Series 1

gintron · #1 08-19-2006, 12:08 PM

I am an above average omaha player with a fairly decent understanding of the game. I used to religiously read the omaha section, but after reading the same situations over and over, you begin to know instinctively how to act accordingly. I simply am not learning much more from the omaha forum. I know others feel this way as well.

I also find the advice that is given, though usually "on average" the correct advice is much too bland and monotonous for the aggressive and extremely profitble style that seems to be developing throughout poker generally.

With that said, I just wanted to initiate the beginning of hopefully an insightful, revelatory and of course profitable series of discussions about the finer points of omaha.

OPENING HANDS:

Comprehensive strategy tends to place emphasis on calling purely with connecting cards/high suited/high pair+connecting cards. Observing higher stakes omaha, the winning hands (coming from consistent and winning players) are rarely the premium hands expected. I will add commentary on this subject later, I would just like to get the concept started.

beset · #2 08-19-2006, 02:16 PM

[ QUOTE ]

With that said, I just wanted to initiate the beginning of hopefully an insightful, revelatory and of course profitable series of discussions about the finer points of omaha.

[/ QUOTE ]

An interesting starting point might be whether there really are any fine points to this game or if it just the bastard child of blackjack and poker. [img]/images/graemlins/tongue.gif[/img]

RedJoker · #3 08-19-2006, 04:45 PM

[ QUOTE ]

Observing higher stakes omaha, the winning hands (coming from consistent and winning players) are rarely the premium hands expected.

[/ QUOTE ]

I couldn't agree more. At my local casino the big winners are not content to sit and wait for big hands. Having only started learning the game 6 months ago they were the first people I asked advice of.

When not involved in the cash game I would stand behind them and watch the hands they played (either live or on the net), hands I would have thrown away having seen the first two cards they were calling preflop raises with. They understand that if they hit the flop they can take down large pots, they also buy in for excessive sums, sometimes up to 1000 times the big blind.

[ QUOTE ]

Comprehensive strategy tends to place emphasis on calling purely with connecting cards/high suited/high pair+connecting cards.

[/ QUOTE ]

These are the hands they raise with, other hands are worth calling with. But this is for a very good reason, deception. While it is difficult to pin them to a hand range, it is easier for them to deduce a tighter players starting hand.

With between 10 and 20 years experience, they intimidate newer players and keep them off balance with continuous aggression. They play more hands because they can read a board better and outplay their opponents post-flop.

You may think you can read a board, but knowing when your straight is good on a paired board in multiway situations takes real experience.

BriMc · #4 08-19-2006, 05:36 PM

This is a great Idea. I don't have much time to post right now, but I'm definetly interested in this. I've been playing a very laggy over the past month in live deep stacked agressive PLO games and I've been crushing it. I find that the guys who are solid players that are only playing "good" starting hands are nearly as easy to exploit as the people who have no idea what they are doing.

I'm really looking forward to this discussion. I'll be able to participate more during the week.

RoundTower · #5 08-19-2006, 11:21 PM

I would like you to write some good articles on Omaha, especially if you are any good. But please use shorter sentences and more direct constructions, or get an editor.

Ribbo · #6 08-19-2006, 11:41 PM

[ 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.....

wheatrich · #7 08-20-2006, 05:20 AM

[ 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...

shpongled · #8 08-20-2006, 05:53 AM

I have come to a very similar conclusion from analyzing my hands. The conclusion being that, as in hold em, there is a small subset of highly profitable hands, and a wide range of marginal hands that are just about break even. Whether or not you play the marginal hands is all about your style, position, & the table image you want to project.

shpongled · #9 08-20-2006, 05:57 AM

Yeah, but look at the win%. A couple of big wins can throw the BB/hand off, but just because you can hit a big flop with a certain hand & win a huge pot doesn't mean you should play the hand. Over the long run, all the money you lose by putting your money in bad before the flop playing marginal hands evens out with the occasional big win.

RoundTower · #10 08-20-2006, 08:30 AM

[ 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.

[/ QUOTE ]
No, the chart says you can't really tell based on the sample size. The only thing you can tell from the table is that aces are the most profitable hand. Oh, and that Ribbo runs good.