My reason for mentioning stack sizes regarding position is that if you both have deep stacks for the stakes, then there will be positional advantage over the remaining rounds of betting. If a scare card hits at any point, then the person with the positional advantage can benefit from that. If the 2 players are all-in, then there less of a positional advantage, because there aren't as many rounds of betting where the position may give the player leverage. It's harder to make that kind of bet with a non-nut hand in early position, so the current round of betting has its influences, but the total effect of position is reduced.
Yeah, the myths are ones I've heard for Limit, and they're wrong (although in one case less wrong for Limit O8):
Raising pre-flop is bad? If you have a good starting hand, its value is good pre-flop. After the flop its value may be great or worthless, but you're putting your money in pre-flop on the basis that you're more likely to get a nice hand.
Secondly, the players before you have put money in and are more likely to call you, while the players after you have nothing in and are less likely to want to call a raise, so you're more likely to push them out and have position over all the other players still in the pot (is this the most important factor of pre-flop raising?).
Finally, most bad Omaha players want to see a flop even with mediocre or worse hands, and will then drop their hand after the flop unless they hit. You want to punish them for their insistence on seeing flops with bad hands, getting more dead money into the pot.
Opponent-reading skills are not important? In Limit games, it's true that opponent-reading is less important in 08 than Holdem, because you're looking for nut hands more, but opponent-reading is very valuable in all No Limit and Pot Limit games, whether it's Holdem or Omaha or Omaha/8.
... the only winner being the casino? Well, no, because while some profit comes from playing nut hands, equally there are situations where nobody has the nut hand, and good reads can prevent you folding the best hand, and allow you to steal pots.
So far I guess I qualify as tight/aggressive - except where I'm against someone who is Loose/aggressive, because if I let them do the betting they'll keep coming at me when I know I have the best possible hand. I guess the point is that fitting neatly into one of the categories doesn't work, because I'll be more likely to bet in position against a tight player who may fold, and more likely to just call against an aggressive player who is more likely to try and bluff at the pot, but a starting strategy of tight/aggressive seems to be worthwhile. You get a bad enough level of play at a table and you can make a profit without bluffing
at all, although picking up pots from position without a hand does naturally increase profits.