Steve Badger's advice

[holdemsucks]

On a previous discussion I replied talking about position in this game. Everyone seemed to be debating against me and Steve Badger, ever since I referred to http://www.playwinningpoker.com/omaha/pot-limit/
I have been playing on PartyPoker starting with $5000 play money and now I have around $120 000 on my account play money. A lot of my decisions are based on what Badger says. However, one person replied to me saying that his advice was silly, wrong, misleading etc; It certainly has not mislead me. By the way, the reason I'm starting a new discussion on this is because this made the other discussion totally off topic when by the starter was asking out flop and turn play and not nearly as much on pre-flop starting hands.

[chucky]

I am not going to focus on this too much, but expect to get plenty of comments that focus on how you are playing with play money not real dollars. The article you are referencing is focused much more on a game that is several hundred BB deep, where the implied odds against hero of playing every street OOP are taken to the extreme.

In the article you linked, Steve Badgeer states:

"If the chips are deep you should be limp/fold almost everything. The main reason to play hands out of position in PLO is to encourage other people to play out of position. That is really and truly the main reason. You want to limp and fold, while they limp and call your raises when you are in position."

Steve Badger never defines "deep" but I assume it is at least 200 BB. If you limp fold from EP against aggressive players in a deep stack format, hero will never get a chance to outplay the aggressive players with a variety of weak leads, check/raises and check/call + check raise or bet combination moves that can take advantage of the other players' aggression to create relative positional advantage.

"If the chips are deep you should be limp/fold almost everything." When holdemsucks posted that folding aa83 ss was the correct play when faced with one preflop raise he misapplied this part of the article. Suited aces represent an elite section of starting hands. If you limp/call with them from EP you will have hidden the nature of you hand, and created the opportunity to play advantageous flops in relative position to the aggressor. Deep stack scenarios may be even more advantageous by encouraging the late position aggressor to take multiple shots at the pot, thereby allowing hero to more effectively trap with strong hands.

[iggymcfly]

The problem with Steve Badger's advice is that it implies that it's basically impossible to win money from early position. Yet almost every winning player on this forum will tell you that they win money from EP. Therefore, his advice is wrong. It's not even debatable, it's that simple.

[thisnamedoesntfi]

[ QUOTE ]
The problem with Steve Badger's advice is that it implies that it's basically impossible to win money from early position. Yet almost every winning player on this forum will tell you that they win money from EP. Therefore, his advice is wrong. It's not even debatable, it's that simple.

[/ QUOTE ]
Exactly, I'm not a huge winner by any means but the only spot I'm losing from is the BB, and clearly that is less position related than forced to pip.

Omaha is not like real estate, position, position, position.


[ QUOTE ]

But again, PLO is position and betting. A solid player who understands the game and has deep chips, can play 3579 in position and eat up AAKK, while also play AAKK in position to eat up 3579.

[/ QUOTE ]

Sure, if the guy that has AAKK doesn't understand the game.

[pete fabrizio]

a solid player who understands the game and has deep chips will eat up anybody from any position with AAKK.

[pete fabrizio]

My life at 6-max:

[Big Dave D]

I know you are well intentioned but surely you can see that this is going to be a somewhat trollish thread. The problem is, Badger wrote for a game that almost everyone who posts here has never played. Comparing full ring, live game PLO from the 90s to 6 max internet play online, is well, insert your own metaphor for very different things.

It doesn't help that badger exaggerates to make his point.

What is the point, is that unlike holdem, there are very many winning styles of PLO, so if it works for you, [censored] 2+2. To be honest, my style of play in the PLO ring games online 2+ years ago was very Badger-esque and although it had a lot of flaws, it made money. Making money is the ultimate test.

gl

bdd

[Buzz]

<font color="green">Hi Big Dave - I intend to keep my eye on the thread and manage it if it becomes trollish. In the meanwhile, perhaps a healthy discussion of different points of view will develop.

As I'm sure you’ll agree, there are different successful styles of card play, including pot-limit Omaha-high play. And if an Omaha style that formerly was successful for you no longer works well, this seems a good place to make that clear.

I think it's healthy for a forum to have different points of view presented, as long as the opposing posters are cordial to each other.

At any rate, I'm inclined to let this thread continue for a while to see what points of view people come up with.

What do you think?

Maybe I'm missing something.

I do understand your concern, and appreciate your representing it.

Buzz
moderator</font>

[holdemsucks]

[ QUOTE ]
unlike holdem, there are very many winning styles of PLO

[/ QUOTE ] I do not want to discuss Hold 'em in an Omaha discussion, but I disagree; there are two main styles in winning Hold 'em, tight-aggressive and loose-aggressive and one could stick with one or the other or slightly alter either or both to his taste or use both and change gears. But that is not the main concern.

Look, if there are many winning styles in PLO, what are they? Are you suggesting that you win more money using your style than what Badger says?

[ QUOTE ]
my style of play in the PLO ring games online 2+ years ago was very Badger-esque and although it had a lot of flaws, it made money

[/ QUOTE ] Well if it had a lot of flaws, how did you make money?

In fact, I find there is nothing wrong with Badger's advice. If you guys can win in early position, fine, so can I. With Badger's advice, you may be playing too tight though. That just results in losing the least in early positions and winning close to nothing in them. So, in conclusion, there is nothing wrong with just playing and winning in a late position.

If you have good opponents, they would start folding in early positions when you raise on the button and that is when you start limp-folding in early position. There is nothing 'wrong' with that system of play. You have to lose a little win to again, that is all there is to it. [img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img]

By the way, on PartyPoker people play 10-handed Pot-limit Omaha High games.

[Flip-Flop]

holdemsucks , if playing like Steve Badger works better for you then using your own head to think about the game and you are fine with it by all means do that.
Play like Steve Badger.

Why do you have a need from 2+2 posters to acknowledge the "greatness" of Steve Badger?
What`s in it for you?