Post deleted by Mat Sklansky

[raisethatmofo]

[raisethatmofo]

[MarkGritter]

[ QUOTE ]
Under step 3,

How many points would KQ76 have under step 3 ?

I'm saying only 8 points since he seems to only add each type of point count once unless it involves an ace which you make straights two ways.

[/ QUOTE ]

Suited cards and pairs can be counted twice, so I think both straights should be counted, since they are different and both add value. So KQ76 rainbow would be 16 points, K7Q6 ds would be 27 points.

One of the examples counts two straights; although this is with an A I think the principle is the same. (The previous examples do not count 89 or AK twice because they do not form distinct straights.)

A more difficult question is how to score two straights that share a card, like QJ86. I think you would count QJ8 as a 2-gap 3-card straight (14 points) and 86 as a 1-gap 2-card straight (6 points).

But would QJ87 be two 3-card straights or one 4-card straight? I think in this case you can count QJ8 for 14 points but I don't think J87 counts for an additional 14 points since the range of straights they make overlap. But I could be wrong on that.

[Orpheus]

[ QUOTE ]

Suited cards and pairs can be counted twice, so I think both straights should be counted, since they are different and both add value. So KQ76 rainbow would be 16 points, K7Q6 ds would be 27 points.

[/ QUOTE ]

I disagree. And so did Hutchinson. it's just that many of the webpages out there don't describe his system well.

I used Edw Hutchinson's second revision whole-point system for a while when I first started full-table Omaha High (I started in short-table Omaha), and it let me turn the corner to being a consistent modest winner.

Thanks for reminding me of it: I'll always remember if fondly-- but Hutchinson himself said it's just a training tool, and its primary lesson is selectivity. It teaches you to discard more hands, especially hands that will tend to get you in trouble with a second best hand. Therefore, you NEVER want to deliberately read the points in a way that magnifies their values. Learn to love the pre-flop fold!

As my game advanced, and I loosened my starting hands, I noticed that a surprising percentage of the 'near miss' hands I considered playing would've made a non-nut that I'd have felt tempted to follow to a showdown -- and lost.

Second best hands can be a dangerous and volatile territory, especially at (paradoxically) loose low-limit tables that are often multi-way at the river: it's hard to know when you've really been beat, and hard to let go of a non-nut made hand because you know *some* of your opponents are just betting 2pr. Remember: with a few exceptions (certain good calling hands may be undervalued and folded by beginners), the nut is just as likely to go to a bad player as a good one, so playing more morginal hands and only getting second- or third- best can cost you money, even (especially?) at certain juicy tables.

Many of the hands I DO add aren't 'near misses' under Hutchinson (some score 21-23) but play well if I drop them instantly if they miss, and play them aggressively when they hit. Many 24-27 point hands "don't make the cut" with me for precisely the reason they didn't make the cut for Hutchinson: they're too likely to hit a second best (or worse).

And FWIW my raising and post-flop folding standards have NOTHING to do with the point value of my hand.

A lot of PLO and Omaha/8 players try LLOH for a while, win, and decide they know it. They often dismiss it as a boring mechanistic game. I disagree. It's a relaxing low-risk game that still benefits from considerable attention to table conditions, psychological analysis (etc.) to extract maximum value at well-chosen tables. Sure, you can make good coin with a relatively simple set of math-based rules, but that doesn't mean you've mastered the game. You can be making a double-digit BB/100 and still be learning new things almost every week. I know I am.

If I didn't believe that, I'd never give hard-learned advice that might draw more 2+2ers to my fish pond.