[ QUOTE ]
When giving basic advice of o8 starting hands, I have a very basic system. Adjusting for position, prior action, etc., my rule breaks down to this:
Play hands that have:
A2
A3 plus one other thing such as suited A or big pair (A3KK, AA39)
A4 plus two other things such as suited A, big pair. Hence, A4sKK is playable, but A4s9Q would not be.
Of course when situations are favorable (late position, no raise, soft-game,) you can loosen up and and play that lone A3, or 4 wheel cards with no A, or 4 broadway cards.
[/ QUOTE ]phish - Your starting hand system is simpler than the one I presented - and that’s good. I wanted to present a very simple system for starting hand selection that would mostly include the playable starting hands and mostly exclude the others. I can think of some ways to improve the system I presented in the 2+2 article, but the improvements all complicate the system. Maybe it’s too complicated already, although I did try to keep it simple.
At any rate, your system
is simpler, and I like that part of it. Just a few things...
<ul type="square">• 1. A bare A2 is not the holy grail.
• 2. I don’t think A4s9Q is a great hand by any means, but I do think it’s generally playable. Indeed, I like A4s9Q better as a starting hand than some bare A2 hands, for example A287o or A277o.
• 3. I think you are missing some very playable hands, for example 23KK-double suited.
• 4. I want something more than a lone A3, even from late position.
• 5. Four aceless wheel cards? Depends very much on which four wheel cards. 5s5h4d4c stinks, even on the button, and even for a half small bet from the small blind. But 5s4h3d2c or 4h4d3h2c are both generally worth the price of seeing the flop - and from any position. I don’t like low pairs in limit O8. With low pairs you tend to make costly losing sets or costly losing full houses. I’d rather have Kh4d3h2c than 4h4d3h2c, but I’ll generally see the flop with both hands, and indeed any Xh4d3h2c.
There are no aceless great starting hands. KK32-double-suited is as good as it gets. But playing some of these hands expands my range, which is good for me for two reasons: (1) the game is not boring for me if I play enough hands, (2) The more extensive my range of playable hands, the less readable I am.
(You obviously don’t want to take this too far, but there are many hands that break even or even lose a bit that are worthwhile playing if they enable you to profit more on various other hands).
• 6. Four Broadway cards? Depends on which four Broadway cards. QhJsThTc is weak and the rainbow version is even worse. But KhQdJcTh or KhQdThTd are both generally worth the price of admission from any position.[/list]
These considerations are all for typical B&M full ring limit games.
I tried to first identify the top 25% of Omaha-8 hands for typical B&M casino limit ring game play. Second I tried to come up with a simple system to select these hands, and which could be easily modified for tighter or looser play.
But how to best play against any group of opponents depends on that particular group of opponents.
Exceptionally tight tables involve different considerations. Short handed play involves different considerations. Pot limit play involves different considerations. On-line play, especially when some of your opponents are aggressively multi-tabling, involves different considerations.
If you're having good results, then by all means stick to what is working well for you.
Buzz