Omaha8 hand selection queires

[RobCee]

Thanks to those who responded to my last post I've now logged about 25 hours of Omaha8 on Partys $0.50/$1.00 tables and have a couple of questions regarding hand selection.

During my time at the tables I've noticed that a lot of players seem to play any four cards seven or under and A2XX. Why are players so keen on going for low when there is always a high but not always a low, and winning low hands get quartered more often than winning high hands? Surely they should be looking to scoop or win high and be mucking hands with only low potential.

Secondly is A2XX a playable hand? Currently I only play A2 if one of my other two cards is a 3,4,5,or 6 and my ace is suited. Is this too tight?

[chaos]

In a loose-passive game, I think A2xx is playable from any position. In these games many players tend to chase you down with A3, 23, and worse.

I would recommend expanding A2 hands to include and any A2 with a suited Ace, AA2x, and A2 with two picture cards (e.g. A2KJ) for most games. Note that all of these hands have a chance to win high as well as low.

[parlance]

i don't think that you are playing too tight, but i guess it depends on the game that you are playing in.

I think that A2 is playable for a cheap flop but i'd rather an Ace suited with a deuce. If I can get into these hands cheaply, I'll play any A2 especially in mid to late position. I don't think that i'm losing much on these hands as i'm quick to toss them if they don't hit me hard on the flop or give me pot odds to draw to the nut low.

As with any A2 hand that doesn't contain another low under five, you run the risk of getting bricked on the turn and river with no low qualifying backup -- That's why i don't mind AA2 and A22 (especially suited aces with these hands) because you are taking away one bad card from the deck that can hurt your low (but help you for high).

[Buzz]

[ QUOTE ]
Why are players so keen on going for low when there is always a high but not always a low, and winning low hands get quartered more often than winning high hands?

[/ QUOTE ]

Rob - Excellent question.

Some of the players who are keen on going for low don't understand the game very well. They fail to take into account the fact that low is only possible approximately three deals out of every five.

However, aside from that, some low hands are better because low cards, in addition to winning for low, can also win for high - especially low hands with aces. (The ace, in addition to being the lowest card, is also the highest card).

And you do get quartered a lot with high straights. It's just less noticable than getting quartered for low - because nut straights get beaten by flushes and full houses and therefore don't get shown down as often as nut lows.

Whatever hand you play, you still need to catch a fit with the flop.

Let's consider three hands from three different ranges. They all will be double suited, will have a pair, and will have the next two cards ranking below the pair.

A. K[img]/images/graemlins/heart.gif[/img]K[img]/images/graemlins/diamond.gif[/img]Q[img]/images/graemlins/heart.gif[/img]J[img]/images/graemlins/diamond.gif[/img],

B. 9[img]/images/graemlins/heart.gif[/img]9[img]/images/graemlins/diamond.gif[/img]8[img]/images/graemlins/heart.gif[/img]7[img]/images/graemlins/diamond.gif[/img], and

C. 3[img]/images/graemlins/heart.gif[/img]3[img]/images/graemlins/diamond.gif[/img]2[img]/images/graemlins/heart.gif[/img]A[img]/images/graemlins/diamond.gif[/img].

Two of these hands, A and C, are good starting hands, but hand B is probably a mistake to play in Omaha-8. The reason A and C are good starting hands is because they both have a good chance to scoop.

Hand C is a better starting hand than hand A because it has a better chance of finding a fit with the flop and it also has a better chance of ending up as the nuts on the river.

If hand A scoops, it will usually be because the board has three high cards, and, in that case, low will not be possible.

If hand C scoops, it will usually be because it wins for low and also for high. Its chances for winning for low should be obvious to you. But note that hand C also can win for high (1) by making a low straight, (2) by making a flush or straight flush, (3) by making a full house or quads, or (4) by default when nobody else happens to stick around with a better high hand. That fourth reason may not be significant in a $0.50/$1.00 game, but it is very significant at higher limit-game levels. In these games the nut low hand often drives the betting and non-nut high hands can't take the heat.

While from an offensive standpoint I consider a low pair to be more of a liability than an asset, a pair of treys, when you also have an ace and/or a deuce, has some defensive value because the chances of getting quartered when the nut low turns out to require A3 or 23 are reduced. And sometimes when there is no ace or deuce on the board and a trey appears on the river, the pair of threes in your hand may work out well for you, in terms of scooping (perhaps making a set or better, two pairs, or even a winning one pair for you).

An added bonus of hand C is that even when you don't scoop, you will end up with a share of the pot almost half the time.

Hand B, on the other hand, has the same chance of making a flush as hand A or hand C - but the flush is less likely to be a winning flush - and when hand B does make a winning flush, it will most usually have to split with low. Hand B will make a straight a bit more often than either hand A or hand C, but when it makes a nut straight, low will also be possible so that it will probably only win half the pot. The pair of nines, although not as bad as a pair of treys will still often end up making a second best hand (ugh!) - and the pair of nines does not have the value of a pair of treys (when you also have an ace and/or a deuce) from a defensive standpoint. You're basically only playing for half the pot when you pay to see the flop with hand B.

Once you're into the play of a hand you often will have favorable odds to play for half the pot, but you rarely, if ever, will find a game in a casino that is so loose and passive that you will have favorable odds to play a starting hand that only can win half the pot. (You might, playing for $0.50/$1.00 - I don't know).

It's very difficult to know ahead of time what the flop will be, and therefore which of these three hands will find a fit with the flop. Hand C (the low hand) has a somewhat wider range of flop fits than hand A or hand B. You may pick up a low draw with hand C that allows you to procede beyond the flop, and then end up with a scooper.

It's very important to keep focused on scooping. You shouldn't be playing hand C because it's a low hand. Rather, you should be playing hand C because it has a good chance to scoop.

Of the three hands, all things considered, IMHO hands A and C are about the same in terms of probability of winning for high in a normal, full game, with hand B a notch down.

For the roughly three deals out of five low is possible (depending on the actual cards you hold), hand C clearly has the edge for the low half of the pot.

Just my opinion.

Buzz

[ QUOTE ]
I've noticed that a lot of players seem to play any four cards seven or under and A2XX.

[/ QUOTE ]

I'm not sure that's such a good idea. Try not to emulate the bad habits of your opponents.

Buzz

[Buzz]

[ QUOTE ]
Secondly is A2XX a playable hand? Currently I only play A2 if one of my other two cards is a 3,4,5,or 6 and my ace is suited. Is this too tight?

[/ QUOTE ]

Rob - There are many fine players who believe any hand with an ace and a deuce is playable. In my humble opinion there's a whale of a difference between various A2XX hands and there also are many different situations, calling for different tactics.

A[img]/images/graemlins/heart.gif[/img] 2[img]/images/graemlins/diamond.gif[/img] 4[img]/images/graemlins/heart.gif[/img] K[img]/images/graemlins/diamond.gif[/img] or

A[img]/images/graemlins/heart.gif[/img] 2[img]/images/graemlins/heart.gif[/img] Q[img]/images/graemlins/diamond.gif[/img] Q[img]/images/graemlins/club.gif[/img]

are clearly much better starting hands than

A[img]/images/graemlins/spade.gif[/img] 2[img]/images/graemlins/heart.gif[/img] 8[img]/images/graemlins/diamond.gif[/img] 9[img]/images/graemlins/club.gif[/img].

I think A[img]/images/graemlins/spade.gif[/img] 2[img]/images/graemlins/heart.gif[/img] 8[img]/images/graemlins/diamond.gif[/img] 9[img]/images/graemlins/club.gif[/img] wins for low about as often against a few players

as it does against many players - and it doesn't hold up particularly well in head-to-head play. Is it always wise to play this hand? No, not in my humble opinion. That is, I can think of situations where I don't want to play this hand at all. But in a loose/passive ring game where I expect most opponents to see the flop and where I don't expect any pre-flop raises, yes, I'm going to see the flop with the hand.

I think in loose games you should probably see the flop with any A2XX hands.

However, when the game gets tighter,

while A[img]/images/graemlins/heart.gif[/img] 2[img]/images/graemlins/diamond.gif[/img] 4[img]/images/graemlins/heart.gif[/img] K[img]/images/graemlins/diamond.gif[/img] or

A[img]/images/graemlins/heart.gif[/img] 2[img]/images/graemlins/heart.gif[/img] Q[img]/images/graemlins/diamond.gif[/img] Q[img]/images/graemlins/club.gif[/img]

are still good starting hands in tight games,

A[img]/images/graemlins/spade.gif[/img] 2[img]/images/graemlins/heart.gif[/img] 8[img]/images/graemlins/diamond.gif[/img] 9[img]/images/graemlins/club.gif[/img] is not such a good hand.

Just my opinion.

Buzz

[BlueBear]

Hi,

The Hutchison omaha 8 system may be of interest to you Hutchison system web page It offers reasonably tight starting requirements (in my opinion) and is suitable for O8 $0.5/$1 tables at party.

I'll always play any A2xx in any position in a loose game. Though I won't necessarily call 2 raises with it if the xx cards are weak.