Omaha is the lottery.

dont you guys think Omaha is too much luck, with everybody always going all in?

No.

http://img386.imageshack.us/img386/6204/graph6kc.jpg

[Doc7]

nh

[nebben]

rough downswing the last 6 or 7 k

[dibbs]

The swings suck. My winrate over 5k hands is pathetic, but in looking at all the massive pots where I got it all in with at least a 2 to 1 favorite and came up short, I can't quit it, hard part is focusing on the long term for me.

What program generated that graph?

[beset7]

thats poker grapher. I can't find the link to it might want to search the software forum.

omaha is way better then the lotto. just need a decent BR and a high tolerance for variance.

Nice looking graph but I have to give the expected line: thats a small sample.

NM. I just found it...poker patterns.

errr those two programs are very similar, but I just got Poker Grapher too. Poker Grapher has a few more options.

[BluffTHIS!]

[ QUOTE ]
dont you guys think Omaha is too much luck, with everybody always going all in?

[/ QUOTE ]

It definitely has more luck than holdem with so many draws getting there including backdoor draws. In his poker classic, The Education of a Poker Player, Herbert O. Yardley said the secret of winning was simply staying on higher cards than your opponents. In omaha this means not just higher cards but also better draws. So you want everyone to go allin as long as you have the best hand or a great draw that might even be a favorite over a set. And you still have to play good poker and fold a good made hand when a redraw gets there and you have no good reason to believe an opponent is bluffing and you are not getting proper odds to draw out if there are more cards to come.

Precisely because there is more luck involved, plo attracts gamblers because they can more often book a win through playing bad. But that's ok because that is what keeps them coming back and keeps the game good. However, if you mentally cannot handle the variance, then you might be better off playing no limit.

If it included bonii and rakeback this thing would look like the leaning tower of Piza.

[Verdi]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
dont you guys think Omaha is too much luck, with everybody always going all in?

[/ QUOTE ]

It definitely has more luck than holdem with so many draws getting there including backdoor draws. In his poker classic, The Education of a Poker Player, Herbert O. Yardley said the secret of winning was simply staying on higher cards than your opponents. In omaha this means not just higher cards but also better draws. So you want everyone to go allin as long as you have the best hand or a great draw that might even be a favorite over a set. And you still have to play good poker and fold a good made hand when a redraw gets there and you have no good reason to believe an opponent is bluffing and you are not getting proper odds to draw out if there are more cards to come.

Precisely because there is more luck involved, plo attracts gamblers because they can more often book a win through playing bad. But that's ok because that is what keeps them coming back and keeps the game good. However, if you mentally cannot handle the variance, then you might be better off playing no limit.

[/ QUOTE ]

It actually has less "luck" than hold'em. Everything is about odds in Omaha. There are actually flops that makes a drawing hand even money wíth top set without a straight or a flush on the board. Ie, Omaha is built around drawing hands. There are some examples like holding 76xx on a 985 (two of the same color) flop against multiple opponents where it's virtually unplayable despite being the current nuts. It assumes that you are up against someone drawing for a higher straight, someone with a set/two pairs drawing for the full house and someone drawing for the flush. In reality you are drawing for none of the other draws to hit. And those are not so many cards...

Also, this might sound like a cliche but it's true. Poker is a game of information. In Omaha you have more information on the flop than in Hold'em. More information will ALWAYS benefit the more skillful player.

However, players will draw out on you more often in Omaha and this can be frustrating. As the pots get bigger the swings will also be much wilder. But in the long run Omaha is a tremendously profitable game if it's played right.

This guy have some good ideas around Omaha. http://www.playwinningpoker.com/omaha/

[beset7]

[ QUOTE ]
If it included bonii and rakeback this thing would look like the leaning tower of Piza.

[/ QUOTE ]

How many tables are you playing and at what limit if you don't mind me asking? Seems like you are playing a pretty solid low variance style. Curious if that is working for you at higher limits.

I will 8 table the Party 25's or 4 table the Party 100's. To play the 100's I have to see at least a few of the players on my Buddy list AKA "Fish List" sitting and playing. I assume all players (besides wickss) are superfish at the 25's, unless otherwise noted (very rare).

[Filip]

What is bonii?

[beset7]

[ QUOTE ]
What is bonii?

[/ QUOTE ]

A clever plural form of "bonus"

[beset7]

[ QUOTE ]
What is bonii?

[/ QUOTE ]

A clever conjugation of the word "bonus"

[Cooker]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
What is bonii?

[/ QUOTE ]

A clever conjugation of the word "bonus"

[/ QUOTE ]

It is a declension. You conjugate verbs not nouns. In Latin bonus is an adjective which is why we don't borrow the declension as we do with octopus.