Playing blinds and check-raising in Omaha8

[Ghazban]

Recently, I've been playing quite a bit of Omaha8 online and I think I play too loosely from the blinds. Are there any hands that normally wouldn't be playable that are playable for the half bet in the small blind? (assume 3-5 limpers) I think I tend to complete with far too many mediocre to bad hands just to see if I can flop something big. How about facing a single raise in the big blind? (again with 3-5 people in the pot-- I see lots of cold calling in the 2/4 Party game) This is another area where I think I let the discount flop price go to my head and play too many hands.

A separate issue-- I check raise next to never in this game, despite using it a fair amount in both limit and no-limit holdem. I think the only check-raising I've done is with a virtually unbreakable high (aces full or better), usually with some low possibilities, too. Often, it seems most profitable to just bet out with my good hands and let the chasers call along. I suppose if the person sitting to my immediate left was extremely aggressive, I could check-raise after everyone behind him calls but, in my experience, the vast majority of Omaha8 players at my level (2/4 and under online, 5/10 and under live) are very passive. Any thoughts?

[benfranklin]

One of the commandments of O8 is thou shall only play hands with 4 coordinated cards. I will usually play a decent 3-card hand from the small blind in an unraised pot. Then it's fit or fold on the flop. In the SB, assuming the BB doesn't raise, you are getting double the pot odds compared to having to call a full bet. In low limit games, I don't think that playing out of position if I hit the flop here is as important as it would be in holdem.

[Buzz]

Hi Ben -

[ QUOTE ]
One of the commandments of O8 is thou shall only play hands with 4 coordinated cards.

[/ QUOTE ]

No. No. No.

Indeed, many hands with four coordinated cards have poor prospects in a full game of Omaha-8.

For example, 7[img]/images/graemlins/heart.gif[/img]-8[img]/images/graemlins/club.gif[/img]-9[img]/images/graemlins/club.gif[/img]-T[img]/images/graemlins/heart.gif[/img] is a poor starting hand in Omaha-8, despite the four coordinated cards.
7[img]/images/graemlins/heart.gif[/img]-8[img]/images/graemlins/club.gif[/img]-9[img]/images/graemlins/club.gif[/img]-9[img]/images/graemlins/heart.gif[/img] is also a poor starting hand in Omaha-8, despite the four coordinated cards.

But A[img]/images/graemlins/heart.gif[/img]-2[img]/images/graemlins/diamond.gif[/img]-3[img]/images/graemlins/heart.gif[/img]-K[img]/images/graemlins/club.gif[/img] is a rather nice starting hand in Omaha-8, despite the lack of four coordinated cards.

And although not a great starting hand, I'd certainly rather see the flop in a loose passive game with 2[img]/images/graemlins/heart.gif[/img]-3[img]/images/graemlins/diamond.gif[/img]-K[img]/images/graemlins/club.gif[/img]-K[img]/images/graemlins/spade.gif[/img] than with 7[img]/images/graemlins/heart.gif[/img]-8[img]/images/graemlins/club.gif[/img]-9[img]/images/graemlins/club.gif[/img]-T[img]/images/graemlins/heart.gif[/img].

Yes, 7[img]/images/graemlins/heart.gif[/img]-8[img]/images/graemlins/club.gif[/img]-9[img]/images/graemlins/club.gif[/img]-T[img]/images/graemlins/heart.gif[/img] is a better starting hand than
2[img]/images/graemlins/spade.gif[/img]-8[img]/images/graemlins/club.gif[/img]-9[img]/images/graemlins/club.gif[/img]-T[img]/images/graemlins/heart.gif[/img], but neither of these hands is a very good starting hand in Omaha-8.

Just my opinion.

Buzz

[benfranklin]

[ QUOTE ]
Hi Ben -

[ QUOTE ]
One of the commandments of O8 is thou shall only play hands with 4 coordinated cards.

[/ QUOTE ]

No. No. No.

Indeed, many hands with four coordinated cards have poor prospects in a full game of Omaha-8.

For example, 7[img]/images/graemlins/heart.gif[/img]-8[img]/images/graemlins/club.gif[/img]-9[img]/images/graemlins/club.gif[/img]-T[img]/images/graemlins/heart.gif[/img] is a poor starting hand in Omaha-8, despite the four coordinated cards.

[/ QUOTE ]

I was talking about the general guidelines for hand selection put forth by the respected writers, particularly for beginners. I wasn't saying that this is carved in stone. As you get more experience, you play more and more according to the situation. Another "commandment" (Kreiger and others) is to generally not play 7's, 8's, and 9's. My point was simply that whatever your starting hand standards, you can loosen them a bit in an unraised pot in the small blind, because you are getting better pot odds and it is unlikely that the big blind will raise.

[ QUOTE ]
But A[img]/images/graemlins/heart.gif[/img]-2[img]/images/graemlins/diamond.gif[/img]-3[img]/images/graemlins/heart.gif[/img]-K[img]/images/graemlins/club.gif[/img] is a rather nice starting hand in Omaha-8, despite the lack of four coordinated cards.

[/ QUOTE ]

I would consider this a coordinated hand, and would play it with few exceptions. The king might look like a dangler at first glance, but it works with the ace for a high draw, so it is not completely isolated from the rest of the hand.

[Yads]

I usually decide to complete only if I would normally play this hand for a full bet. Unless the hand is just below marginal folding. Something like A38Q with no good flush possibility. But I usually play fairly tight pre flop.

[Buzz]

Hi Ben -

[ QUOTE ]
I would consider this a coordinated hand, and would play it with few exceptions. The king might look like a dangler at first glance, but it works with the ace for a high draw, so it is not completely isolated from the rest of the hand.

[/ QUOTE ]

You were referring to A23Ks. O.K. I can easily come up with another hand which has a total dangler.

Which do you like better, 6[img]/images/graemlins/heart.gif[/img]-7[img]/images/graemlins/club.gif[/img]-8[img]/images/graemlins/club.gif[/img]-9[img]/images/graemlins/heart.gif[/img] or
A[img]/images/graemlins/heart.gif[/img]-9[img]/images/graemlins/spade.gif[/img]-2[img]/images/graemlins/diamond.gif[/img]-3[img]/images/graemlins/heart.gif[/img]?

It's an easy choice, even though I had to come up with a hand that includes a middle card to get a dangler.

Clearly the hand would be better if the nine of spades was replaced by a card than was better coordinated to the ace, or even the deuce or trey. But A239 with a suited ace is very playable without having all four cards coordinated. (It wouldn't even have to be that good. Suited ace-deuce is very playable, regardless of the other two cards involved. And then there are various playable KKWWn hands like 23KKn where the deuce and trey are coordinated only with each other and the pair of kings stands alone. You have to want to see the flop with that hand in a loose (or tight - or any) game.

Avoiding hands with too many middle cards is a much better commandment, if you're looking for commandments, than wanting all four cards coordinated. That commandment would lead you astray, away from the path of righteousness.

You see the suggestion to only play hands with four coordinated cards written here and there, but I think it's a carryover from Omaha-high. It's a false commandment for Omaha-8.

I do generally (1) avoid hands with middle cards, and I do generally (2) avoid rainbow (non-suited) hands. There are exceptions, but those are two better commandments, if you feel like Moses.

Just my opinion.

Buzz

[3rdEye]

Damn good post, Buzz.