0/8 better than Hold'em?

[FREDSKINS]

I think 0/8 is a better game right now for one simple reason. Players play worse hands. What would you say an equal calling hand in hold'em would be compaired to someone calling 8c,8s,10s,kd? Also in 0/8 when someone does call with a hand like this and hit they are mostly up for only one side of the pot which still leaves the other side open for you. That doesnt happen in hold'em because if they hit they is no other side of the coin. Just a few words I've been thinking about, best regards.

[Jimbo]

What would you say an equal calling hand in hold'em would be compaired to someone calling 8c,8s,10s,kd? I did I simulation at Twodimes and found that baby suited connectors such as 5/6 suited is very close in EV as the Omaha8 hand you provided.

For what it is worth! /forums/images/icons/smile.gif

ps: I compared AA to the 5/6 and AA23 Double suited to the 88KT.

[Dynasty]

If the Bicycle 3-6 Crazy Pineapple hi-lo game I played in last week is a good example of a typical casino Pineapple game, then that's what I want to be in before both Hold 'em and Omaha8.

Starting hand information on Hold 'em is widely available. So, it's natural that games which have less information in print will see players playing worse pre-flop.

[Tommy Angelo]

When I see posts about what a drudgery it must be to grind out a living playing limit poker, I always figure the writer has Omaha/8 in mind.

I used to play a lot of $4-8 (very low home-game rake)Omaha/8 when I had to, and I learned how to play it very well, meaning, I could fold before the flop way more than anyone else in the player pool, meaning, I was a huge favorite to make money no matter what I did after the flop. Sure, there is dandy strategy and hand-reading potential in Omaha/8. Deep stuff. Fun stuff. But by and large, in a game where those things matter a lot, well, that means the game isn't very good because you've got people thinking, instead of training each other to see pretty much every flop and turn.

I agree with you that the loosest money flows in Omaha. But to get it and stay sane through the hours of boredom, I'd recommend reading books in between folds.

Tommy

[Knockwurst]

As Ray Zee (maybe it was Malmuth?) has pointed out there are less fluctuations in 0/8, this is very important when you're playing with a small bank roll. I play 0/8 when I don't have the bank role to take on the swings in Hold'em. I can sit there in a 5/10 with a 10/20 kill game just playing A,2 or A,2,3 all night and few other hands. These hands are not as vulnerable as the nut starting hands in Hold'em. But as Tommy says that kind of grind is about as exciting as watching paint dry. I think Dynasty is also right about less information out there about 0/8 and the somewhat difficult determination of what makes a playable starting hand results in worse players in 0/8 than Hold'em. But I have to take issue with Jimbo's simulation results. 5/6 suited is often playable in an unraised Hold'em pot. The 0/8 hand given is never playable -- it's about the equivalent of J/3 unsuited. You're looking for potential nut hands in 0/8 -- that hand will almost never be the nuts.

[SunTzu68]

I actually love playing 8 or better, and I have never had a losing session at it. However, I realize this isn't because I am very good at it....more because the people I play with are worse than me. What is the best book on Omaha 8 or better, and starting hand requirements? I'd love to get better at this game.

[Jimbo]

Knockwurst here is the question you asked in your original post: "What would you say an equal calling hand in hold'em would be compaired to someone calling 8c,8s,10s,kd?" Then you wrote "But I have to take issue with Jimbo's simulation results. 5/6 suited is often playable in an unraised Hold'em pot." You did not ask if this hand was playable or not you implied someone had called with this hand and querried what would be an equivalent calling hand in holdem. The only interpretation I could come up with was you wanted a camparison of a heads up calling hand in holdem that won a comparable percentage of the time as the hand you provided in Omaha8. That is what I provided. Just remember if I say 2+2=4 just because you never need to add 2+2 does not mean my formula is incorrect. /forums/images/icons/smile.gif Anyone can provide you with hundreds of unplayable hands in holdem or Omaha8. If all you wanted was agreement as to whether or not this hand is playable I would generally say no. But just like your 5/6 suited statement I might play this hand in the SB for another 1/3 of a bet with other callers in front of me.

[eMarkM]

I agree, you routinely see players playing the equivalent of 72o in O8. And there's far less suckouts and schooling in O8 because someone can't just hit their odd ball kicker to beat you.

But, as Tommy says, playing O/8 well is as exciting as watching paint dry. Just play the tightest, even tighter than you would in HE, and mostly draw to the nuts and you'll bring home the cash. There's so little bluffing and outplaying of your opponent and more just mathematical crunching of numbers.

However, I've been attracted to O8 for the reasons you state and lately when I've been playing two games online I'm frequently making one of them O/8. It helps with the boredom part by playing HE where "exciting" post flop skills are paramount. I concentrate on the HE game and how the players play and bet and only look at the O8 game when I'm in a hand with 4 good, well coordinated cards and stick around with draws to the nuts. This helps relieve the boredom of O8 as I can play the more "fun" HE while I wait for a nut draw in the O8 game.

And I can attest to the lower flucuations in O8. While playing both at once I've had multiple +100/-100 swings in my longer sessions playing HE while staying in the same $50-75 range in O8.

[TimTimSalabim]

I think some famous poker player once said, "Omaha isn't a game, it's a disease". That pretty much sums it up.

[Roy Munson]

I have played both HE and O8 extensively for the last 3 years on PP. From my experience the fluctuations in O/8 exceed those of HE.
The slow pace and ultratight play of O/8 makes it seem that fluctuations are lower. However, I can tell you from experience, when you go on a long run of being counterfeited, quartered and missing huge draws when you have pumped the pot that the bankroll swings can be tremendous. But these swings can be positive as well, when in these same situations you are making huge scoops against many callers chasing runner/runner low draws that don't make it. Or grabbing 3/4 of a pot with solid two way hands can make you feel like the game is a license to print money.
Like Tommy stated earlier though this game can be very boring, especially the live version with the time consuming manual pot splitting and waiting for players who take forever trying to figure out what they have and then arguing at the showdown wondering why they only have 3 of a kind instead of full house when the board pairs or why their straight using 3 of their hole cards is not a straight.

[cferejohn]

Not to wander totally off topic, but it seems like that might make it more interesting as a tournament game because sooner or later, everyone's going to have to play some marginal games. I've only played O/8 for microlimits online, and never a tournament; anyone find this game more enjoyable in that format?

[MarkD]

I completely agree. I was playing O8 online, it's a lot faster so not as boring, and found myself in a game where I needed to be reading hands and such. I took a look at the preflop stats and it was playing much like a holdem game would (same pot size and % seeing the flop). I quickly left that game and went back to holdem. O8 is a simple boring game in the environment it should be playing IMO.

I wager the same could be said for most HILO split games, although I don't have much experience.

[RiverMel]

Interesting. You compared AA to 56s. But doesn't 56s play better against AA than KK, QQ, or just about any other hand? (Not quite, but very close. I believe 78s is the best against AA). Basically with this fact in mind I'm not sure where your analysis stands, and how/if it is useful.

[Jimbo]

The comparison of 5/6 suited to AA is only useful insofar as to how it corresponds to the comparison of 8s 8c Ts Kd to As Ac 2s 3c. This was a question in the original post. Both inferior hands win correspondingly the same percentage of the time compared to the superior hands in their respective games. Hopes this explanation helps to show my intent, I was certainly not implying that 5/6 suited is the worst hand to play against AA nor that it is the only hand that corresponds to Fredskins original example. However it is one of very few which has a similar winning percentage when compared to the Omaha8 example. I suppose another way to put it is that the inferior hand supplied by Fredskins is far from the worst starting Omaha8 hand just as 5/6 would not be the worst starting hand in Holdem.