H/L Omaha: My treatise

I am a beginning player, transitioning to intermediate. Here are excerpts of a discussion I share with my local players' group, just my take on the game. Comments, suggestions are criticism are welcome.


Omaha HL limit didn't work out for me. The game dynamic is a whole different profile than Pot Limit. It costs more to see a flop, so if you're not hitting you fritter your stack away at a faster rate. The pot odds make it cheaper to chase, so you might end up doing more of that than you should. And there's not much leverage with the betting.

I'm back to Pot Limit and doing well. I'm playing .10/.25 with a $25 buy-in. It's mainly a lot of waiting, then trying to capitalize from big hands. Flops are cheap, but I'm really tightening up at full tables. I'm consistently seeing 16% of flops, which is pretty darned tight. I find in Omaha it's so easy to hit the second best hand that you might as well just fold anything that doesn't have the potential to make the nut.

Here's what I'll play if it's cheap:

A-2-3, especially if the ace is suited.
Any three cards that make the wheel.
And hand with three broadway cards
Any double suited aces

I'll fold almost every hand with three middle cards. 8-9-T-J looks good and is a decent hand in Omaha high, but in H/L, if you make the straight you're either splitting with a low or have the dreaded King-high strait, which is one of the most costly hands I come across.

A naked A-2 can be very expensive.

I avoid low sets and the under full.

The thing I like about H/L Omaha is that there are much fewer bad beats than in Hold Em. I think that's because if you play really tight hand selection, you end up with big draws or big hands most of the time you're in the pot, or you're out early.

I prefer to scoop, but if it looks like a split, you have to remember to cut the pot in half when calculating pot odds and implied odds. It could still be worth it.

Big rookie mistake: overbetting and betting people out of the pot. In a split pot game, you want as many people contributing as possible. Once you're down to heads up, if you have the high or low nut, you're only getting your own bets (minus rake) back or you win only by betting the other person out of the pot - which is a rarity. This is more possible in PL than Limit only.

Bluffing isn't nearly as big a part of the game as on Hold 'Em. Sometimes you can do it in late position on a flushy board, but be cautious because anybody sitting with the nut is doing what they can to build the pot, including check-raise. I imagine bluffing is even less effective in limit.

BAD opponents are easy to spot in Omaha. They are often those who play like it's hold 'em. They get a good hand (or maybe not so good) so they come out betting. We're all learners, so it's no surprise that there are people who do this. I like to see it. But what amazes me is seeing the same people doing it week after week. It's about the most stupid thing you can do in Omaha, especially the split game. The good players are playing so tight and selective that anybody who calls them is likely to have a powerhouse hand. But mainly, they are just killing the pot and not getting any value out of their good hands. You can tell that they're getting a thrill because they take lots of small pots - they're usually just getting their own money back. It's a perfect example of somebody playing a strategy that goes against their own interests. It can be a little annoying because it cuts down you ability to see flops, but on the whole that's not such a bad thing since selectivity is so important. These guys are like the hold 'em maniacs. Lots of drama and fireworks, lots of action, but they are usually depleted within an hour. The good players at the table are just waiting for an opportunity to call them.

I think Omaha is more profitable than Hold 'Em because:
1. bad players are so obvious
2. The rise from bad to average is easier in Omaha than Hold 'Em, and the advantage is huge.
3. It's more analytical, less psycho-bluffing aggressive BS.
4. Because of the big bets in PL, it's easier to get away from speculative hands. Since you expect Omaha hands to be bigger, I find this to be perhaps the biggest advantage of Omaha. It just doesn't pay to chase, so you don't. The best draws in Hold'Em are crappy ones in Omaha. In Hold 'Em, an 8-outer open-ended straight draw is a decent hand. In Omaha it's crap, because the outs there are 13, 16 or 20 outs. So you don't even mess with a lot of the crap that looks golden in Hold 'Em. They say FOLDING is the most powerful move in Hold 'Em. It's even more so in Omaha.
5. I feel more in control in Omaha. When it comes time for me to bet the pot, I'm very rarely doing it on a hope and a prayer. Looking at my Omaha stats, I'm winning close to 100% of showdowns. I just don't go to showdown unless I'm in good shape. It could be I need to loosen up with that 100% stat - something to think about. Usually my worst outcome, and I try to avoid this, is getting quartered. It usually happens when I have the nut low and am trying to be aggressive with a big bet in hopes of inducing a fold. Sometimes it works. The other bad outome is betting big with the nut low, then getting counterfeited on the river. The saving grace in a PL game is that the bets get exponentially bigger each round, so I can usually fold after the turn without too much damage. Or if I'm against a small stack, I just take the loss.

The down side of Omaha:
1. It can be very slow. It's great when you sit down and get a couple big hands per hour. The $25 can quickly go to $50, $75 or more. But more often you sit and you wait, folding almost everything, bobbing back and forth between $20 and $30. It can go on like this for a long time. Several hours. In Hold 'Em, you can get creative, get aggressive, get bluffy. But that's usually a fatal path in Omaha, so it's just wait, wait, wait.
2. Getting scooped or quartered can cost you your stack. Of course, you can get felted in Hold 'Em too. Getting felted in Omaha can be pretty discouraging, though, because it can be such a slow game that you've just spent a couple hours only to lose it all on one hand, and now you feel like it's going to take all day to recover.
3. Going on tilt can be fatal. No room for tilt. In Hold 'em, even the worst tilty move sometimes works out because people will fold to your big bet. In Omaha, so many hands go to showdown that you have to win it with the cards, and if you can't, you're toast.

If you're having a good Omaha session, it seems so easy. Just give me my fair share of scoop hands, one or two per hour, and I can breeze through this game.

If you're getting no hands, you can wonder why anybody would ever play this game.

I had a prolonged losing streak playing H/L $1/$2 limit. I just couldn't figure out how to win in a game where you have virtually no betting leverage at all. In PL, I still pull off enough bluffs that I scoop the occasional medium pot. I just don't see how you could do that at all in limit.

I was playing yesterday and these two guys each had $30 in a $65 pot. On the river, one went all in with his last 60 cents, and the other folded. I couldn't believe it! He obviously missed his draw, but still - with those pot odds I'd think you'd call with anything on the hope that the other guy is spasming out with a seizure or something. Lost cause for almost sure. But still, $65 pot and you're not going to make the 100:1 call? I try not to get into that situation - and with pot-sized bets and the spectre of pot-sized on the next street, it's pretty easy to get away with anything but stellar holdings. But in a limit game, I'd just be calling those bets on pot odds alone. Maybe that's why I'm no good at limit.

Anyway, in trying the limit I pretty much blew through what was left in my UB account. So I switched back to Bodog, which has the worst players online. I had $300 six weeks ago, faltered to $167 while learning the game, and am now up to $440 on a pretty steady rise. It's slow going, but steady and as I said less volatile than hold 'em. I'll eventually move up in stakes, which always makes me nervous, because higher stake tables are harder to find and I'd expect there to be fewer bad players. I might not be able to find those tables consistently on Bodog. The flop percentages on Bodog are high - almost always 50+%, and often in the 70s or 80s. I look at PokerStars where they are in the 40s, and I don't know if I could win there.

I'd like to hear how others are doing? Still playing limit? Mainly high? Steady profits?

I'm actually preferring smaller tables, which allow me more post-flop play and creativity. The fuller the table, the more cut-and-dry the strategy.

As to reading, I think the most succinct text on H/L is the section in SuperSystems 2. I find that if I try to read everything, I get confused. It's really a pretty simple game that comes down to patience, discipline and above all hand selection.

GtW

This is a nice little post. I'm dabbling in PLO/HL. I found, like you, that you have to really tighten up your card selection. I would suggest for beginners starting to learn this to play low limit SNGs. You can limit your losses this way till you get a better understanding of the game.

I have tried both games and find that Omaha is not for me. I will play Stud which is very similar. Very nice strategy. X

this is actually a very good read and needs way more love, very nicely done sir

Obvious bias from me though as i play omaha h/l HU as my main game, but its still a really good read

Good read and advice, kudos

I dabbled briefly with $10PLO8 towards the end of last year. Making sure you capitalise on those one or two big hands in each session and then ensuring you don't spew the profits back the rest of the time really did seem to be the key to me - it wasn't like NLHE where you can steal a pot here and there to keep yourself going.

What I did find (on Full Tilt, at any rate) at the PLO8 tables is that there wasn't really a whole lot of action - there were maybe three or four tables at the $10 level, on which there were a lot of fairly solid multitabling regs. Seemed like the game was being propped up by the occasional noobs who'd sit down, drop a buy in then decide they wanted to go back to hold 'em. You're absolutely right, it was easy to spot who they were, but if you didn't have a hand in the brief time they were at the table you couldn't capitalise on them.

A combination of bankroll issues and more plentiful fish sent me back to NLHE - I might give it another go some time though.

Excellent post, thanks for doing it! I read every word, and thought you were spot on with almost everything. A few new points to ponder for me too. Well, you asked for some comments, and I got them.

1) I've found both to be partially true. First off, people do PFR in Omaha PL too. So, it sounds like what you mean is this... In PLO PF bets are bigger so you can get off a hand quicker. In limit (O8 in particular), you've got to be very selective about your starting hands, totally anticipating it will get reraised around, and this goes for every round of betting post-flop too. Post flop, you need the discipline and skill to know when it's smart to chase or not. (i.e. half pot draws, non-nut draws, I could go on all day here).

2) If you're going to play any 3 wheel cards, you'll certain play A23, so a little redundant. A23, yes that's a given, suited is nice, but it doesn't matter. A45 and such, the 4th card must be doing a job, like a K suited to the 4 or 5. On the 3 Broadway cards (and I just checked Hwang's book to be sure I was on the right track)... Any 4 Broadway cards are VERY playable. And 4 cards 9 or higher including an ace. He didn't say this specifically, but an upper-gapper Broadway with 3 cards like KJT6, is not playable. KQT (lower gapper is better, and of course AKQ or KQJ).

3) All great points here. The only thing I can add is that should you even hit that 8-outer open-ender on the high end, it could never be the nut straight, unless it's a Broadway.

4) Funny, I'm currently reading Hwang's Omaha book. On page 1, he says "In PLO, or any Omaha game for that matter - the difference between a good players and a great player is not nearly as great as the distance between a good player and a bad player." I believe he was comparing it to holdem.

1) The more I thought about it, you've gotta be correct on this one. It was hard to tell from the context. And in that 2-page 1st chapter, he immediately goes on to talk about mistakes, bad play, and getting freerolled (it's not what you think ). But I see now where you're both coming from. But I'd strongly disagree with "basic principles of Omaha are easier than Hold Em", unless you are talking about the phychological aspects of the 'NL' part of NLHE. You've just got 2 cards, use 1 or both, what's so hard. Just MHO, to each their own though.

2) I think that's the key right there (in terms of complication) "typical opponenents" and "at the lower limits".

3) You played that hand very well. Made him pay for the draw, and you recognized the river could be of no help regardless of what he was drawing to. Your worst case scenario was quartering, and if there's any folded money in the pot, still not a disater. Good job!

I enjoy reading your omaha 8OB posts. Your writing is neat, clear and concise. Keep it up.

I don't get it. If his strategy didn't work well enough for him to keep using it, how can it be a good strategy?

Over my first 5k hands of LO8, I'm winning at 1.5 BB/100 at $1/$2 and $2/$4. Given its a tiny sample, but its a pretty easy game.

The main thing people screw up in a limit game is that they think they have pot odds when they don't. Here's an example:

Suppose someone bets $2 into a $10 pot on the turn, and you have a low draw and nothing else (you cannot win the high). You're getting 6:1 pot odds on your 4:1 draw *if you were drawing to the whole pot*. But you're not drawing to the whole thing, you're drawing to half. So you have to call $2 to win $6 (3:1 pot odds), so you're not getting odds to draw to half.

People who play LO8 make this mistake over and over again, which makes it such a profitable game. In high only games, chasing weak draws is often correct, because you're drawing to win the whole pot. However, when you're drawing to only half, most of those weak draws should be folded.

So yeah, that's probably why you couldn't succeed at the limit game. Its pretty easy to wait for a multi-way hand on the flop, and then just shove all the money in. You never have pot odds to draw to anything but the strongest draws because the bets are so big. But the limit game is going to put you in marginal situations much more often, and you're going to have to deal with many close decisions.

How did you come to this conclusion? I'm always learning, adjusting, trying to progress - but where did I say that I abandoned this strategy?

But to be honest, I don't like the concept of "strategy" since it implies going in with a pre-conceived notion. Having a "strategy" or "style" is in and of itself limiting. I prefer to have a more holistic concept of the game and adjust my play according to conditions.

I've gotten away from 08 a little and going back to Hold Em for awhile. I need to change games every once in awhile just to keep it fresh. While I'm still convinced that PL 08 is the most profitable, lowest risk combination, it can get pretty darned boring over time, and if you're not getting the cards, creative play doesn't help as much as it does in Hold Em.

Gary

I misread it. I didn't see that you gave up on fixed limit and your strategy was for pot limit.

very nice post, I was looking for more tips and this helped alot.

I've just come across this - that is an excellent read, GL. I've been dabbling in Hi-Lo recently and enjoy it as a break from Holdem. I'm going to play it a lot more from now on and I'll try to take on board the advice you offer here.
Good stuff.

um.

lol

I did have the nut low with counterfeit protection as claimed. But I didn't have a 6-high straight, or any straight at all for that matter. The classic mistake of using three hole cards. A mistake I want my opponent to make. This was a long time ago, but my reporting of the hand is obviously Fxxxed up.
GtW

um

and you did have a 6 high straight

I really like Omaha Hi now.
I just started and am killing the micro tables on FT.
Once BRM calls for it I'll move up and try my hand at the higher stakes.

I'm wondering why anyone would play OHL8 at a six seat table when there are nine seat tables available. The only one who usually wins is the house. Sure, you can get lucky and sweep a couple pots, but normally the pot gets split and your stack steadily goes down from the rake. I prefer as many players as possible to sweeten the pots.

I re-read this today and following on from the pointer in the OP i played a $1 SNG at Stars.

Result >>>>

Attached Images

06-07-2009 22-25-17-Omaha8.jpg (95.2 KB, 22 views)

Well done, beardy. And good point FearFactor. I was playing hi-lo at a nine seat table today. Everyone slowly drifted away and I ended up playing heads up with an opponent. The only winner was the house - the rake kept on eating into our stacks at an alarmingly fast rate.

I like to play smaller tables mainly because I have ADD. You're right about the rake and pot sizes - although I find that I actually do scoop more (through fold equity) at a smaller table and am even able to bluff a little. I like the smaller table because I can play a bigger range of hands and don't quite have to have the monster nuts as often as at full ring. Basically you have to play so tight, especially at FR, that it gets kind of boring.
OP Gary

What do you do, James, hypnotize me or something? I've managed to fully confuse myself on this silly little point of mere hand recognition.

Yes, I had the straight: My 34 combined with the board's 256.

And I had the nut low: My A3 with the board's 256, with my 4 as insurance protection.

Maybe I'm a little dense, but what then was the point of your original "um, lol"?

I had a pretty good thread going here, and now you've caused me to reveal my pure idiocy!
GtW

Very nice read,

I really enjoyed reading this thread (yes,all of it)
I only occasionally play OH/L tournaments,but your comments were spot on to my understanding of the game.
Thanks for the Post and Gl in your games!




Snow

I have also been playing pot limit omaha hi/lo quite extensively and you do develop a love hate relationship with the game. It can be the best game ever when you're winning, the worst game ever when you're getting great hands but all the time getting beat by better hands and it can be like watching paint dry when you don't get hands.

I have also noticed that the games have dried up in the past year or so and it is harder to make money these days.

PLO8 tournaments are another place where you can make a good return, but not a lot of sites run regular tournaments with decent buy-ins.