Omaha vs. NLH - Higher Skill/Edge Capacity?

Hulloooo...

Noticed omaha's taken off quite a bit recently, lot of the pros seem to be playing it, my local casino's omaha cash game gets going before the NLH these days...

I don't actually play any omaha, so I thought I'd ask what you lot think about the capacity for skill in the game compared to that of NLH.

Cheers!

Since I played HE for so long, it was hard for me to transfer into omaha. The betting odds and odds of your hand winning drastically change. I felt that more people just flat call most raises pre-flop just so they can see if they hit anything. I think HE takes more skill but omaha is stll fun to play every once in awhile.

More people are playing it because the word is out that so many suck at it. In terms of determining nut outs and sheer odds, IOW how your cards relate to each other to give you a winning hand, both pre- and post-flop, Omaha is much tougher, it's not even close. The pot limit aspects adds another dimension of difficulty, position notwithstanding. You cannot shove your shortish stack. While you can isolate to a degree, it is not a game of bluffs. NLHE requires a different set of skills, and some more difficult to master than Omaha, i.e. the elements of bluffing and betting amounts. In simplistic summation, I see Omaha as being more a game of precision, while NLHE being more a game of reads, position, and aggression.

I don't disagree w you Dive, though I think position is much more important in PLO than NLHE, and reads are important but in a different way imo.

POSITION is way more important in PLO. There are really no reads required that much unless you are playing shorthanded. It's simple, you have 3rd best straight, easy fold. or a 4 high flush. etc. etc.

Ya know, I would never disagree with you on this, as I've heard that time and time again. It's just that on a lot of my tables, especially past the idiot donks, play is very tight pre-flop. Lots of limpers, I'm very satisfied and happy to do so. See what the flop brings, whole new deal and like it.

You actually have less playable hands in PLO than HE. If you get involved in a game where everyone is waiting until the flop to raise, you are spewing money if you get in with a hand which won't turn the nuts. The game to me is all about nut hands, redraws and bluffs. It is wise to play with a full stack. I think that the learning curve for holdem players now switching over to PLO is what can make you money now, if you play the game well.

PLO is the next wave online, but better hurry, the games are nitting up at pokerstars and tilt and regs are all around now, almost like HE 5 years ago.

Bodog, cereus and other smaller sites are quite soft because YES you need a different skill set than HE and NO a lot of HE players don't get it yet, and: Less regs at the smaller sites and easier to spot..

PLO takes more calculation and precision in forethought (talkin draws and redraws and position and stack sizes)... almost more like playing in colour, while HE is black and white (he he) without the redraws.

Aggression still important in PLO but not like HE, where isolating and pushing opponents can fold them more easily...

Annie Duke told me one time, PLO is a very tricky game, because (paraphrase): "There are a lot of cards out there!!"

Thanks, very good point. Lets make one point clear: In HE, depending on reads, position SSs, etc., any two cards are playable and winnable. Shoving PF SS in a tourney situation a case in point, also Cbetting dry or wet boards, floating etc...if you deny them good odds, they should fold. In PLO, any four cards are not playable unless they have strong potential, because shoving pre or bluffing postflop are way less profitable/instantly winnable. Redraws are getting odds in PL to stack you if they catch.

Talkin the TAG line here, I know some people think any 4 will do...

sry for deleting the rest of yr post jazz but that is right too...