Competition: PLO vs NLHE

[kceow2981]

I'm sure this has been asked or thought of before, but what do people think about the level of competition that exists in say microstakes PLO vs NLHE? Do you think there are more recreational players in PLO since PLO is inherently way more complex, so it is way harder for anyone to play well? Or do you think that there are more recreational players in NLHE because it's simpler so it will not be as scary to new players? Or would NLHE competition be tougher because it's easier to get good, since it's a simpler game? Let me know what you think.

 

[dj11]

When I first started playing OLP, I got exposed to PLO, and thought that the only game that could possibly be scarier would be NLO.

I've learned a lot since then.

 

[zwbb]

No matter whether you are a professional or just an amateur, preference will always fall on the game, where it is easiest to win. Why is it easier to earn money in PLO? Yes, because the average player here is weaker. By these words, I mean that in the PLO, there will not be robotic maniacs that profitably roll 24 tables, which are full of hold'em. The game is so intricate and has not yet been studied that even the best of the best multitablers will not beat a decent player when he has only a couple of tables open. Again, this can not be said about NLHE

 

[shadow72]

As far as the question about recreational players go .... there are WAY more rec players in Hold Em then there are in PLO.

PLO is too intimidating, difficult to understand, and quite frankly scary for a lot of rec players.

I much prefer PLO over NLHE as there's generally more action and bigger pots.