PLO vs NLHE Tournys

[CruNKinTILT]

I've basically only played NLHE tournies up to this point and felt that o/8, stud, and LHE tournies don't give good players even close to as large of an edge as NLHE does. How does PLO rank compared to other types of tournies? Let's just take the DS structure at FT - 3000 starting chips with 15/30 blinds. How big of an edge does a good player have over a weak player when PLO is compared with NLHE in the same structure.

[Troll_Inc]

The beginning of a PLO tournament, when your M is high, a better player should in theory have an equal edge to the NLHE tourney situation (assuming everything else is equal*). A good tournament, if they still have it, is the Tuesday PokerStars Deep Stacks tourney --- lots of opportunity to push a skill edge there.

The problem with PLO tourneys is that the mid game and endgame, as your M decreases skill becomes a lot less important. Specifically the preflop/all in equity differences in PLO are less and you are handicapped by the pot limit betting limit. In the endgame, often the biggest mistake you can make is folding.

So to answer your question, the best PLO tourney player will have less of an edge than the best NLHE tourney player.


*This is probably a bad assumption. The average skill level between PLO and NLHE tourneys is probably not the same, and there probably aren't too many PLO and NLHE tourney players that have equal skill and experience between the two types of games.

[shpongled]

In a deep stack tourney, the edge is probably about the same. In your typical internet crapshoot tournament, there's probably a little more skill in NLH because you get in more hands per hour. PLO tourneys are still very profitable for a good player, though.

[jk1986]

I think people underestimate the importance of aggression- ie. steals and resteals, late on in tournies. Often players take the same never raise (or at least rarely raise) approach to the game late on. Against these players you can really push the button and cutoff spots hard, and pick up some relatively large uncontested pots.

[jbird]

In general, the quality of play is better in NLHE tournaments than in PLO tournaments however, IMO. So while this is certainly true:

[ QUOTE ]
The problem with PLO tourneys is that the mid game and endgame, as your M decreases skill becomes a lot less important. Specifically the preflop/all in equity differences in PLO are less and you are handicapped by the pot limit betting limit. In the endgame, often the biggest mistake you can make is folding.

[/ QUOTE ]

at the current state of the games, your edge if you are a good player outweighs this.

** This is at the middles stakes tourneys that I play -- generally $10 - $100 buyins.

[Troll_Inc]

[ QUOTE ]

at the current state of the games, your edge if you are a good player outweighs this.


[/ QUOTE ]

This may be true, although difficult to measure (maybe MOPs Doubling Up Theory vs ROI?). It does some quite easy to get further in a PLO tourney than a NLHE tourney due to the overall worse play when you can use your skill.

HOWEVER, if you get to the end when the M's are usually low and stack sizes are pretty equal, it becomes more of a crapshoot. That can happen and you can be hit by quite a bit of variance in your results that doesn't correlate to skill at all, and your overall ROI is going to be great influenced by the top 1-2% finishes.

And I agree with the other poster that PLO tourneys are profitable. There are players that aren't terribly great overall PLO players that have fairly decent ROI's in low limit PLO tournies.

[jbird]

[ QUOTE ]
And I agree with the other poster that PLO tourneys are profitable. There are players that aren't terribly great overall PLO players that have fairly decent ROI's in low limit PLO tournies.

[/ QUOTE ]

<-------------------------

[img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img]