|
|
#12
08-21-2006, 08:11 PM
|
|||
|
|||
Re: Series 1
Question for the better players who know how to play loose and smart.
How do you manage to play such bad hands successfully. Are you showing down non-nut hands successfully all the time, or are you just pure-bluffing your reads and position all the time? I know there is alot to it, but is there any insight someone can give me into the thinking behind this style? 
|
|
#13
08-22-2006, 07:11 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Series 1
[ QUOTE ]
I am an above average omaha player with a fairly decent understanding of the game. [/ QUOTE ] What level do you play at? [Or so as to not offend RoundTower: "At which level do you play?"]
|
|
#14
08-22-2006, 11:26 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Series 1
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] [ QUOTE ] Observing higher stakes omaha, the winning hands (coming from consistent and winning players) are rarely the premium hands expected. [/ QUOTE ] This statement is just wrong. Two aces *long term* are the *significantly* most profitable hand at high stakes (and low stakes for that matter). Most other hands just push chips between players in the long term. Oh but unlike you, I use stats to back up my statements and not just "from observation". Here was my stats from several months ago when I broke starting hands up into pocket pairs in omaha... Aces are way, way, way out there.....  [/ QUOTE ] I agree (damn long run takes too long) but unfortunately there's a bit of a flaw with that chart because according to that chart then AA>JJ>77>QQ>88>KK>66>99>55 >44>TT which isn't true. Must have made quads vs nut boat with 77 a lot or something... [/ QUOTE ] Its very intersting that fives and tens are your biggest (only) loosers, I allways like playing these hands as they have good blocker bluffing potential when a straight is possible, but I guess the flip side is that when playing a set you must run into straights a little more than with other pairs, something to be a aware of with these hands I guess.
|
 |
|
|
Linear Mode
