[ QUOTE ]
1. In a loose game, there are always players who still will play reasonable hands. With 8 people seeing the flop, one could assume that there are no aces left in the deck.
[/ QUOTE ]Hi Tilt_Monkey - I do think that's sometimes a valid assumption, but it depends on your opponents as a group. Even with 8 people seeing the flop I don't think you can necessarily assume there are no aces left in the deck. At least five of your opponents are playing ace-less starting hands. Why not six or seven?
But at any rate, anyone seeing the flop naturally wants to continue and is looking for reasons to continue. Exactly what a solid player needs in order to continue depends on the particular cards of the flop, but when 8 people see the flop there's a pretty good chance someone will find a decent reason to continue for high, probably needing only one card to make a straight or better.
[ QUOTE ]
How would AAxx perform in such case?
[/ QUOTE ]Generally poorly.
If the flop is paired, solid players will be continuing with sets or flopped full houses. Your opponents will have 28 cards between themselves. If you don't have a card the same rank as the board pair, there's a high probability (~86%) an opponent does.
The math: <ul type="square">1-C(43,28)/C(45,28)=0.8626[/list]And in addition, someone might have a pair matching the odd card on the flop. It's unlikely you'll see an ace on the turn or river (p=~8.8%).
Bottom line: you have a negative e.v. for playing bare aces when the flop is paired.
When seven opponents see the flop and the flop is not paired, opponents will continue with flush draws, flushes, straight draws, straights, sets, and two pairs. All of these are generally better than a pair of aces. With a pair of aces, you'll be drawing for an ace to make trip aces and even when that happens for you, an opponent can end up with a straight or better.
Thus with eight of you seeing the flop, unless you catch an ace on the flop or unless at least one other two-card comgination in your hand is working for you, you should probably fold.
[ QUOTE ]
2. I am looking at the "high only" numbers and I am somewhat surprised to see that AAKKd (best omaha high hand) is winning less than a hand like AAJ9d. Is that due to the normal fluctuations with the simulation, or is that really the case?
[/ QUOTE ]It isn't.
AAKKd.....794+0+1186=1980
AA9Jd.....814+0+747=1561
AAKKd is the best high-only hand, as simulated, with a pair of aces.
But interestingly, 10,000 deals may not be enough! When I did the simulations for the series of post-flop articles for the 2+2 on-line magazine, I used at least 100,000 deal simulations. I'll run both of those again at 10,000 deals, just to see. I expect the results to be similar, but a little bit different. Here goes:
AAKKd.....772+0+1149=1921
AA9Jd.....757+0+764=1521
As you can see, the results are a bit different.
I'll run them both at 100,000 deals for Omaha-8. Here goes:
AAKKd.....7957+0+12027=19984
AA9Jd.....7755+0+7648=15403
As you can see, the results are about ten times greater than for 10,000 runs. Presumably they're also better values.
Simulated for high only (also nine handed)
AAKKd.....19+2712=2731
AA9Jd.....65+2196=2261
first column is hand,
second column is high splits halved,
third column is scoops,
fourth column is total.
AAKKd is a substantially better hand in Omaha-high than Omaha-8 because there are no splits with low.
[ QUOTE ]
By the way, what simulation software do you use?
[/ QUOTE ]For these I used Wilson software.
Buzz