on the board, or you're most likely going to be getting the worst of it. Although you certainly can't play a game that has you auto-folding every time someone raises you and you do not have the mortal nuts to the current board, I imagine that most players would not harm their overall bankroll too much by folding against all large bets when not holding either the current nuts or a draw to the nuts on the board.

I will be back soon with another hand for us to analyze and comment on. Thank you again to everyone who contributed to this post, and I look forward to hearing from you again soon.