View Full Version : omaha books

07-15-2005, 11:11 PM
I am primarily a hold em and stud player trying to learn omaha, I would just like to know what books the more experienced players on this site recommend for omaha. I read the section in super system 2, but it wasn't really as good as I was expecting(probably because im used to 2+2 books). Any recommendations??

07-15-2005, 11:23 PM
Omaha Hold'em Poker by Ciaffone

07-16-2005, 02:23 AM
Hey Guy,

Welcome to the wonderful world of Pot-Limit Omaha. It's fun, it will drive you crazy, and so much more. I have a few suggestions:

1. Omaha Hold 'Em Poker, by Bob Ciaffone (as mentioned)
2. Improved Your Poker, by Bob Ciaffone
3. PL & NL Poker, by Bob Ciaffone
****Do we notice a pattern emerging here?
4. Controversial, but I would also add Stewart Reuben's How Good Is Your Pot Limit Omaha

I would also check out these two sites:

web page (http://www.rolfslotboom.com)

Rolf has a review of the 4 books I mentioned above, plus of the two that are usually mention (Championship Omaha by Cloutier/McEvoy and SSII)AND he has some excellent articles on starting hand selection for PLO

Also, check out Steve Badger's site and specifically this article:

web page (http://www.playwinningpoker.com/omaha/pot-limit/)

I hope this helps.

With Regards,


07-16-2005, 02:08 PM
So I guess Ciafonne is the primary author to read? I am in the same boat as the OP, seems like a fun game to try and learn.

thanks for the suggestions.

07-16-2005, 04:49 PM
That would be my suggestion. You might go to rolfslotboom.com and in the "Ask Ace" question and ask Rolf about this. I have done a relatively lot of research on this subject and have found Rolf, a european player with a very good reputation and track record in PLO, to be the clearest writer on PLO out there. You can find many of his articles at Cardplayer and at his web site.

Incidentally, here is a little exchange we had a couple of days on this very subject:

From Will May


1. I have read both SS II's PLO section and Championship Omaha and I see that you gave them a pretty poor review. Your review is kind of sketchy in what you disagree with. Might you expand on this a little? The reason I ask is that I find their advice to be almost identical to the advice you give and I have found both books very helpful.

2. Cloutier especially keeps hammering about "dangler" hands. I find the advice against playing them to be generally good. However, I was wondering if you thought this applied to PLO8 as well. What I mean is:

If in PLO we are going to pass on K Q J 4, are we then also going to pass...

In PLO8 games with A 2 3 9

That doesn't seem to make sense to me, but the 9 is definitely not well coordinated with the rest of the hand.

3. Both Cloutier and Berman made statements in their books that there was NO hand worth a the first raise in PLO. I don't think you think that is true, but I found their reasoning compelling. Could you tell me why you disagree.

With Regards,

Will May

Response From Rolf Slotboom

Hi Will,

1. It is true, I don't think both books offer very good and / or useful advice. I have described some of the things I don't like quite extensively in the reviews. The first book is just not accurate enough IMO, and Mr. Berman's section offers nothing new. In fact, both books suffer from that problem, and on top of that they both have a bit too many errors or "strange" things for my taste. I also disagree that our advice is quite similar. In fact, I think I usually advocate a style of play, based on weaknesses of specific opponents and clearly adjusted to the size of one's stack, that I have not been able to find in *any* Omaha book so far. This does not automatically make my advice better or worse though - so don't think I am saying "my advice is better". As for these books: They are not bad, but Mr. Ciaffone's books are both more insighful and more accurate IMO - so I would advocate reading *his* books as primers, and not the two mentioned.

2. The example is not very good in my view, Will. You compare the three premium cards in Omaha/8 with three merely decent cards in Omaha high. A proper comparison would be your Omaha/8 hand and something like AcAhKh7s in Omaha high. And this is a hand that ALL Omaha players play, dangling as this seven of spades may be. So yes, danglers are bad - but in some situations (in good position, cheap to come in, against weak opposition, or as with these aces, even all-in before the flop) dangler hands can clearly have positive expectation.

3. If aces are the only hands they raise with, well yes then they are correct. But in Omaha, many hands are worth a preflop raise, and for *many* other reasons than just the strength of the cards (deception, isolation plays, making the pot bigger, taking the initiative etc. etc.). Especially Mr. Berman seems to think that there are only two possibilities: calling or raising the max. This makes for a @#%% of a predictable game, and then indeed his raises give away so much information that he is right: he should never make that first raise. But for almost all good players, hands like QJT8, AT98ds, 8765ds are clear raising hands if the situation is right, and those who don't recognize these potentially profitable situations, will not be using their Omaha potential at its fullest. Also, note that Mr. Berman is talking about games with *very* deep money - with money quite a bit deeper than I usually play, and *much* deeper than anyone playing on the Internet will ever experience.

Hope this answers your questions, Will.

Rolf Slotboom

07-17-2005, 05:35 AM
If aces are the only hands they raise with, well yes then they are correct. .... This makes for a @#%% of a predictable game, and then indeed his raises give away so much information that he is right: he should never make that first raise.

Hope this answers your questions, Will.

Rolf Slotboom

[/ QUOTE ]

I'd hardly be qualified as an "expert" in PLO, but I think if most of the low stakes winners in PLO read this advice and took it to heart, the game would get a whole lot tougher. Though I guess when 70% of the table doesn't actually hear the "I have ACES" that goes with a potsized preflop raise, nor the "I have ace-deuce" that goes with minraising, I guess it's not so bad.