Is o8 a limpers game?

[k_squared]

FWIW My understanding of why it is not a good strategy to raise pre-flop in a high-low game like omaha is that hands run much closer in value than in hold'em. You simply never have as significant an advantage as AA does in hold'em. The flop changes everything by making the best starting hands into utter crap when the board comes high with a rainbow. Your hands value greatly depends on the flop, much more so than in hold'em. In hold'em an unimporved AA wins in Omaha an unimproved AA23ss typically does not.

k_squared

[Ribbo]

[ QUOTE ]
FWIW My understanding of why it is not a good strategy to raise pre-flop in a high-low game like omaha is that hands run much closer in value than in hold'em. You simply never have as significant an advantage as AA does in hold'em. The flop changes everything by making the best starting hands into utter crap when the board comes high with a rainbow. Your hands value greatly depends on the flop, much more so than in hold'em. In hold'em an unimporved AA wins in Omaha an unimproved AA23ss typically does not.

k_squared

[/ QUOTE ]

That's not called an 'understanding of Omaha', that's called an 'ignorance of omaha'. The sad thing is you really do believe what you are writing. AA23 is the single most profitable omaha/8 hand, and just because you're playing limit does not change this fact. Is it possible for you to spout any more meaningless drivel than this?

[Mendacious]

Well I might have put this a little differently... Ribbo appears slightly less patient than normal today.

The fact that one hand is not as much of a favorite pre-flop as some hands are in Holdem does not mean that you should not raise the hand for value pre-flop. What it actually means is that people should be LESS inclined to fold to your pre-flop raise because chances are they are not that big of an underdog. So in my view you definately do not raise in limit to chase. The question that remains is should you raise at all?

So far I have not heard a good arguement for why not! An edge is an edge. Moreover, the fact that the hands become much more well defined on the flop than in holdem is NOT a reason not to raise. If you are a better player, the fact that you know whether to fold or not on the flop will SAVE you money, not cost you money. So your raise will not lock you into poor play (however it may tempt your poorer opponent to stick with hands that are close, but hopelessly behind.

[BettyBoopAA]

Most posters seem to play in low limit games where many people see the flop and raising doesn't make the game tighter. In these games it is correct to raise before the flop for value. Very good hands run close to value but against bad players they're calling with junk anyway so you make them pay for their preflop mistake.
At higher stakes vs good players, one should raise to thin the field when you have a hand that plays better vs fewer opponents. In this game, you have to ask yourself will my raise knock out opponents and proceed accordingly.
It's a mistake to raise with A 2 hands if you knock out the A 3 before the flop and in tight games that's what happens.

[Mendacious]

fair enough.

[k_squared]

the question is why should you raise a hand with a marginal advantage if that puts you in a position to not have a more significant advantage to press later? How much value do you gain from making the raise now, and how much do you lose later? Does raising define your hand in omaha? Would you raise a hand that didn't have a low draw? If the answer is no then it seems you are giving away a lot of information about your hand pre-flop information that can easily be used to dominate you based on the flop conditions.

What hands do you advocate raising with?

Furthermore, I am not suggesting that raising is something that should never be done. Rather, I believe that raising is much more positional and situational than in hold'em. I don't see what the point of defining your hand to a field of players is by raising your AA23ss into 4 limpers. With 3 low cards you only have a 40% chance of making a low pre-flop. Why invest that raise pre-flop, and declare your strength when you have a field of limpers? Why not just let the flop come and if it gives you a strong hand or draw pump the pot at that point?

How much value do you actually derive from raising AA23ss pre-flop? How often will that hand pay off? How much of an advantage does it have over K-Q-J-10ss of different suits? How much advantage does it have against a random hand? How does the hands value change when in a multi-way pot? I imagine that the more multi-way it is the more chance the low gets quartered and the high is won by someone else.

The flop has a huge impact on this game. Your pre-flop equity is significantly less than in hold'em in part because of the fact that it is a high-low game and in part because you have more cards from which to make a hand. With a reduced amount of equity the question of whether or not to raise becomes one that is largely dependent upon meta-game questions of how opponents respond, position, and what your image is. The reason you won't see people open raising with any hand they play, which would be a strategy employed by many winning TAG hold'em players, is that they don't have the same pre-flop edge, and so put the money in when they have a larger edge.

Ribbo - are you telling me that AA23ss typically wins pots, as in more than 50% of the time? I can tell you AA wins pots significantly more than 50% of the time. I was not saying that AA23ss is not a good hand, what I was saying is that when you compare it to other starting hands the difference in strength is significantly less than AA to anyother hold'em starting hand.

Furthermore, you should try to be more respectful of people posting. It is okay to disagree but you did it in a very rude way. At no point did I even suggest aa23 is unprofitable as you seem to imply. Perhaps you should read more carefully. FWIW I guess it would be "possible for me to spout more meaningless drivel than that" seeing as your reply clearly fits into that category. The only thing of value you said was that AA23 was a winning hand... which was not even a contended point. If you truly think AA23ss has a larger edge over other hands than AA then explain why rather than writing the sort of reply that tends to drive intelligent and curious people off of these boards rather than engaging them in the task of deepening our understanding of poker.

k_squared

[Ribbo]

You're not interested in winning pots, you're interested in winning money, the two things are fundamentally exclusive of each other. Bad Omaha players win a lot more pots than good ones. AA23 wins MONEY. You should raise ANY edge you have on any street, this is how you win money, this is not how you win pots, but you don't care about winning pots.
Now you ask "why declare your strength". Well sure, if you're a complete rock you're going to give your hand away. But good players raise a wide variety of profitable preflop hands. A345 falls into this range, and if the flop comes AK5 and people want to believe I have AA, then that's just great with me. Your preflop selection of hands is the single contributing factor in limit O8 to whether or not you will be a successful player.
If you think a small edge is "meaningless" I suggest to you to take a walk down Las Vegas strip. All those buildings were built on a 3% edge at roulette or craps etc.

[Buzz]

[ QUOTE ]
You're not interested in winning pots, you're interested in winning money,

[/ QUOTE ]

Ribbo - Yes! I agree completely!

[ QUOTE ]
You should raise ANY edge you have on any street, this is how you win money,

[/ QUOTE ]

That's not necessarily true. Sometimes you can win more money by somehow luring more opponents into paying more on later betting rounds. For example, when you flop quad kings from late position on second street, with an off-suit queen as the third flop card, and when somebody in early position bets and gets three limpers, maybe you don't want to pull the trigger just yet.

[ QUOTE ]
this is not how you win pots,

[/ QUOTE ]

That's not necessarily true either. Sometimes you can raise before the flop, limiting the field in the process, and knocking out someone who would otherwise have beaten you.

[ QUOTE ]
but you don't care about winning pots.

[/ QUOTE ]

Sure you do. You can't win any money if you don't win any pots.

[ QUOTE ]
But good players raise a wide variety of profitable preflop hands.

[/ QUOTE ]

True.

Styles differ among good players. Raising frequencies vary. Someone who raises with a good starting hand isn't necessarily a better player than someone who doesn't.

You and I will probably never agree on how often one should raise before the flop. In my humble opinion, whether or not you raise before the flop very much more depends on the particular opponents you're playing (and how they play) than on the cards you have been dealt. Obviously I don't mean you should be raising with garbage, at least very often.

Your playing style is not the same as mine. I imagine you make your playing style work for you and whether you do or not, and whether I could make your style work for me or not, I very much appreciate reading your point of view. Gives me insight into a different way of looking at things.

I can't play like Mike Cappelletti. I get my butt kicked when I try. He's obviously a very intelligent man, and I believe he makes his style work for him. But I just can't seem make it work for me. I've incorporated some elements of his game into my own, but other tactics he suggests backfire on me when I try to use them. However, I think knowing more about how he plays and also how you play helps my game.

So thank you for your useful insights.

[ QUOTE ]
Your preflop selection of hands is the single contributing factor in limit O8 to whether or not you will be a successful player.

[/ QUOTE ]

I've read that opinion elsewhere. And I agree starting hand selection is very important. I've spent thousands of hours simulating, figuring, and thinking about starting hands, and it's an on-going study for me. I wouldn't bother with that if I didn't think starting hand selection was very important.

However:
(1) I think I win more from opponents who don't know when to quit than from those who see the flop with too many hands.
(2) In some games I can get away with seeing the flop cheaply with lots of hands I consider marginal. But I only rarely get away with continuing after the flop with a hand that doesn't have much chance of success.
(3) There are four betting rounds - not just one - not just the first betting round. The amount you and your opponents invest on the three betting rounds after the flop is generally more than you invest on the first betting round.
(4) You have more information at your disposal on each successive betting round. Assuming you are capable of using the information available, the more the better.
(5) I can make a better decision as to the worth of the cards I have been dealt after I see how my hand meshes with the flop than knowing how well the hand simulates before any board cards are known.
(6) Whoever has the best hand at any juncture if play stopped at that point does not matter unless play stops at that point. Otherwise the one who has the best hand <font color="red">on the river</font> will prevail.

And therefore I think post flop play is at least as important as starting hand selection, if not more so.

I'll agree starting hand selection is very important. But it's not all there is to the game, or even most of it.

Lastly, you can't really tell when you have an edge before the flop. You can only know how your hand stands relative to random cards on the board and in the hands of your opponents. Whether or not you actually have an edge depends on the cards that will come to be on the board at the river, and also on what cards each of your opponents holds. For example, if you hold double suited kings and queens, a pretty nice starting hand, but if your opponents collectively hold all the missing kings and queens, then the main source of power for your hand is rendered useless. Doesn't mean you can't win with the hand, which still has flush and straight potential, but wouldn't it be a lot nicer to see a king or a queen on the flop?

Just my opinion.

Buzz

[pipes]

[ QUOTE ]
Furthermore, you should try to be more respectful of people posting. It is okay to disagree but you did it in a very rude way. At no point did I even suggest aa23 is unprofitable as you seem to imply. Perhaps you should read more carefully.

[/ QUOTE ]

Sure Ribbo comes off as a little rude, but what's most important is that he is giving good advice here. I'll take good advice from an azz anyday rather than bad advice from a super polite guy.

But I reread your post and it does seem that you suggest that raising AA23ds preflop is a bad idea as you still need to hit the flop to win. To win the most money possible you must raise good hands, especially in late position with many loose limpers.

[cjs]

And Ribbo's cute too!