Do you prefer to play NLHE, PLO, or both?

I've recently turned into a PLO-aholic. I think it's the future of poker - at least I hope the game catches on more in the US. NLHE just seems so boring once you start logging a lot of PLO hours.

I wish more live card rooms would spread it... Vegas and some places in the south seems to be the only places where one can find a game.

Anyhow, just curious, how many of you here play PLO?

Damn, I hope PLO is the future, it would mean my life has not been wasted.

While my skill level in both is very very minimul, I would always always prefer to play PLO over NLHE. With that said even the casinos around me (Foxwoods and Mohegan Sun) can barely scrap one table together if that. They do however have one constant table at foxwoods of PLO8 and I dont like that version of Omaha

PLO gamblers game

I thought NLHE had swings until I played a lil PLO wow weeee! I guess the fact

that so many more starting hands can be played preflop it adds to the "action"

appeal of the game. Lots of people in lots of pots and more people feel they are

getting tied to the pot receiving greater odds. PLO is def a more interesting and

intriguing game.

NLHE but that is only because I don't really get PLO. I understand the basics, but have no clue what a good starting hand is or betting basics. I do have fun playing it though when it is part of the 8game.

Ask around ... this isn't a valid poll unless it contains ...

[X] Cake
[X] Bastard

also ... There are other games beside Holdem and Omahaha.

[X] Neither
[X] Other

???????????????

nevadanick said:

Ask around ... this isn't a valid poll unless it contains ...

[X] Cake
[X] Bastard

Click to expand...

True, I just got sick of saying it lately.
Bastard btw.

nevadanick said:

Ask around ... this isn't a valid poll unless it contains ...

[X] Cake
[X] Bastard

also ... There are other games beside Holdem and Omahaha.

[X] Neither
[X] Other

???????????????

Click to expand...

This ....plus what the hell is an equel ?

[x] pie (not worth cake or waffles)

damon789 said:

I thought NLHE had swings until I played a lil PLO wow weeee! I guess the fact

that so many more starting hands can be played preflop it adds to the "action"

appeal of the game. Lots of people in lots of pots and more people feel they are

getting tied to the pot receiving greater odds. PLO is def a more interesting and

intriguing game.

Click to expand...

Yea, PLO is definitely more of a gamblers game. You don't really play PLO for pots, you play PLO for stacks... and often you're getting your whole stack in there very close to the 50/50 line.

It would be interesting if people who use pokertracker posted their NLHE graphs vs. the PLO graphs just to see how much more volatile that game is.

I prefer NLHE. I always play on SnG one on one is many poker sites. NLHE is fast a game. You have the control of your chips on whatever you like to do.

PLO & NLHE seem like almost exactly the same game.

Eugenius said:

I've recently turned into a PLO-aholic. I think it's the future of poker - at least I hope the game catches on more in the US. NLHE just seems so boring once you start logging a lot of PLO hours.

Click to expand...

the thing is that, for about the past 5 years people have been saying PLO is the "future of poker", that within a couple years PLO is going to become huge. and although a lot of the high stakes players are partial to it, the overall growth has been much much less than most people predicted

NLHE has a simplicity that seems to innately appeal more to the average person. tv networks have tried televising PLO, but the ratings have consistently shown that people want to watch NLHE

i'm not saying PLO can't become as popular as NLHE, but i no longer think it's a foregone conclusion that it will. maybe if FTP or PS will put together a super high stakes 6max PLO televised cash game with all the sickest gamblers, to really emphasize the action/gambling side of it, and then hype it up big time, get a good time slot and network. i think if something can be done to get the average tv viewer hooked, that could snowball and lead to a big PLO movement. without that happening, i'm not sure

I like both. But NLHE seems to be the most popular. Best to stack those fishy donks than to stack off lightly in plo that game has too many outs and variance runs wild.

PersonallY I have always loved plo as my game of choice.
I do like to play nlhe but yeah plo is my game of choice.

c9h13no3 said:

PLO & NLHE seem like almost exactly the same game.

Click to expand...

Not even close - just the fact that you have to use 2 cards makes it a lot different.

Not to mention that the most you can bet in PLO is POT.

There is no limit in NLHE.

NLHE vs LPO my godddddd NLHE 4 LIFE!!!!!.. LPO is a very good game.. it is too easy to play.. and you have a lot of games with thouse 4 cards, easily you can do a straight or color, or a straight color.. it is too easy but i like it sooo much too. but nothing compares to NLHE!!!

blankoblanco said:

the thing is that, for about the past 5 years people have been saying PLO is the "future of poker", that within a couple years PLO is going to become huge. and although a lot of the high stakes players are partial to it, the overall growth has been much much less than most people predicted

NLHE has a simplicity that seems to innately appeal more to the average person. tv networks have tried televising PLO, but the ratings have consistently shown that people want to watch NLHE

i'm not saying PLO can't become as popular as NLHE, but i no longer think it's a foregone conclusion that it will. maybe if FTP or PS will put together a super high stakes 6max PLO televised cash game with all the sickest gamblers, to really emphasize the action/gambling side of it, and then hype it up big time, get a good time slot and network. i think if something can be done to get the average tv viewer hooked, that could snowball and lead to a big PLO movement. without that happening, i'm not sure

Click to expand...

You're right on most points. Particularly that PLO doesn't have the same "average Joe" appeal that NLHE does. That's the biggest problem - it only attracts the degenerate gamblers.

The game is quite popular in Europe, however. I wonder how it got side-spread over there...

NLHE is better but I honestly never played the other stuff lol

NLHE because i'm a better HE player than a Omaha player . I do alright on PLO cash tables but never do good in SNG's or MTT's, but with NLHE I do alright on all fields cash tables, SNG's, and MTT's.

blankoblanco said:

the thing is that, for about the past 5 years people have been saying PLO is the "future of poker", that within a couple years PLO is going to become huge. and although a lot of the high stakes players are partial to it, the overall growth has been much much less than most people predicted

NLHE has a simplicity that seems to innately appeal more to the average person. tv networks have tried televising PLO, but the ratings have consistently shown that people want to watch NLHE

i'm not saying PLO can't become as popular as NLHE, but i no longer think it's a foregone conclusion that it will.

Click to expand...

This is not surprising at all. And not saying I'm a good PLO player, simply partial to it. And possibly for the same reasons high stakes players are... so many people are horrible at it. My real game is Omaha HL, and even more are worse at that. So if you take into consideration that higher stakes players probably depend more on poker for income than those with a 'real 'job', you begin to comprehend why many high stakes prefer Omaha, particularly H/L to NLHE ... it's more profitable cuz most suck at it.

To sum it up, I believe no game will ever become more popular than NLHE. Not saying it's easier, just a different set of skills, easier to master or at least be competant at by more people.

atlantafalcons0 said:

Not even close - just the fact that you have to use 2 cards makes it a lot different.

Click to expand...

Spoken like someone who doesn't play a lot of Omaha...

Most winning hands in NLHE use two. And the fact that Omaha forces you to use two just slightly alters how you read the board (QQ > AK on a 222A4 board obviously). This isn't a big change.

atlantafalcons0 said:

Not to mention that the most you can bet in PLO is POT.

Click to expand...

95% of bets in NLHE are pot sized.

The big difference in the game is that draws have significantly more equity in PLO than in NLHE. In NLHE, paying off weak draws is pretty standard, since often your opponent wasn't getting pot odds to chase them. But with PLO, the turn & river cards have a bigger influence on the value of your hand, and your opponent is likely getting odds to try and hit their stronger draws. Thus, it makes things more of a postflop game.

However, PLO is the most similar game you can find to NLHE without getting into those weird variants like pineapple. While PLO may require you to make a few adjustments from how you play NLHE, you'll have to make bigger adjustments when switching to any other game from NLHE.

So, if I had to say it in one sentence: Once you've learned NLHE, the next easiest game to learn is probably PLO.

I spend most of my time these days playing limit games (stud & LO8 mostly), and the skill set used in those games is a bigger departure from hold'em than PLO is.

I pretty much agree with what c9 stated.

NLHE Tournaments and Nothing else.
But hey that's just me, I think PLO is the future or even the current cash cow.