How to beat PLO25

[evazan]

I don't want to hijack this post but I've been playing .10/.25 for a while and have built most of my roll from it. I was originally planning on jumping up to .25/.50 when I hit a grand but I now have 1500 dollars and am still playing .10/.25.

I am just extremely comfortable at this level. I am destroying the games. Since I just got pt I only have 3k hands logged but I am running 25 ptbb/100. I understand that I probably wont be able to maintain this but it just shows how badly I am beating these games.

At this point in time I've decided to wait till I hit 2k and have 40 buyins to play .25/.50. I am just a poor college student and am making around 20 dollars an hour playing .10/.25 which is more then any other job would pay me so you can see why I haven't been in much of a rush to jump up levels. Am I being too much of a bankroll nit and missing out on a lot of earning potential or am i just doing a good job protecting my roll.

By the way, great post and I agree with just about everything you said on beating these games. I'd also like to add that I've noticed a big difference between playing full ring and 6 max at these levels. Full ring can be very profitable just being a nut peddler with very little aggression but playing 6 max really requires you to become much more aggressive and to play and raise more hands from position.

[Craggoo]

Posters in this thread are advocating just extreme tightly play; I disagree. I'm the maniac you always see at the table and i advocate mad aggression. People don't know how to play against mad aggression which is why its so effective.

[Troll_Inc]

[ QUOTE ]
Posters in this thread are advocating just extreme tightly play; I disagree. I'm the maniac you always see at the table and i advocate mad aggression. People don't know how to play against mad aggression which is why its so effective.

[/ QUOTE ]

You make a very convincing argument. I take back everything which I wrote in this thread.

[Craggoo]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Posters in this thread are advocating just extreme tightly play; I disagree. I'm the maniac you always see at the table and i advocate mad aggression. People don't know how to play against mad aggression which is why its so effective.

[/ QUOTE ]

You make a very convincing argument. I take back everything which I wrote in this thread.

[/ QUOTE ]

I sense a hint of sarcasm

[piiop]

Troll,

There's no doubt that this strategy will beat $25 games and like you said, there are other styles and other strategies that will result in winning poker. However, I think there are some points you make that are not optimal. It also seems like this type of play will not allow you to expand and grow as a player or win for anywhere near as much at especially as you move up in limits.

Here are a few points that stood out the most:

Starting cards - This seems way too tight, especially for 6max.

Position "LP you can loosen up a tiny, tiny bit, but don't over do it." - Again too tight, you can loosen up a lot in LP. This game is all about position - use it.

3 "bluff very little," - Well yes and no. Obviously don't bluff calling stations, but there are a lot of situations that you can pick up the pot with a pure bluff. It's a pretty situational thing to explain, but you just have to pay attention. Don't check behind when you missed your draw only to lose to 2nd pair. If there's a 3way hand that goes check, check, check on the flop, then check on the turn pot it. Agression is good.

Raising - You only mention the CO and button as spots to raise. Obviously, your pfr will be highest from those positions, but you can still be raising from other positions.

Flop play - This is table dependant and in some cases your advice is exactly right. Like if there are a lot of raised pots or games where stack sizes will make it where usually someone is allin by the turn. I think this actually happens at more aggressive mid limit games. At low limits, there not only are a lot of unraised pots, but opponents are betting the pot as frequently or betting the turn as much. In these games, you can peel the flop a lot more liberally in position. It's a pot limit game. You pay a little on the flop and win a lot win you hit or lose nothing when you miss.

To your 2nd post:

Preflop Tightness - It soundslike playing too many tables is the problem here, not your preflop play. Yes, playing more hands leads to closer decisions, but that doesn't mean you shouldnt play them.

Straights - I am raising A765s almost always and I'm almost always playing A854s and 7652s. "Again, this is probably a finer point, you are right you could make money wtih 765, but by not playing it how much money are you leaving on the table?" - If it makes you money, why would you not play it?

[jad14]

[ QUOTE ]
Troll,
It also seems like this type of play will not allow you to expand and grow as a player or win for anywhere near as much at especially as you move up in limits.

[/ QUOTE ]

Moving up in limits would call for adjustment, tough to disagree. I guess one definition of a good player is to be able to see the adjustments needed as you move up in levels.

I have never heard Omaha is "all about position" before..

[sahaguje]

[ QUOTE ]

I have never heard Omaha is "all about position" before..

[/ QUOTE ]

According to Ciaffone, position is even more important at PLO that at NLHE, mostly because the drawing-out possibilities makes it very dangerous for a made hand to slowplay. That means you can often win the pot uncontested with a pot bet if you are last to act and it is checked to you. So if bluffing is an important tool in your play (and it should be IMO, even at PLO 25), you can play a lot of hands in LP.

Of course, if you follow OP's tight advice and do not bluff often, position is far less important, and you should not loosen up that much. Having a coherent play is very important to beat any game.

[jad14]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]

I have never heard Omaha is "all about position" before..

[/ QUOTE ]

According to Ciaffone, position is even more important at PLO that at NLHE, mostly because the drawing-out possibilities makes it very dangerous for a made hand to slowplay. That means you can often win the pot uncontested with a pot bet if you are last to act and it is checked to you. So if bluffing is an important tool in your play (and it should be IMO, even at PLO 25), you can play a lot of hands in LP.

Of course, if you follow OP's tight advice and do not bluff often, position is far less important, and you should not loosen up that much. Having a coherent play is very important to beat any game.

[/ QUOTE ]

I see, a check in PLO is a better indicator of weakness vs NLHE since it's more dangerous to slowplay in PLO. I will bluff in LP depending on how many to the flop etc. Most hands are 4 to the flop (max 6 players) and that's enough for me to be cautious about bluffing.
I enjoy the game more when there are contrasting players at the table and you can count on a one or two players to take his shots. I like to compare my results with the more aggressive player since I consider myself fairly tight..

[skitzofranik]

To the poster who was thinking of moving up from .10/.25 to .25/.5. Dont even worry about it. Take some shots and see how you do. I played plo25 at ub for awhile and decided to play at ftp. I started playing .25/.5 at ftp and havent looked back. As long as you have any semblance of plo knowledge you can beat plo50 for a good amount. I've doubled my roll in about 2500 hands and am crushing that game from about 20bb/100 (which i really do believe is sustainable at that level).

Also, i suggest taking shots at the new mixed games on ftp. The HA game is pretty much fantastic as you can tilt a guy in HE and take the rest of his money in PLO where your advantage comes in.

I'm was like you in terms of br management and then i read the rempel's well thread and decided to try out his ideas (since he plays a similar game to what I like to play). I highly recommend checking that out if your interested in moving up.

[pete fabrizio]

[ QUOTE ]
I see, a check in PLO is a better indicator of weakness vs NLHE since it's more dangerous to slowplay in PLO.

[/ QUOTE ]

I don't think this is necessarily true on either point.