View Full Version : My view on PLOH. 3. Where ?

07-26-2004, 10:13 AM

Considering the success of my first 2 posts, here is a third one : where to play omaha online ? I found 5 sites which offer PLO games about everytime I log in : Party, Paradise, Stars, UB and Ladbrokes. If you know other sites with PLO games running, please let me know. So which site is the most profitable ?

The most common answer is : Party. I totally disagree. For a good player, the fact that you can only buy-in for 50 BB instead of 100 is a big problem. PLO is a game of agression, and on Party you or your opponent will often be all-in before the turn ; with 2 betting rounds instead of 4, you're basically giving up half of your edge. Moreover, the really bad players on Party are on the 25$ table. But why should a good player play on such small tables ? Personnaly, I am much more successfull at the 1$ or 2$ BB tables, and these are not much softer on Party than anywhere elses - except there is is that 50 BB problem, which really reduce your edge.
UB games are also really soft, but you have to know how to play short-handed, cause you'll often have to start a game if you want to play higher than 50$. But the players are really really bad, and there is money to be made.
Paradise is a good site for PLO, but usually you only have the choice between 50$ and 400$ tables. The former are very good, but the latter can be quite hard to beat. Anyway I think Paradise is a good site to learn PLO ; the players are usually tight passive, and that is perfect for a good agressive PLO player.
Ladbrokes poker is only for europeans, I think, but it is a really good place to play. There are a lot of Londonian players, and it give you a good idea of the - low - level of play of PLOH in European poker rooms. The players are usually much more agressive than in Paradise or Stars, and that makes the game more hard to beat. But I think you can learn more there than anywhere else on the Net.
Finally, my favorite : Stars. Of course, the players are tigher than anywhere else, but you can find PLO games of all stakes, and unless you play the 600$ or 1000$ tables, where there are good players, you wont have problems to make very good money. Indeed, the players at the 100$ and 200$ tables are usually successful small tables players, playing a tight-passive strategy, which works perfectly at the 25$ and 50$ tables. So if you play a solid and ultra-agressive game, you really can outplay them very easily.

So in a nutshell, I think a good PLO player should avoid Party Poker. The 50BB buy-in is a real problem, and to maximise your winnings, since there is so much all-in going on, you should have a tight strategy which wont work at the bigger tables. Party learns you to play solid, but does not rewards agressivity, which is the most important quality of a good PLO player (see how Ciaffone, a solid player, plays in "Improve your poker"...).

Please, some comments, my 2 previous posts remained answerless. I really think we should start this forum with general discussions about PLO...


nicky g
07-26-2004, 10:33 AM

Have you tried Victor Chandler's PLO games? I don't really like the software or the small player base, but it allows a 200xBB buy-in which looks like you might like. As for Party, I found the 50xBB cap annoying and that it made the games quite dull to play in but I stil found the games v. profitable. The $50 game almost never went at the times I played and the $100 was too big so I didn't play in them and can't comment.
Have enjoyed your posts, don't worry about your English it's perfect.

07-26-2004, 10:43 AM
Thanks for your posts, sahaguje.

In fact I have started to explore PLO today, just for fun. I'm really a confused newbie at the moment, but I hope to improve and show profit like in Texas Holdem.

I'm testing at microlimits and I see that my stats for seeing flop is as high as 33%.. /images/graemlins/cool.gif Time to tighten up... I have to learn a lot about basics.

Best regards,


07-26-2004, 10:52 AM

I didnt know Victor Chandler. I'll try these games, with 200 BB buy-ins, these should be very interesting games. About Party, the gap between 25 and 100 tables is really a problem, as 50 tables are very rarely running. There is the same problem at Paradise.

See you


PS : thanks for your comment on my English /images/graemlins/smile.gif

07-26-2004, 10:55 AM
Hello Pug,

Good luck for your first steps in Omaha. If you want to learn the basics, I suggest you visit crockpot's page, www.winningonlinepoker.com (http://www.winningonlinepoker.com), there is solid advice. And dont worry, 33% of flops seen is pretty good, if it includes the blinds. You should just be a little more selective, and it will be ok.

Good luck,


07-26-2004, 11:17 AM
actually at the penny blind tables you can see tons of flops because when you win it could be 100x the big blind. On UB the max buyin for the .01/.02 PLO tables is $2 and you will see players with $6+ stacks routinely so the pots get big ( relatively speaking )

07-26-2004, 11:28 AM
Try Prima. I have no clue what I'm doing in PLO, and I made a decent amount at the 1/2 blind table. Granted, its not that hard to play quad queens against morons, but it's worth a look.

07-26-2004, 12:30 PM
One thing to keep in mind regarding the Party games versus elsewhere.

Usually a Party $100 buy (1/2 blinds) in game will contain several stacks over $200. Almost everyone else will have on or near $100. Note that at Party the default buy-in is $100.

On the other hand at Stars, in the $200 buyin (1/2 blinds) game, I've seen instances where everyone only has around $80 with maybe one player at $200. Note that on Stars the default buy-in is only $40. This is something I really wish they would change.

My point is that because a game has a max buyin does not mean that every player will buyin for that amount.


07-26-2004, 04:24 PM
actually, there is a max buy-in, it's just they've won up to that amount and everyone else has either left of re bought

07-27-2004, 06:40 AM
My point is that because a game has a max buyin does not mean that every player will buyin for that amount.

[/ QUOTE ]

Good point. When I look for a table, I only sit if 3 players at least have more than the max buy-in. If not, I find another game. That's the beauty of internet, especially if you have an account on many sites, so I use it... Anyway, you certainly want to compare 3 financiary factors, when you sit : the max buy-in, the BB relatively to it, and the stacks of players. In my original post, I mostly focused on the first 2, because it is stable, whereas the third changes every hour. But if you think Party players have the tendancy to stay longer when they win than on Stars, it is valuable information.



07-27-2004, 04:00 PM
Just a question about stradegy.

I've been playing PLO online for about a year and a half and have been very successfull with a different stradegy that I think you advocate. I play VERY loose pre-flop (upwards of 80% flops seen) but VERY tight post flop, only betting when I either flop big or sense quite a lot of weakness.

I have made quite a decent amount of money playing this way. I think the best part of the stradegy is that because I rarely fold a pre-flop hand, people think I'm playing this loose post-flop. They don't put two & two together and very often pay me off when they shouldn't.

What do you think?




07-27-2004, 04:09 PM
the correct answer to this question depends on how well you play and what your specific strengths are. for example, a player who is excellent at playing the turn and river, uses his position very well, and bluffs well, could be a long-term loser on party poker because those skills have much less value, especially if you're in a game where every pot is raised preflop.

party is easily the best game for players who view omaha as a 'flop the best hand or a great draw and get your money in there' game. if a lot of your winnings come from reading the betting and making moves, you're better off on another server. really, the key difference between the UB, paradise and stars games is how many idiots are sitting at the table at any given time.

AJo Go All In
07-27-2004, 06:21 PM
giving up way too much playing this way, cannot make up for it postflop