Holdem VS Omaha/8 or pot limt, Variance, suckouts, win rates etc.

steamboatin · #1 10-26-2005, 05:10 PM

I think Holdem has a higher variance than Omaha and I think Holdem has more suckouts.

Omaha game selection is much lower. i would like to start a discussion comparing the two games.

What sucks about Omaha? Why is Omaha or Holdem a beter game?

Rasputin · #2 10-26-2005, 05:12 PM

At the moment hold'em has more players that suck due to all the TV.

It seems to me you'd play a lot fewer hands in Omaha, and even less in the hi/lo versions. That would seem to make it ideal for multitabling freaks and bonus whores.

callydrias · #3 10-26-2005, 07:07 PM

[ QUOTE ]
I think Holdem has a higher variance than Omaha and I think Holdem has more suckouts.

[/ QUOTE ]

I disagree on both counts. There's less information in Omaha and I think that leads to higher variance. As far as suckouts go, maybe it's just where I play, but when there are 6 to a flop, I cringe when I flop a two-tone nut straight. Having to dodge half the deck between letting the flush and boat draws chase is not fun. I would also say that frequent low hand counterfeiting in O/8 would increase variance and would sort of count as a suckout.

Rasputin · #4 10-26-2005, 07:21 PM

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I think Holdem has a higher variance than Omaha and I think Holdem has more suckouts.

[/ QUOTE ]

I disagree on both counts. There's less information in Omaha and I think that leads to higher variance. As far as suckouts go, maybe it's just where I play, but when there are 6 to a flop, I cringe when I flop a two-tone nut straight. Having to dodge half the deck between letting the flush and boat draws chase is not fun. I would also say that frequent low hand counterfeiting in O/8 would increase variance and would sort of count as a suckout.

[/ QUOTE ]

How can there be less information in Omaha?

You see two more cards than you do in Holdem and you know that just about every card is in someone's hand.

callydrias · #5 10-26-2005, 07:44 PM

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I think Holdem has a higher variance than Omaha and I think Holdem has more suckouts.

[/ QUOTE ]

I disagree on both counts. There's less information in Omaha and I think that leads to higher variance. As far as suckouts go, maybe it's just where I play, but when there are 6 to a flop, I cringe when I flop a two-tone nut straight. Having to dodge half the deck between letting the flush and boat draws chase is not fun. I would also say that frequent low hand counterfeiting in O/8 would increase variance and would sort of count as a suckout.

[/ QUOTE ]

How can there be less information in Omaha?

You see two more cards than you do in Holdem and you know that just about every card is in someone's hand.

[/ QUOTE ]

Knowing that every other card is in play is useless because you can't use a single card by itself (I checked the rules). It's not about your two "extra" cards, it's about the 18 extra cards your opponents hold (and the extra 54 2-card combinations they make). There are more down cards in play, thus you have less information.

randomstumbl · #6 10-26-2005, 09:32 PM

[ QUOTE ]
I think Holdem has a higher variance than Omaha and I think Holdem has more suckouts.

[/ QUOTE ]

The suckouts are in your mind.

steamboatin · #7 10-26-2005, 09:57 PM

[ QUOTE ]
The suckouts are in your mind.

[/ QUOTE ]

No, because there is a difference in the structure of the game, we can compare the effect of the river card in each game.

#8 10-26-2005, 10:27 PM

There is less printed material on Omaha. I have had several dealers tell me that Omaha is a good game to play(I dont play Omaha so I have no idea) since a lot of players have read at least one holdem book. They still might be a fish but they might of learned to play tight.

Omaha seems like the slots of poker. Most fish see all the draws and two pair hands and think they can draw. An expert Omaha Hi player would have less of a winrate than an expert Holdem player if all other things are equal. Just like an expert 7 stud player would have a higher winrate than a holdem player.

Omaha High has more variance than Holdem but I would guess Omaha/8 would have less than Holdem. This is given for pot limit Omaha.

#9 10-27-2005, 01:17 AM

[ QUOTE ]
I think Holdem has a higher variance than Omaha and I think Holdem has more suckouts.

Omaha game selection is much lower. i would like to start a discussion comparing the two games.

What sucks about Omaha? Why is Omaha or Holdem a beter game?

[/ QUOTE ]

I agree with you assessment of the variance of Omaha. I'm not sure what you consider a suckout, but I'd say more hands are decided on the river than Holdem. Sometimes the draws you're up against have more than half the deck live against you, so I don't really consider that a suckout.

The problem with Omaha is action. If 10 decent Omaha players sit down and play, all the money goes into rake. For an Omaha game to have action you need some fish who see what they could have, not what they likely will have. That said, I've never sat in a low limit Omaha game that wasn't juicy. Everybody seems to think that if any 2 can win in Holdem, any 4 can win 8 times as much in Omaha.

randomstumbl · #10 10-27-2005, 04:09 AM

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
The suckouts are in your mind.

[/ QUOTE ]

No, because there is a difference in the structure of the game, we can compare the effect of the river card in each game.

[/ QUOTE ]

If we're saying that a suckout is that the river card changes who wins the hand then Omaha is obviously going to have many, many more suckouts.

But, really, what is a suckout? It's a word without any agreed upon meaning. Mostly, it's just an excuse for people that think they should win more often than they do.