General Omaha Advice (2 Viewers)

[Highli99]

I only play small PP when I know I am going to flop quads.

There's a good point here. In my game some of the weaker players make more quads because they play all pairs to flop. So they make a few giant hands while bleeding out.

 

[surfik]

Again Jeff Hwang books are recommended

 

[stavman]

I just play Bingo, we 4 cards in hand what could go wrong?

 

[naked_eskimo]

One of my players recently declined playing Omaha anymore as he feels it's like playing slots. Meaning, I suppose, that it's just a luck fest.

It can feel like that sometimes. We've been playing Omaha (NLO) for a couple of months now. It does sometimes feel like a seat of your pants kind of deal with each hand. It could be partly due to our player base. Most of have clued into the fact that you need a stronger hand at showdown to win. This does not stop them, however, from just checking down with any two pair and/or set. So often this leads to me flopping a straight, betting out on every street, only to see the river pair the board and my straight is dead. Flush flops tend to mitigate this somewhat. But when no one raises with a set or two pair, how do you tell that the paired board on the river has killed your hand? When they go from calling to betting out. They know that I will not likely bet the river with a straight if a scary card comes, so they will bet it out.

I can't simply fold every single time the board pairs on the river, either though. I will occassionally call if it's a player that I think is smart enough to try to exploit that situation. With others, I would never call when they suddenly bet into me on the river. Am I always beat against an ABC player? Probably. The odd time that I will look someone up that I think is trying to exploit, I've found that they are bluffing. At least there is a small amount of value in advertising that you can't just bet every paired river and expect me to fold. It has cost me a river bet once in a while to do so.

If it's a straight up ABC type player that suddenly loves their hand on a paired river, I never call. With a smarter player, I will sometimes call. It's tricky, though.

 

[Kain8]

One of my players recently declined playing Omaha anymore as he feels it's like playing slots. Meaning, I suppose, that it's just a luck fest.

It can feel like that sometimes. We've been playing Omaha (NLO) for a couple of months now. It does sometimes feel like a seat of your pants kind of deal with each hand. It could be partly due to our player base. Most of have clued into the fact that you need a stronger hand at showdown to win. This does not stop them, however, from just checking down with any two pair and/or set. So often this leads to me flopping a straight, betting out on every street, only to see the river pair the board and my straight is dead. Flush flops tend to mitigate this somewhat. But when no one raises with a set or two pair, how do you tell that the paired board on the river has killed your hand? When they go from calling to betting out. They know that I will not likely bet the river with a straight if a scary card comes, so they will bet it out.

I can't simply fold every single time the board pairs on the river, either though. I will occassionally call if it's a player that I think is smart enough to try to exploit that situation. With others, I would never call when they suddenly bet into me on the river. Am I always beat against an ABC player? Probably. The odd time that I will look someone up that I think is trying to exploit, I've found that they are bluffing. At least there is a small amount of value in advertising that you can't just bet every paired river and expect me to fold. It has cost me a river bet once in a while to do so.

If it's a straight up ABC type player that suddenly loves their hand on a paired river, I never call. With a smarter player, I will sometimes call. It's tricky, though.

One thing to also consider with your hands is stack to pot ratios. The smaller your stack relative to the pot, the more inclined you should be to get the rest of your money in. This of course can only be done effectively if you bet your strong hands/draws which allow you to set up relatively easier shoves on the turn or river.

And since you're playing No Limit instead of pot-limit, I'd be incorporating overbets as much as possible if you find yourself in pots with very sticky opponents. If you flop well, say top two pair or better, and you fire near pot, the turn is an absolute brick, don't be dissuaded. Your opponents want to try and draw again cheaply so you flat out deny them that luxury.

Obviously there's more to it than that, but Omaha is a game of draws. Assessing where you stand in any given pot can get murky at times, but as you play with the same lineup more and more, you know who is capable of what. If you set up rather elementary turn bets that put the screws to your opponents, it can get much easier.

 

[Highli99]

One of my players recently declined playing Omaha anymore as he feels it's like playing slots. Meaning, I suppose, that it's just a luck fest.

It can feel like that sometimes. We've been playing Omaha (NLO) for a couple of months now. It does sometimes feel like a seat of your pants kind of deal with each hand. It could be partly due to our player base. Most of have clued into the fact that you need a stronger hand at showdown to win. This does not stop them, however, from just checking down with any two pair and/or set. So often this leads to me flopping a straight, betting out on every street, only to see the river pair the board and my straight is dead. Flush flops tend to mitigate this somewhat. But when no one raises with a set or two pair, how do you tell that the paired board on the river has killed your hand? When they go from calling to betting out. They know that I will not likely bet the river with a straight if a scary card comes, so they will bet it out.

I can't simply fold every single time the board pairs on the river, either though. I will occassionally call if it's a player that I think is smart enough to try to exploit that situation. With others, I would never call when they suddenly bet into me on the river. Am I always beat against an ABC player? Probably. The odd time that I will look someone up that I think is trying to exploit, I've found that they are bluffing. At least there is a small amount of value in advertising that you can't just bet every paired river and expect me to fold. It has cost me a river bet once in a while to do so.

If it's a straight up ABC type player that suddenly loves their hand on a paired river, I never call. With a smarter player, I will sometimes call. It's tricky, though.

The player who quit is telling you they are not good enough to win at Omaha and are not willing to put in the work to improve results. It's just hard for most people to be honest with themselves so they craft another narrative that places the responsibility externally. Blame the game / equipment/ rules etc. Just human nature.

 

[naked_eskimo]

I completely agree with you. At first, some of my players were loving Omaha. They loved the extra action and found NLHE to be boring in comparison. A few weeks and many rebuys later, and some are changing their tune. Not just the one player. I've had to change the table to a mix of NLHE and NLO every ten hands--easy enough to do in Poker Mavens software.

But I have to say that I do not understand their approach. They will leak money over multiple play sessions and then give up and say omaha sucks, I don't want to play it, rather than spend one hour learning the basics, or simply being more observant at showdowns--even ones they are not involved in. It does not take that long to learn how to not lose your shirt in Omaha. Adjustments are required, for sure, but they should be able to do so with minimal time and mental energy, in my opinion.

One of the things that I like about Omaha is that I have learned to fold more. I can avoid a lot of trouble spots simply because draws that may be worth chasing in NLHE, are not worth chasing in Omaha. Some people just cannot fold a set or a straight under almost any circumstances. Those people should not play Omaha.

 

[Anthony Martino]

The only tip I have for PLO is don't play with Cubans!

 

[BGinGA]

The only tip I have for PLO is don't play with Cubans!

I just avoid stoned Nebraskans.

 

[MrCatPants]

The player who quit is telling you they are not good enough to win at Omaha and are not willing to put in the work to improve results. It's just hard for most people to be honest with themselves so they craft another narrative that places the responsibility externally. Blame the game / equipment/ rules etc. Just human nature.

Some just don't want to put in the work/don't like poker that much.

With hold'em, just getting your preflop ranges straight makes you competent. Omaha is so much more about post flop play though.

 

[shorticus]

@TheWhiteJZ

 

[JustinInMN]

Flopping a set, particularly bottom set. I almost hate flopping a set in Omaha. I often end up folding them on the turn when a straight draw gets there or on the river when a flush comes in.

Yup, it's worse than you think. A set is nothing more than a full house draw in omaha. And if you are drawing to a full house, it should be a big one. I don't go out of my way to play middle-weak pairs unless I have good solid connectors. Even hands like Q-Q-rag-rag are trash.

Board pairing. I HATE this. It must be a perception thing, but it seems the board pairs way more often when playing Omaha than Holdem. I understand that is not rational, but it feels that way. Board pairs are like the death knell for my made hands. I don't want to get too sticky with hands when the board pairs, but I don't wish to over fold either. It's always a tough call. And with so many two pair combinations, it seems that anytime the board pairs, someone has a full house. Bye bye to my made straight or flush.

I think it is a perception thing because boards pairing in Omaha almost always means a full house, where as in hold'em it sometimes means a full house but usually doesn't. The board pairs that don't make full houses in hold'em are often just forgettable. In Omaha, it wipes out all the nut straights and flushes.

He likes to be able to push people out of pots. In a small (4 handed some nights) game that is pot limit, he feels vexed when he cannot simply price everyone out.

There are plenty of NLHE players that think like this too. They think it's so clever that as long as I always bet enough, no one can ever beat me. It's hilarious. It's a bullying behavior that is so delightful to beat. I love these players in my game.