Is o8 a limpers game?

[Wintermute]

wait for it...





wait for it....

[Mendacious]

Babyhater!

[gergery]

I will say the average age at the O8 table is always at least 20+ years older than the average age at limit or NL tables at my local casino.

[Buzz]

[ QUOTE ]
I think many people who are afraid to raise preflop in this game with a premium hand......

[/ QUOTE ]

Pipes - Are you implying I’m afraid to raise because I don’t advocate raising?

I’ve only been dealt the holy grail hand, AA23-double-suited, twice in my Omaha-8 playing career. And both times, as it turned out, I raised before the flop with it. One of those times, as it turned out, I was glad I raised before the flop and the other time, as it turned out, I wasn’t.

And I’ve raised before the flop with various other hands, both premium and non-premium.

With me, rightly or wrongly, raising or not before the flop with any hand, premium or non-premium, is a matter of considering what I think the effect of the raise will be on my opponents or on a specific opponent, not only on the current hand, but on future hands.

Can you not see that playing that way involves a much more complex reasoning process than woodenly raising before the flop with any premium hand?

Think about it.

[ QUOTE ]
.....should read Small Stakes Hold'em.

[/ QUOTE ]

All these suggestions for my further reading!

Well, thank you.

I bought a copy of that book several months ago and then got distracted by other things, put it aside intending to read it later, and forgot about it until I read your suggestion. I got it out last night, began reading, and finished Part One. I plan to read Part Two tonight. It’s very easy reading and is interesting to me. Seems like a very good book.

At any rate, thank you - and that’s not sarcastic.



[/ QUOTE ] To maximize winnings you should take value wherever it exists.

[/ QUOTE ]

Hmm. I’ll have to think about that some more. At this point I disagree. Although I agree you do have to be able to "play good poker" - Omaha-8, in my humble opinion, does not play the same as Texas hold 'em. It seems to me you’re trying to apply Texas hold 'em strategies to Omaha-8. But gee... maybe that works for you.

I actually encounter that quite a bit (players applying Texas hold 'em strategies to Omaha-8). Of course some strategies apply to all games, perhaps with different emphasis.

[ QUOTE ]
I don't buy the argument that it reduces your equity on future streets.

[/ QUOTE ]

No? O.K. then don't buy it. I buy it, but you don’t have to.

[ QUOTE ]
If anything it ties your opponents onto their hands. Because the pot is bigger they will hang onto non nut low draws, non nut flushes, and bottom two pair for dear life.

[/ QUOTE ]

All of them?

I do think there is some truth to what you write, at least for some opponents and groups of opponents. But I don't think all opponents or groups of opponents are the same.

Buzz

[Mr_J]

Always raising good hands is silly, hell even I know that. It can affect how players will play with you in future hands, and that effect could be a negative one.

One important thing that sngs have taught me is how you need to consider future EV. The best option now doesn't always give the most value. Sometimes in sngs you need to make a suboptimal play in order to maximise future opportunities (eg take a gamble with your stack to conserve folding equity). The same is true for other forms of poker, it's just not as obvious.

Buzz is right that there's different factors you need to take into account when choosing to raise. Will it knock players out? Do I want them out of the pot? Do I gain more EV know by putting as much of my money in as possible, or by letting opponents get attatched to inferior holdings? How does my raise affect my opponents perceive me? How will they react to future raises??

" To maximize winnings you should take value wherever it exists."

I totally agree. But sometimes value will mean just calling.

"I don't buy the argument that it reduces your equity on future streets."

Raising gives info away about your hand, and you may have knocked players out. It's possible that the negative effects of your raise outweigh the gains.

Just IMO, but I think anyone who does something blindly (like preflop raising) isn't seeing the whole picture.

[Ribbo]

[ QUOTE ]
Always raising good hands is silly, hell even I know that. It can affect how players will play with you in future hands, and that effect could be a negative one.

One important thing that sngs have taught me is how you need to consider future EV. The best option now doesn't always give the most value. Sometimes in sngs you need to make a suboptimal play in order to maximise future opportunities (eg take a gamble with your stack to conserve folding equity). The same is true for other forms of poker, it's just not as obvious.

Buzz is right that there's different factors you need to take into account when choosing to raise. Will it knock players out? Do I want them out of the pot? Do I gain more EV know by putting as much of my money in as possible, or by letting opponents get attatched to inferior holdings? How does my raise affect my opponents perceive me? How will they react to future raises??

" To maximize winnings you should take value wherever it exists."

I totally agree. But sometimes value will mean just calling.

"I don't buy the argument that it reduces your equity on future streets."

Raising gives info away about your hand, and you may have knocked players out. It's possible that the negative effects of your raise outweigh the gains.

Just IMO, but I think anyone who does something blindly (like preflop raising) isn't seeing the whole picture.

[/ QUOTE ]

You're arguing apples and oranges. Tournament strategy does not apply to what started this discussion, which was a cash game. Nobody will disagree that in a tournament, you wont want to raise so often (particularily earlier in the tournament) preflop.

[pokerswami]

[ QUOTE ]
At limit o8 tables though, it seems like I'm the only one raising PF, why is this?

Is raising PF less common in o8 because it's impossible to have a made hand pf or what?

And more importantly than whether it's common or not, is whether it's the correct approach?

It seems to me that if I have a good hand, which I believe is the best hand, I have to raise it up, no?

[/ QUOTE ]

I believe your respondents have entirely missed the correct answer. I don't play much Limit O8/B currently, buy I spent a year playing it live several times a week.

The reason that many Limit Omaha 8/B games have little pre-flop raising can be found on page 193 of Ray Zee's book, High-Low-Split Poker:

A lot of raising before the flop adds marginally to your profits, but it adds tremendously to your fluctuations.

There are several reasons players choose to play Limit O8/B from among the games currently spread. One of the main reasons that many players choose it is that if you know what you're doing and you're disciplined, you can play it with a smaller bankroll at a given limit than probably any other limit game commonly dealt.

Part of this knowledge and discipline includes playing at only full tables and normally playing with a mix of poor quality, very loose, calling stations and very loose, somewhat aggressive bettors.

If you want to play on an undersized bankroll and if you want to limit your fluctuations, then you will be able to best accomplish this by playing in a game where you have the opportunity to limp in pre-flop most of the time, if you decide to play a hand. If you're in a game where 6 to 7 or more of the 9 seated players limp in to see the flop and you know what you're doing, it can be a gold mine. I've played in games such as this.

A huge part of your profit in these games comes from very disciplined card selection. If you're the tightest player pre-flop in this type of game, you'll have a big advantage. If most flops can be seen without a raise, then you will have smaller fluctuations. But, because you're playing against poor quality, loose opponents, you can still make a good profit, especially relative to your bankroll size.

This effect is magnified in kill pot games. Suppose your game is $10.- $20. with a bet and 3 raises maximum and has a full kill. The minimum to limp in on a non-kill pot is $10., and in a kill pot the maximum to see the flop is $80, the $20. bet plus 3 raises.

Now suppose you're in this for the LONG RUN. Although every deal of the cards is a random event completely unrelated to the previous deals, we expect that over the long run there will be a distribution of hands that mirror the average distribution of hands. Now also suppose you only play hands that you believe have a positive expectation in your game. Here's the rub. Adding a pre-flop bet range of $10.-$80. will add ENORMOUSLY to your money fluctuations.

You can control what cards you play, but adding this huge volitility in pre-flop betting means that your bankroll swings will be amplified greatly.

If you are super aggressive and you want to generate big fluctuations and you can find willing cohorts, then this game can provide that. However, if you are the type of conservative, wait for good cards player that is often attracted by limit Omaha 8/B, then you want to avoid games with a lot of pre-flop raising.

Part of knowing how to play poker well is evaluating a game in progress and deciding if you want to play in it and how best to profit there. The present trend in conservative limit Omaha 8/B players is to discourage pre-flop raising because it adds to their fluctuations. Even if most players haven't thought it through as I've outlined it here, they eventually realize that they want to avoid the heavy pre-flop raising games or they just experience too many downswings for their taste/bankroll and give it up.

[pipes]

[quote


The reason that many Limit Omaha 8/B games have little pre-flop raising can be found on page 193 of Ray Zee's book, High-Low-Split Poker:

A lot of raising before the flop adds marginally to your profits, but it adds tremendously to your fluctuations.



[/ QUOTE ]

Zee also says in the next paragraph that this does not apply if there are many terrible players in the pot. This is generally the case.

I find it amusing that Zee says when you have AA23ds, that you probably want to raise. Probably? If you are on the button with AA23ds with six limpers and you have to consider whether or not you should raise I don't think there's much of a future for you in any type of gambling.

I really like Baldwin's discussion of raising preflop in SS2. I think this is a much better resource for O8b than the Zee book.

I disagree that raising preflop only adds marginally to your profits but adds tremendously to your fluctuations. But even if it does, so what? IMO one should be playing at a level where there can play optimally.

For those of you have read Mason's Gambling Theory book, you'll recognize that raising in position preflop with a premium hand is a non-self weighting strategy. A good gambler is willing to deal with the fluctuations in order to maximize their bets when they have the best of it.

[Ribbo]

I believe raising preflop adds tremendously to your profits and only increases your variance marginally. Go figure.

[ QUOTE ]

I disagree that raising preflop only adds marginally to your profits but adds tremendously to your fluctuations. But even if it does, so what? IMO one should be playing at a little where there can play optimally.

[/ QUOTE ]

That's because you're discounting the risk of ruin:

Let's say that your bankroll should be roughly eaqual to 4*variance/Expected Value.

In real life, of course, the bankroll is effectively fixed, so, if you can cut your variance in half for a 1 or 2% decrease in EV, you can take the same bankroll to a table with twice the stakes, and make twice as much money.

Therefore, variance-reducing play is valuable.