15,211 hands and -$1515.33 later...

...I need help. Badly.

Here's the deal. I've been trying to learn low limit Omaha Hi/Lo for about a month. I've played 15,211 2/4 LIMIT Hi/Lo hands in this time. Of these hands, only about a quarter of them are at a semi-full/full table (6 people or more). The rest of the hands a 5 people or less.

Because the type of play required for shorthanded play differs so greatly from that for ring games, I've split my database into hands with 5 or less players and hands with more than 6 players (9 max). Here's my data:

Ring games(6 or more players):
Total Hands: 4,096
Vol. Put $ in Pot: 21.70%
Won $When Saw Flop: 37.10%
Amount Won: -$18.68
Win Rate Per 100 Hands -$0.46
Went To Showdown: 44.15%
Won $ At Showdown: 59.71%
Pre-flop Raise: 2.05%
Limp/Call Reraise PF: 0.07%
Won High: 10.01%
Won Low: 3.34%
Scooped: 7.45%
Folded SB to Steal: 76.67%
Folded BB to Steal: 51.11%
Fold BB to Steal HU: 47.83%
Att. To Steal Blinds: 4.82%
Overall Post-Flop Aggression Factor: 1.08
Flop Actions:
-Raise: 2.06%
-Bet: 15.47%
-Call: 20.57%
-Check: 38.23%
-Fold: 21.46%
Flop AF: 0.86

So as you can see I'm pretty much a break even player when the table is full. I've had a really bad run this past week in which I lost around 1k in 4900 hands. Before this past week I was around 2.5 BB/100 in ring games. But I guess the wheels fell off. I'd like to get my full handed play to around 2.5 bb/100 again... does anyone see where my leaks are?

But where I really need help is shorthanded (its been very hard to find any advice on shorthanded O8 as far as proper stats). Here are mine:
Shorthanded Games(5 or less players):
Total Hands: 4,053
Vol. Put $ in Pot: 33.33%
Won $When Saw Flop: 42.62%
Amount Won: -$1,053.25
Win Rate Per 100 Hands -$25.99
Went To Showdown: 45.25%
Won $ At Showdown: 44.20%
Pre-flop Raise: 7.18%
Limp/Call Reraise PF: 0.12%
Won High: 26.75%
Won Low: 5.28%
Scooped: 23.19%
Folded SB to Steal: 82.67%
Folded BB to Steal: 55.08%
Fold BB to Steal HU: 49.19%
Att. To Steal Blinds: 8.41%
Overall Post-Flop Aggression Factor: 1.57
Flop Actions:
-Raise: 3.62%
-Bet: 21.79%
-Call: 19.45%
-Check: 36.68%
-Fold: 14.06%
Flop AF: 1.31

(By the way, I do have 15,000 2/4 hands, but when I split the database I only get 4k in each database.... I'm not sure what happened to the other 7k.... oh well)

So basically, I suck at shorthanded play. Any advice on both my full game play and my shorthanded play is desperately needed.

Thanks for reading!

[Buzz]

A. Wolf - Based on what you have written, it seems like you should stick to full games if you continue to play at all.

Short handed play is very, very much different from full game play. Your opponents tend to be much more agressive. And the average skill level in short handed game tends to be higher than in full games. Poor players simply don't seem to last very long in short handed play. (That's my experience).

I hate to write you any advice on how to play in short handed games, because it doesn't seem to me, on the basis of what you, yourself, have written, that you should be playing at all in a short handed game.

You don't need to be the very best player at the table to be successful in any ring game - but you certainly don't want to be the worst. I think you're more likely to run into opponents who will be able to out-play you at a short handed table than at a full table.

Best advice I can give you: Either stop playing altogether or if you want to keep playing, at least cut out the short handed play and find opponents you can beat.

Buzz

[steamboatin]

[ QUOTE ]
Vol. Put $ in Pot: 21.70%

[/ QUOTE ]

Is this too loose or about right for low limits?

[Ribbo]

Yeah i'm not a fan of shorthanded games.
Because omaha/8 is such a complicated games compared to holdem you really should try and master just one style of game and stick to it. For me it's pot limit omaha/8 10 handed.

[ QUOTE ]
A. Wolf - Based on what you have written, it seems like you should stick to full games if you continue to play at all.

[/ QUOTE ]

Buzz, honestly I agree. The thing is- I simply can't cut out the shorthanded play. I'm not able to discuss it and must be careful about what I say, so please let me just leave it at: I must continue playing the shorthanded tables simultaneously with the ring games (if I want to play ring games at all). Pretend I have a gun to my head.

So... that being said, let me tell you more about how I play: I'm an very decent NL holdem player. I've kept statistics on my play both B&M and online for the past year have showed a slow but steady profit. I've taken 1st in two live B&M tourneys of about 200 people, 1st on Party twice in a field of 310 (limit) and 110, 3rd (party) in a field of 570, and 5th and 8th and many lesser ITM finishes. Then I found a new love for cash games when playing 200 NL at Ocean's Eleven and other local casinos. I did rather well for a while making well over 5 BB/hr, then my results started to level out and I cashed my sizeable $2000 profit for the month back into party when I realized how useful pokertracker could be for both my online and future live play. Then this omaha thing came along and it seemed too good to be true (again PLEASE don't ask anything about the details- assume there's a reason a non-insane poker player would continue to play at such horrific loss-rates for so long).

But what about my Omaha play? As far as I can tell, its top-notch: I've read Super System 2, Cappelleti, O8Poker.com, playwinningpoker.com. Zee's book is on its way from amazon, but I'm assuming its going to be more of the same. In ring games play only AAxx, A2xx, A3xx and a few 23xx's. I also pick up high only hands if I'm pretty sure I can see a flop and dump the hand if it has more than one low card. I understand well the concept of not drawing for half the pot (high or low). I look for multi-way potential when deciding whether to play past the flop. I never chase non-nut draws without a marginal hand in the other direction. I have folded a set around 5 times in these 15k hands. Shorthanded play is obviously different. There, I look for any hand which can go both ways or is strong high and I play it. Perhaps my style is a little "tricky" as I'd rather let an over-aggressive player do the betting until I've made something. Shorthanded seems a lot like head's up holdem to me, which I have lots of experience playing from the hundreds of Sit and Go's I once played on partypoker. All in all, I'd say I play well.

So what gives? Well, I could just be running bad. But I'd say, and I'm pretty sure you guys would agree, that these loss amounts lie well outside of simple statistical deviation. There needs to be something fundamentally wrong with how I play for my losses to be so enormous. Then again, the bulk of my loss has only been in this past week of 4900 hands. So again, what gives? To say the least, I am suspicious. To me, looking at my statistics and my winrate IT JUST DOESN'T ADD UP. You may have a hard time believing it, but I actually do play the way I described in the above paragraph. I have spent many hours in the past month studying proper O8 play and honing my hand selection/lay down abilities. This past week, and to a lesser extent the week before it, I have had the worst luck possible. Almost every playable hand starts with a decent match to my hand, gives me a reason to stay in, and then rewards terrible play on the same fishes part over and over and over. I am really at a loss for how I could possibly lose so much. I keep telling myself it was just a bad week and in the long-run things will turn around, but I've never seen a losing streak this gigantic. It's spooky.

So anyways, back to the point- Buzz, can you please try to analyze my shorthanded stats? Am I not being aggressive enough post flop? Should I try to play more hands cheaply? Maybe a general overview of shorthanded strategy vs. a loose aggressive player, an ABC player, and a tight player? Any tips will be a huge help.

[beset7]

[ QUOTE ]

But what about my Omaha play? As far as I can tell, its top-notch: I've read Super System 2, Cappelleti, O8Poker.com, playwinningpoker.com. Zee's book is on its way from amazon, but I'm assuming its going to be more of the same. In ring games play only AAxx, A2xx, A3xx and a few 23xx's. I also pick up high only hands if I'm pretty sure I can see a flop and dump the hand if it has more than one low card. I understand well the concept of not drawing for half the pot (high or low). I look for multi-way potential when deciding whether to play past the flop. I never chase non-nut draws without a marginal hand in the other direction. I have folded a set around 5 times in these 15k hands. Shorthanded play is obviously different. There, I look for any hand which can go both ways or is strong high and I play it. Perhaps my style is a little "tricky" as I'd rather let an over-aggressive player do the betting until I've made something. Shorthanded seems a lot like head's up holdem to me, which I have lots of experience playing from the hundreds of Sit and Go's I once played on partypoker. All in all, I'd say I play well.

[/ QUOTE ]

You are confusing me. If this is true then why post your stats? Just remain confident that you play well and the results will come. This paragraph is in the same post where you admit you shouldn't be playing short-handed but for some cryptic reason you are required to? So, either you are a online prop player or this is a disguised online poker is rigged post and you are wasting our time.

Don't mean to be harsh but its frustrating to read downswing posts where people insist they are good at poker and aren't posting to discuss variance or other isssues related to downswings but under the pretence of looking for help.

I suspect that your leak is you don't play well when losing. But I suspect that because I think thats the case with 99% of all poker players.

Fair enough. I can't talk about what my exact situation is and that alone should tell you exactly what is going on.

What I'm trying to figure out in this post is if I actually AM a good player. If I have glaring holes in my play that people can point out from my statistics, then I'd like to know. I don't have the Omaha knowledge to properly analyze my shorthanded stats.

Sorry for the conflicting statements. I need help with my game. Simple as that.

EDIT: And by the way, I'd love to talk about variance. Like I said earlier, doesn't thing amount of loss seem to be outside the threshold of being a simple variance? I'd say something must be fundamentally wrong with game in order to explain it. And that thing is what I'm desperately trying to figure out. I'm out of ideas, so I'm looking to the experts.

[Buzz]

[ QUOTE ]
Buzz, can you please try to analyze my shorthanded stats?

[/ QUOTE ]

A. Wolf - Pretty hard to do that.

[ QUOTE ]
Any tips will be a huge help.

[/ QUOTE ]

I think your main problem is you’re being out-played by too many of your opponents.
• (1) That may be partly because of the limited range of starting hands you play, the cards you’re likely to hold are somewhat predictable.
• (2) It may be partly because your opponents are simply very strong players. (Short handed games players tend to be strong players, maybe because the weaker players don’t last).

If you are too predictable, then I think you have to take steps to become more unpredictable. Expand the range of starting hands you play and make random pre-flop raises.

What I mean by random pre-flop raises is something like this: key off the first card dealt to you. If it is a particular suit, say clubs, always raise when you have a playable hand, regardless of the quality of your playable hand.

For example, showing the cards in the order they are dealt to you, raise with
A[img]/images/graemlins/club.gif[/img], 2[img]/images/graemlins/club.gif[/img], 3[img]/images/graemlins/diamond.gif[/img], K[img]/images/graemlins/diamond.gif[/img], a hand that actually merits a pre-flop raise, but also raise with
2[img]/images/graemlins/club.gif[/img], 3[img]/images/graemlins/heart.gif[/img], T[img]/images/graemlins/diamond.gif[/img], J[img]/images/graemlins/spade.gif[/img], a marginal starting hand for short handed play.
Choose another suit, say spades as a never raise suit. For example, when you’re dealt
A[img]/images/graemlins/spade.gif[/img], 2[img]/images/graemlins/spade.gif[/img], 3[img]/images/graemlins/diamond.gif[/img], K[img]/images/graemlins/diamond.gif[/img], just limp. Also just limp when you’re dealt
2[img]/images/graemlins/spade.gif[/img], 3[img]/images/graemlins/heart.gif[/img], T[img]/images/graemlins/diamond.gif[/img], J[img]/images/graemlins/club.gif[/img].

Your goal here is to make your play unpredicatable, and the easiest place to do that in Omaha-8 is on the very first betting round. When the first card dealt to you is a diamond, do one thing, and when the first card dealt to you is a heart, do another.

You’d also like your play to be unpredictable on the second betting round and on the third and fourth betting rounds, but it’s more difficult to disguise your play after the flop. You can do a bit more bluffing than in a full game, especially on some flops - but you can get in trouble bluffing too much in Omaha-8. (There's a much greater chance an opponent has a board fit than in Texas hold 'em).

I suggested, several paragraphs back, that you expand the range of starting hands you play. This is contrary to the general advice to tighten up which is normally excellent advice for losing players. But in your particular case, I think you’re currently playing too limited a range of starting hands for your own good in these short handed games against strong opponents.

You still shouldn’t like starting hands with middle cards. In fact, hands with all middle cards are even worse short handed than they are in a full game. You simply don’t hit the flop often enough and when you do, and when you end up with a winner, it’s usually a winner for high only and you usually end up splitting the pot with low. Re-draws are not as important as in full game play, so that there should be less emphasis on four coordinated cards. (You should much rather have A389 than 6789 or 7899).

Be alert for the opportunity to get one-on-one with an opponent when you have a good one-on-one hand. In other words, raise if your raise will knock out other opponents so as to isolate you against an opponent, particularly a blind. When you do this, you usually want to act after the opponent you’re isolating. If isolation is impossible or unreasonable, then don’t try to isolate an opponent. (Don’t try a tactic that isn’t likely to work).

Just a few ideas for you to consider.

Even if you’re a strong player, it’s difficult to beat the rake in short-handed limit games against other strong opponents. Chips simply keep getting drained off the table and dropped down the collection slot with the result that nobody makes any money except the casino.

Buzz

[dcasper70]

awolf,

I play primarily 6-max and have roughly the same number of hands as you at shorthanded tables (<=6 players), so I'll post my numbers for you tonight to compare.

I'm currently sitting on 3-4 BB/100with a vpip of 30, so I see nothing wrong with your vpip.

One number that does jump out at me is your W$SD of 44.20%. That is very low, IMO. This needs to get up into the mid-high 60's or better. I think your WTS 45.25% may be high too, but I'll check against mine tonight. If it is, then you're simply showing down too many losing hands (Captain Obvious alert).

Do you overplay a set or top 2 early on a str8 or flush flop, then feel pot committed on later streets when they hit? Do you chase low draws, then make crying calls? What do you think may be some of your bigger weaknesses? Have you become one with Ribbo's favorite website Ribbo's World?

Numbers don't tell the whole story, how do you feel you play?

I'd love to see your statistics.

I fear my main weakness shorthanded may be not driving enough. Pokertracker has consistently labeled me LAP (tricky) on almost every session I've played. Does that show in my stats as a glaring weakness? I don't think it does...