In many ways you are correct. I far prefer omaha, because it's a flop game, and for me, there are fewer suckouts by idiots playing awful hands. One professional I know hates holdem. He knows four or five other professionals who play cash, and they all prefer omaha to holdem. Obviously there will be some who go for holdem and some who go for omaha. Some good holdem players say they don't know where they are in omaha, so it's personal choice, but give me omaha any day.

The object in poker is to make money on the other player's mistakes. If you learn to play post flop, you can make more money in PLO because "many players" make huge mistakes in continuing to play hands that miss the board.

The big pair hands are almost worthless post flop unless they flop to the secondary aspects for side cards and flush/straight draws.

Many players will stack-off with AAxx, KKxx types of hands with deep stacks. They just can't understand why someone would call a big raise pre-flop with 5,6,7,8; 7,8,9,T; and other post flop type hands. They think like AAxx is the nuts (holdem thinking). On a bad flop a big pair hand will just be a bluffing hand (two napkins).

I played at the IPBiloxi (WSOP circuit events) and played in a $1/$2 PLO (with $5 straddle much of the time but not mandatory) this past Sunday. Many of the players started with $1000.00 stacks (500bb) so they were playing deep stacked. Pots were sometimes $200.00+ and many times $500+. We had several players in our game that would get all-in post flop ($300 to $500 stacks) with big pair hands drawing almost DEAD.

I personally started with $200 & had many re-buys in may pocket. I had a great day running my stack up to $1500.00. I busted 2 buy-ins before I caught a few multi=buy-in stack hands.

PLO is a great game with good table dynamics.

 

Originally Posted by MYBLUEDOG

The object in poker is to make money on the other player's mistakes. If you learn to play post flop, you can make more money in PLO because "many players" make huge mistakes in continuing to play hands that miss the board.

The big pair hands are almost worthless post flop unless they flop to the secondary aspects for side cards and flush/straight draws.

Many players will stack-off with AAxx, KKxx types of hands with deep stacks. They just can't understand why someone would call a big raise pre-flop with 5,6,7,8; 7,8,9,T; and other post flop type hands. They think like AAxx is the nuts (holdem thinking). On a bad flop a big pair hand will just be a bluffing hand (two napkins).

I played at the IPBiloxi (WSOP circuit events) and played in a $1/$2 PLO (with $5 straddle much of the time but not mandatory) this past Sunday. Many of the players started with $1000.00 stacks (500bb) so they were playing deep stacked. Pots were sometimes $200.00+ and many times $500+. We had several players in our game that would get all-in post flop ($300 to $500 stacks) with big pair hands drawing almost DEAD.

I personally started with $200 & had many re-buys in may pocket. I had a great day running my stack up to $1500.00. I busted 2 buy-ins before I caught a few multi=buy-in stack hands.

PLO is a great game with good table dynamics.

Yes imo absolutely spot on. This reasoning also applies to stud hi/lo games too. This is why so many pros prefer these games to holdem. The beauty of pot limit, is you cannot be bet out of the flop preflop. Post flop is when the skill element comes in. Omaha eliminates the levellling the "Kill Phil" style has. You get crushed in omaha in the same way players got crushed in 7 card stud, if you don't know what you're doing.

If you take the time to learn the game and play well, I believe you will have more of a chance in omaha than in holdem. In long term you will lose at any game if you are a bad player, and win if you are a good one, but even in small omaha games you see more money go quickly to the good players than in holdem. I think this is why omaha will never become very popular, and is the reason stud virtually died out. If you want to play bingo you will have more chance at holdem in the short term.

Didn't you guys read Harrington on hold-em? Professional players don't play hold em because it's fun, they play it because it's most profitable. Who wouldn't want to see more flops, more turns, make more hands? But, according to Harrington, over the long run, 2 card is most profitable for a pro to play and that's why it's the game of choice in casinos.

omaha= best game ever.

Matt, squirrel, blue dog - do you guys recommend any omaha specific books or other training material?

BMad524 - Even though 2+2 is for me now synonymous with a forum that should make anyone involved with it thoroughly ashamed, with it's over zealous interfering mods, trolls, shills, obnoxious kids, and its hands too firmly in the pockets and up the arse of internet poker, it used to be the place for intelligent poker books, written for the love of the game and to enlighten those less able. I would hate to buy a 2+2 book ever again, but I have plenty which I have read and reread over 30 times. So even though I hate to recommend anything 2+2, Ray Zee's High Low Split Poker Seven Card Stud and Omaha, is one I would recommend. I am not aware of that many good omaha books on the market, so would be interested to hear any other suggestions.