Why people prefer Texas Holdem to Omaha?

texas is standart and easier to play. but omaha is harder... if we start talk about omaha hi/lo or only omaha hi... that was hard and very dificult to play omaha...

If omaha was the game that was always on TV then it would be the more popular one. People tend to stick to what they're familiar with. I like all the forms of poker and wish there were more of the different games spread. This is one of the reasons I miss being able to play on Stars so much!

BomTombadil said:

If omaha was the game that was always on TV then it would be the more popular one. People tend to stick to what they're familiar with. I like all the forms of poker and wish there were more of the different games spread. This is one of the reasons I miss being able to play on Stars so much!

Click to expand...

Merge/Carbon isn't totally bad. They have 3 HORSE games each day, 1 is a freeroll in the West Coast morning , the 2 buy-ins are at 8:10 AM and afternoon (4:45PM IIRC), both are West Coast times.

They run lots of O8 tourneys, and a few S8 games thru the day. Ring games for non-holdem games are common.

Not bad but not Stars.

i like actually omaha hi low and stud hi low. hi low is easier to play.

if u play nl texas, one mistake and its all gone.

For me the Texas Hold'em poker is much easier than the Omaha. In Omaha there are a lot of combinations to win or to lose some pot. I mean there could everything be happen and you don't know you will the pot to the end. Texas Hold'em poker is much easier and your chance to win the pot is bigger than in Omaha. The rules are simple and that is the famous poker game in the World.

I play Omaha every once in awhile, but I very much prefer Holdem. The reason is because Omaha just has too much variance for my liking. I've been dealt AAKK in Omaha and I've lost to a hand that looked like pure randomness. I guess I just prefer Holdem because the decisions are easier, and I feel like in Holdem the chances of being donked by a hand much worse than yours is much less.

I think the nl texas hold'em is more popular because it is played all over the world, and is simpler to play! in argentina are playing texas holdem but if you ask about omaha pasis people do not know my other is much more complicated to understand!

hadi said:

no no,playing omaha is easier than hold em,omaha have more possibilites,

Click to expand...

That's what makes it hard to play. Everyone hits every board, so it takes a ton of experience/know-how to know when your hand is good.

most players seek to increase their bankrol more quickly and omaha makes this possible, and more agradavel.eu really like to play omaha hi but do not have much long-term success.

I prefer PLO over NLH. Some of the reasons people prefer NLH are why I prefer PLO.
When I'm a huge favourite preflop in NLH and lose to trash hands, I will end up paying them off then tilt really bad and spew all over the place. In PLO, I am able to make the laydowns and won't tilt most of the time because I am never a huge favourite preflop.

Some people also mentioned that alot of people have been improving NLH for very long times and I find that its not easy for me to just come in and start beating all these veterans. In fact I'm probably down like a hundred buyins at only micro NLH lol. Only started winning after I one day decided to go sit at PLO tables for a change.

Whereas at microstakes PLO there are wayy more fish imo.

TLDR: Too many people are good at NLH. PLO good. Many fishes swim there.

i love texas poker but
my first high won cash, in real life, on tournament ohama poker..
well, welcome

I dont know. But I think new players dont know what is omaha so they only play texas

Omaha is in my opinion a better game and more fun on this note. I do prefer omaha hi and not hi/lo but i find myself even craving omaha hi/lo at times. I play sportsbook freerolls because i can get my fix of HORSE and Omaha, HORSE in this case is Holdem, Omaha hi/lo, Razz, Stud hi/lo, then stud hi i beieve. Its very fun try it out guys!

Like everyone else thinks, I think people play omaha because its more interactive than holdem. holdem typically is boring if you dont get hands for 30mins and fold. However, with omaha one can play more hands, be in more pots, and in lo you might even chop a pot and not lose.

hypknautiqah said:

Like everyone else thinks, I think people play omaha because its more interactive than holdem.

Click to expand...

Oh it definitely is. When dealt 4 cards instead of two, you have six possible starting hands rather than holdem's 1. Because of this, people are more inclined to think that they have a good hand more often, and thus they are more inclined to call or raise rather than fold.

i prefer omaha to holdem because of the more possibilities. the negative to omaha is whatever you have, there's a chance someone has something better.

texas seemed easier for me to learn however i do like omaha hi

Some people are action junkies and love omaha. hand ranges are probably a bit easier to analyse omaha while holdem they can be all over the shop.

madethegrade said:

Some people are action junkies and love omaha. hand ranges are probably a bit easier to analyse omaha while holdem they can be all over the shop.

Click to expand...

Other way around. WAAAAAAY other ****ing way around. Hand ranges are near bloody impossible to analyze on the spot in time to make a decision; that's why I don't play Omaha.

Think about it; you have (ignoring cominatorics for a moment) 325 starting hands in Hold em versus over thirty thousand in Omaha. I shit you not. That's how much difference adding two cards to people's hands makes.

Aleksei said:

Other way around. WAAAAAAY other ****ing way around. Hand ranges are near bloody impossible to analyze on the spot in time to make a decision; that's why I don't play Omaha.

Think about it; you have (ignoring cominatorics for a moment) 325 starting hands in Hold em versus over thirty thousand in Omaha. I shit you not. That's how much difference adding two cards to people's hands makes.

Click to expand...

I know this is how it is for most people but for me its totally the other way round lol. I agree it takes abit longer to analyze in some spots but I don't usually end up in these spots too often(yet). Mayb once(if) I get out of micro PLO my opinion will change.

In PLO I generally assume people are playing a wiiiiide range of hands whereas in NL I always end up telling myself 'he can't have that' and he does -.- I suck at NL lol.

not sure why everyone is complaining about fish drawing out on you. dont you want to get your money in good and have the fish trying to draw you out? maybe you shouldnt have gone all in if you're constantly getting drawn out.

in omaha a lot of the time you have great odds of having a made hand at the river. in hold em, it's pretty much a lottery of "any 2 cards". much more skill is involved in good omaha play and as many people have posted, hold em is just easier to pick up and play. people tend to be afraid of things they dont understand.

I think that people prefer Texas Holdem to Omaha, because usually texas holdem is no limit, the game is more exciting, you can read your opponents. Besides the huge prizes are in texas holdem and there is a lot of tournament, more than omaha, so I think that why. Just by popularity.

texas holdem is standart... I think 97% people who play poker know how play holdem but 3% know how to play other games (badugi,omaha... utt.).
I preffer holdem, it's easy. 2 cards and combinate. 4 cards is risk for me and better tourneys and esier win cash in holdem...

holdem is very basic and easy to understand....the average person will have to work at plo a lot more.....I also think people prefer it because of tv also

I love 5 draw but pokerstars killed this game