Omaha 8 article -- The Flaws

[MeetUrTwin]

[ QUOTE ]
Any retard can see that winning 1/2 the dead money in the pot twice is not as good as winning all of the dead money in the pot plus what your opponent bet once. Buzz you're 100% right about that. But that is completely and utterly irrelevant to how you should play the hand. . Your net gain on average is exactly the same for both cases in the above example. It seems as though everyone on 2+2 has tried telling you this, but you still don't believe it. In the example you cited above, your EV is exactly the same with 2 split outs as 1 scoop out, so you should play them exactly the same way. All this nonsense about what fraction of a scoop out a low out is worth is just wrong, misleading, and bad advice.

[/ QUOTE ]

Bingo.

Jai, well done in this thread.

[Phat Mack]

[ QUOTE ]
All this nonsense about what fraction of a scoop out a low out is worth is just wrong, misleading, and bad advice.


[/ QUOTE ]

I disagree. Comparing relative worths is the correct way to approach the game. Trying to find a precise ratio between scoop outs and split outs might be futile, but understanding the difference between scoop and split EVs is a better approach to the game than by comparing equities. We can all think of examples where hero faces a bet on fourth street against a single opponent in a forked universe where is equities from scooping and splitting converge with his EV, but being able to do this doesn't help much in other situations.

[ QUOTE ]
But that is patently obvious to anyone who has spent more than 2 minutes thinking about split pot games and, to be frank, not very useful information.

[/ QUOTE ]

This is grand to read, and I would love to believe it, but nothing in my experience leads me to believe it's true. In fact, I think the confused thinking about this issue by otherwise rational players is one of the reasons that hi-lo games can be so good.

[iH8poker]

I hate to bring this back up but want to state it one time simply.

Let's say your chance of scooping on the river is 25% in hand A and in you have a 50% chance of spliting in hand B.

Let's say you must call $100 to see the river in each scenario, creating a total pot size of $1000.
Let's assume no implied odds (if you make your scooping hand, he will fold any river bet, and if you split the pot, then you will get only 1 caller whom takes the other half).

Here the formula is:
Hand A = .25 X 1000 - 100 = $150 EV to scoop or
Hand B = .50 x 500 - 100 = $150 EV to split.

Ah that just solved it for me!
Now let's say the implied odds of a $200 bet being called on the river after your hand is made in the scoop and a $200 bet being called by one whom takes neither half of the pot in the split, then...

Hand A = .25 X 1000 - 100 + 200 x .25 = $200 EV to scoop or
Hand B = .50 x 500 - 100 + 100 x .50 = $200 EV to split.

I think I did that right. Presense of rake does not change the outcome.

iH8poker [img]/images/graemlins/club.gif[/img]