PLO, Variance and Profitability vs Furthering NLHE Game

[fimbulwinter]

I apologize in advance if these are newbie questions and if i sound ignorant of this game, esp for the stakes im describing.

I've been playing in a 5/10 PLO game recently and have been riding quite a gigantic wave of variance. my first session in the game (the two PLO hands i posted were from that game) saw me losing 6K and the two subsequent sessions have had me winning a little over 4 each. I'm happy with the returns, but the variance is insane to a NLHE player (i know, we're coddled WRT variance vs limit and PLO) especially when i reviewed the big hands i played in each session VIA twodimes.

in session one, i put my money in with a massive pot equity edge (>90%) twice, put it in as a 65/35 dog twice, put it in 55/45 and 65/35 favorite 4 times and once i was drawing stone dead (the quads over FH hand).

I guess the question i have is this:

Are these typical overlays in this game? are you basically trying to maintain a 60% general overlay on your big hands and allowing the variance to iron itself out long term?

In general when im putting the money in at holdem, the overlay is much higher, but it happens many fewer times per session. if i worked out the EV of all my omaha vs holdem hands they'd likely be similar however the SD's, i'd guess, would not.

Sometimes i can't find 4 tables of NL, so i'd like to add this game to my repertoire. my bankroll is very sufficient for much higher stakes holdem, so i'd assume it can handle omaha, but if the risk/reward ratio is just so high, i'd rather concentrate on further developing my NLHE game.

so is it worth it? any comments from big bet holdem players cum PLOites and anyone else welcome.

fim

[josie_wales]

Fim,
Omaha is as you know not nearly as popular as Holdem. Yet it often attracts holdem players due to its large pots.

Most of these players play omaha as if its holdem re: the way they value their hands.

Now is the time to get into omaha as you can be well ahead of the learning curve and just wait for others to come in and try to learn when you already know how to play.

As far as if it is worth it? I say yes for a few reasons.

1) If you learn how to play it right, the rewards are much, much greater

2) There are TONS of mistakes that players make in Omaha...you can capitalize on them

3) [ QUOTE ]
are you basically trying to maintain a 60% general overlay on your big hands and allowing the variance to iron itself out long term?


[/ QUOTE ] As far as the percents you use, I am not sure...But I think you know the answer to the variance question.

4) [ QUOTE ]
i'd rather concentrate on further developing my NLHE game.

[/ QUOTE ]

It does not have to be one or the other...I feel that playing omaha actually HELPS my NLHE game for a few reasons.

Mostly keeps me from getting too bored with one game. Keeps me fresh. Allows me to view different styles of play and adapt/alter them into my HE game

good luck

jw

[LA_Price]

You are right that the variance is indeed higher. This is why limit Hold'em and NLHE Tournaments are so popular and games like razz and stud/8 are not. Games with low variances eventually die out. I think you should definetely learn to play this game as I suspect it will become more popular in the next few years. Already the 10/20 PLO on party is probably the most profitable game on the net next to the big UB games.

It's typical in this game to be putting lots of money in with smaller edges than you would have in NL Hold'em.

If you wan't to lower your variance in this game you can pass on some of the very close plays. Another thing is to determine if the game you're in is tight or loose. In a weak tight game where you can win with lots of bluffs and semi-bluffs I suspect you could achieve a similar win rate and lower variance than in a loose passive game.

Remember to keep a proper bankroll as well. For No Limit the establish bankroll i believe is 20 buyins but for PLO you should probably have around 30. But this of course depends on your win rate and standard deviation. For example say you had these stats for the two games.

NL Hold'em 2/4 Win rate $80/Hr, Std Dev $287/Hr
Pot-Limit Omaha 2/4 Win rate $80/Hr, Std $335/HR

The recommended bankroll on statking is $3000 for NL but $4200 for PLO so it's definetely a swingier game.

Later,
LA_Price

[Tilt]

Fim,

I think its a great game to add to your repertoire in general. A solid, thinking poker player can extract more $ from losing players at PLO simply because more money ends up in the pot more often than in NLHE.

The variance you describes sounds consistent with the fact that 1) you are learning the game (and doing so on a higher stakes playing field than the average student) and 2) you are probably playing more shorthanded games...which in my experience leads to greater variance due to the fact that you need to make more moves and seek to snap off more bluffs in such a game.

I think it improves your NLHE game, but not alot. Specifically it has helped me with planning pot control in NLHE contests, and in thinking through those multiway crazy pots in loose games (since thats like most pots in PLO).

I would recommend you spend some time in full ring games before playing alot of shorthanded ones. I played a lot of full ring limit Omaha (which is like watching paint dry) as a training ground and found it very helpful in getting you acclimated to some of the basic probabilities/situations. I also would not recommend multitabling NLHE and PLO games at the same time. I have made some dumb mistakes doing so trying to switch my brain between HE and PLO rules rapidly. You might have a better brain for that though.

[Ribbo]

If you lack the mental strength to deal with the huge swings of the game, you will be completely destroyed by it and the ensuing tilt that follows. Be certain you are a winning player before you sit down and play, because sometimes it takes months to realise. Omaha is such a fickle mistress that idiots can win a fortune never once suspecting that they are actually bad.

[Tilt]

[ QUOTE ]
If you lack the mental strength to deal with the huge swings of the game, you will be completely destroyed by it and the ensuing tilt that follows. Be certain you are a winning player before you sit down and play, because sometimes it takes months to realise. Omaha is such a fickle mistress that idiots can win a fortune never once suspecting that they are actually bad.

[/ QUOTE ]

LOL

He clearly doesnt know who he is responding to.

Whaddya say Fim, you think you are a winning player?

[Ribbo]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
If you lack the mental strength to deal with the huge swings of the game, you will be completely destroyed by it and the ensuing tilt that follows. Be certain you are a winning player before you sit down and play, because sometimes it takes months to realise. Omaha is such a fickle mistress that idiots can win a fortune never once suspecting that they are actually bad.

[/ QUOTE ]

LOL

He clearly doesnt know who he is responding to.

Whaddya say Fim, you think you are a winning player?

[/ QUOTE ]

Last time I checked this was a message board, and comments are there for everyone to read. All my comments are made irrespective of the limit or the player, because that's the most useful responce to give. Since I see no poker content in your post, why did you make it?

[fimbulwinter]

first off, let me say thank you to all the people who responded. the responses have been awesome.

just a few points to clarify:

typically in my NLHE game, there are 4 very solid and tough playes, 1 or 2 weak tights who aren't worth much long term and 3-4 very bad players who dump cash like it's going out of style.

conversely, there is usually one plo game going with 2-3 terrible LAGs and 1 very very good PLO player who plays 200NL normally. he's a middle eastern guy and said he doesn't get NLHE, FWIW.

so the full ring PLO game really isnt an option, but i really prefer shorthanded play in general- it's where i learned NLHE and LHE.

as for my BR, it's many times larger than needed, so it's mroe a psychological bankroll thing for me. i've never had more than an 8 buyin slide at NLHE (happened this week too) and i can see such a slide happening at PLO very easily.

I'll admit that i too was drawn by the big pot sizes and by the fact that i've seen the PLO guy sitting with 10K+ many times. Idon't think i've ever had that much at a NLHE table. i mean he could be into the game for a bit, but still, that's a grip of cash.

as for the question of whether i make my own variance, i think that's a very good question. i think i'm so used to pushing every angle in NLHE, that i sling it in quite a bit in PLO as well. i think i could turn out a nice winrate peddling the nuts at these lags.

well that's about it.

fim

[Tilt]

[quote

[/ QUOTE ]

Last time I checked this was a message board, and comments are there for everyone to read. All my comments are made irrespective of the limit or the player, because that's the most useful responce to give. Since I see no poker content in your post, why did you make it?

[/ QUOTE ]

You very condescingly addressed one of the best online NLHE players on 2+2 like he was a total noob.

[barongreenback]

Can someone post their standard deviation / 100 hands (session tab in PT, click more detail) so we can put a number on this. I don't think mine has settled down yet.