Omaha winrates vs Holdem winrates

[pete fabrizio]

[ QUOTE ]
It totally is though. 30 PT BB/100 is only 3/5 of a buy-in. So if I get one guy to get all-in for 1 BI in a bad spot where I'm 80/20 every 100 hands and play exactly breakeven the rest of the time, that gets the job done. And with a full table full of people who think the fact that you pushed a draw once means they should never fold AA or two pair for the rest of the session, situations like that really aren't that hard to find.

[/ QUOTE ]

Iggy, are you cracking up? This is my most ridiculous post I've ever seen from you. Surely you understand that playing break-even outside of your 80-20 hands is completely impossible.

[pete fabrizio]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
It totally is though. 30 PT BB/100 is only 3/5 of a buy-in. So if I get one guy to get all-in for 1 BI in a bad spot where I'm 80/20 every 100 hands and play exactly breakeven the rest of the time, that gets the job done. And with a full table full of people who think the fact that you pushed a draw once means they should never fold AA or two pair for the rest of the session, situations like that really aren't that hard to find.

[/ QUOTE ]

If you can get a guy to go in as bad as 80/20 every 100 hands, you're going to be very rich very soon. The truth is those spots are pretty far between and you know it, and you'll be taking a lot more 60/40 and 53/47 flips playing LAG or TAG.

If some one has a datamine of a player with a real sample taking the games at 20PTBB/100 I would be interested in seeing it.

[/ QUOTE ]

You can go on some sick heaters in this game -- I've run at ~30 ptbb for 10k+ hands several times. But no one is beating anything but the lowest games for that amount. The very best players at each level I think beat the game for 10-12 ptbb.

[iggymcfly]

OK, maybe 20's a little high. But part of me thinks the only reason you don't see higher winrates is that if players are capable of winning that much, they move up limits. I'm actually running even hotter now, averaging 23 PTBB/100 over the last 20K hands, but PokerEV's got me convinced a pretty decent portion is luck.

I still think 15 PTBB/100 is easily sustainable for a good LAG though which makes PLO significantly more profitable than NLHE which was my only real point in the first place. And if a great player was using really strict game selection, I'm not sure that 20's not a reasonable winrate either.

[Aisthesis]

I think the math is absolutely impossible to do on the spot in some situations. I think it comes with lots of experience (having run various hands through 2dimes) that you just kind of "know" what shape you're likely to be in.

Just counting outs on the spot isn't completely trivial, then if you try to get into stuff like "well, I think he has AA with flush draw 40% of the time, a wrap 30% and top set 30%, so can I really call/raise with middle set?" all I know is that it's probably near marginal without doing a REALLY elaborate calculation.