Originally Posted by KoRnholio
Against good players you'll often both end up all in on the flop or turn (correctly) when it's the nuts against a huge draw. Generally hands run much closer together equity wise in Omaha compared to holdem. It can actually be quite hard to get the money in as a huge favorite. This makes the variance super high.
Of course, against fish a good player's edge is actually much higher than in holdem (in my opinion) and thus the variance is lower. There will be many times where the good player will be playing a solid hand like AdKsJdJs while the fish is in there with a dog crap hand like AJ85 rainbow. Flop comes KQT with two spades or diamonds and now the good player has a 30%+ chance to win the whole pot, even though both players currently have the nuts.
If I were to give a 30 second PLO lesson I'd just say:
- Draw to the nuts
- Redraws are great
- Many times a big draw is a strong favorite (for PLO) over a set/2 pair
- Bottom set can be a big trouble hand (akin to 22 preflop in Holdem, If all the money goes in, you are either slightly ahead, or way behind)
Exactly. On everything. The variance is greater. But the skilled player, who understands the values and the risks, and knows the value of additional outs even with a made hand, can do very nicely, thank you. He will still need a much larger bankroll to be able to deal with the higher than NLHE suckout rate.
So, yes, Omaha is more of a gambler's game. Few hands are safe before the river. (Quads are pretty good, and a royal is always good. Anything else can be beat.) Anything can happen in Omaha. No whining allowed.