pokerfied.com
Promoting poker discussions.

Main
Date: 12 Jan 2009 22:28:55
From: Wayne Vinson
Subject: Serious PLO8 Starting Hand Question
I almost never play this game, but today for some reason I did. Game is
PLO8 full ring microstakes on Stars. Action is as follows:

UTG min-raises. He does this frequently and has shown crap afterwards
several times
UTG+1 pots - read is that he doesn't play many hands and I've never seen
him raise before. His stack covers mine.
3 players fold to me
I have AKT2 rainbow. My stack is about 150BB. My play is?

I folded. The reasoning was that if UTG+1 has aces, I was drawing pretty
slim for high with KT2 as my uncovered cards. If he had A2 he could
easily have a better low draw (ie. a backup low card) and a better high (a
suit, an additional wheel card, etc.) and I could be playing for half of
the low and behind on the high.

Anyone agree or disagree with this play and have a reason why? Is it
standard? As I said, I don't normally play PLO8.

Wayne Vinson
http://cardsharp.org/
Wayne (dot) Vinson (at) gmail (dot) com

________________________________________________________________________ 
: the next generation of web-newsreaders : http://www.recgroups.com





 
Date: 14 Jan 2009 11:42:00
From:
Subject: Re: Serious PLO8 Starting Hand Question
On Jan 13, 1:28=A0am, "Wayne Vinson" <a7a8...@webnntp.invalid > wrote:
> I almost never play this game, but today for some reason I did. =A0Game i=
s
> PLO8 full ring microstakes on Stars. =A0Action is as follows:
>
> UTG min-raises. =A0He does this frequently and has shown crap afterwards
> several times
> UTG+1 pots - read is that he doesn't play many hands and I've never seen
> him raise before. =A0His stack covers mine.
> 3 players fold to me
> I have AKT2 rainbow. =A0My stack is about 150BB. =A0My play is?
>
> I folded. =A0The reasoning was that if UTG+1 has aces, I was drawing pret=
ty
> slim for high with KT2 as my uncovered cards. =A0If he had A2 he could
> easily have a better low draw (ie. a backup low card) and a better high (=
a
> suit, an additional wheel card, etc.) and I could be playing for half of
> the low and behind on the high.
>
> Anyone agree or disagree with this play and have a reason why? =A0Is it
> standard? =A0As I said, I don't normally play PLO8.
>
> Wayne Vinsonhttp://cardsharp.org/
> Wayne (dot) Vinson (at) gmail (dot) com
>
> ________________________________________________________________________=
=A0
> : the next generation of web-newsreaders :http://www.recgroups.com


I don't know if "standard" is the right word, but it is a correct fold
in this low of a game (at least for me), for pretty much the reasons
Gary said.

I love O8, but I just don't think it can be played at micro stakes.
95% of these idiots are in the mode of "weeeeee....I have 4 cards! And
there are going to be 2 winners!!! I can hit this, or that...or
that....Let's just keep betting and see if I can chop at least." It's
painful. It's a Pai Gow sort of game to them ("I'll probably lose a
bit or break even, but I'll have some fun, and might get lucky").

Even if you play it well, and beat the rake and don't kill yourself
over the assinine plays, at these stakes you play 50 hours and might
win enough to be able to go and put a downpayment on a large Diet Coke
at the multiplex.




.







  
Date: 15 Jan 2009 09:38:27
From: Wayne Vinson
Subject: Re: Serious PLO8 Starting Hand Question
On Jan 14 2009 1:42 PM, johnnycoconutsftp wrote:

> On Jan 13, 1:28 am, "Wayne Vinson" <a7a8...@webnntp.invalid> wrote:
> > I almost never play this game, but today for some reason I did.  Game is
> > PLO8 full ring microstakes on Stars.  Action is as follows:
> >
> > UTG min-raises.  He does this frequently and has shown crap afterwards
> > several times
> > UTG+1 pots - read is that he doesn't play many hands and I've never seen
> > him raise before.  His stack covers mine.
> > 3 players fold to me
> > I have AKT2 rainbow.  My stack is about 150BB.  My play is?
> >
> > I folded.  The reasoning was that if UTG+1 has aces, I was drawing pretty
> > slim for high with KT2 as my uncovered cards.  If he had A2 he could
> > easily have a better low draw (ie. a backup low card) and a better high (a
> > suit, an additional wheel card, etc.) and I could be playing for half of
> > the low and behind on the high.
> >
> > Anyone agree or disagree with this play and have a reason why?  Is it
> > standard?  As I said, I don't normally play PLO8.
> >
> > Wayne Vinsonhttp://cardsharp.org/
> > Wayne (dot) Vinson (at) gmail (dot) com
> >
> I don't know if "standard" is the right word, but it is a correct fold
> in this low of a game (at least for me), for pretty much the reasons
> Gary said.
>
> I love O8, but I just don't think it can be played at micro stakes.
> 95% of these idiots are in the mode of "weeeeee....I have 4 cards! And
> there are going to be 2 winners!!! I can hit this, or that...or
> that....Let's just keep betting and see if I can chop at least." It's
> painful. It's a Pai Gow sort of game to them ("I'll probably lose a
> bit or break even, but I'll have some fun, and might get lucky").
>
> Even if you play it well, and beat the rake and don't kill yourself
> over the assinine plays, at these stakes you play 50 hours and might
> win enough to be able to go and put a downpayment on a large Diet Coke
> at the multiplex.

I won at least a whole coke in maybe 20 minutes on two tables. While I
posted a hand that might be worth discussion here, there were several
places where I got tons of money in with what was clearly the best of it.

I'm just trying to collect some info on a game I rarely play.


Wayne Vinson
http://cardsharp.org/
Wayne (dot) Vinson (at) gmail (dot) com

____________________________________________________________________ 
: the next generation of web-newsreaders : http://www.recgroups.com



 
Date: 14 Jan 2009 10:33:05
From: garycarson
Subject: Re: Serious PLO8 Starting Hand Question
On Jan 13 2009 1:28 AM, Wayne Vinson wrote:

> I almost never play this game, but today for some reason I did. Game is
> PLO8 full ring microstakes on Stars. Action is as follows:
>
> UTG min-raises. He does this frequently and has shown crap afterwards
> several times
> UTG+1 pots - read is that he doesn't play many hands and I've never seen
> him raise before. His stack covers mine.
> 3 players fold to me
> I have AKT2 rainbow. My stack is about 150BB. My play is?

That hand isn't worth a shit, it has weak draws for splits, little scoop
potential, plus things look they are going to get serious. Don't even
think about it.


>
> I folded. The reasoning was that if UTG+1 has aces, I was drawing pretty
> slim for high with KT2 as my uncovered cards. If he had A2 he could
> easily have a better low draw (ie. a backup low card) and a better high (a
> suit, an additional wheel card, etc.) and I could be playing for half of
> the low and behind on the high.
>
> Anyone agree or disagree with this play and have a reason why? Is it
> standard? As I said, I don't normally play PLO8.
>
> Wayne Vinson
> http://cardsharp.org/
> Wayne (dot) Vinson (at) gmail (dot) com

_______________________________________________________________________ 
looking for a better newsgroup-reader? - www.recgroups.com




  
Date: 14 Jan 2009 23:21:24
From: La Cosa Nostradamus
Subject: Re: Serious PLO8 Starting Hand Question
On Jan 14 2009 1:33 PM, garycarson wrote:

> On Jan 13 2009 1:28 AM, Wayne Vinson wrote:
>
> > I almost never play this game, but today for some reason I did. Game is
> > PLO8 full ring microstakes on Stars. Action is as follows:
> >
> > UTG min-raises. He does this frequently and has shown crap afterwards
> > several times
> > UTG+1 pots - read is that he doesn't play many hands and I've never seen
> > him raise before. His stack covers mine.
> > 3 players fold to me
> > I have AKT2 rainbow. My stack is about 150BB. My play is?
>
> That hand isn't worth a shit, it has weak draws for splits, little scoop
> potential, plus things look they are going to get serious. Don't even
> think about it.

I agree 100% and hope i follow my own advice more.
> >
> > I folded. The reasoning was that if UTG+1 has aces, I was drawing pretty
> > slim for high with KT2 as my uncovered cards. If he had A2 he could
> > easily have a better low draw (ie. a backup low card) and a better high (a
> > suit, an additional wheel card, etc.) and I could be playing for half of
> > the low and behind on the high.
> >
> > Anyone agree or disagree with this play and have a reason why? Is it
> > standard? As I said, I don't normally play PLO8.
> >
> > Wayne Vinson
> > http://cardsharp.org/
> > Wayne (dot) Vinson (at) gmail (dot) com


Atheism is drawing dead

_____________________________________________________________________ 
: the next generation of web-newsreaders : http://www.recgroups.com



 
Date: 13 Jan 2009 17:32:17
From: FangBanger
Subject: Re: Serious PLO8 Starting Hand Question
On Jan 13 2009 12:28 AM, Wayne Vinson wrote:

> I almost never play this game, but today for some reason I did. Game is
> PLO8 full ring microstakes on Stars. Action is as follows:
>
> UTG min-raises. He does this frequently and has shown crap afterwards
> several times
> UTG+1 pots - read is that he doesn't play many hands and I've never seen
> him raise before. His stack covers mine.
> 3 players fold to me
> I have AKT2 rainbow. My stack is about 150BB. My play is?
>
> I folded. The reasoning was that if UTG+1 has aces, I was drawing pretty
> slim for high with KT2 as my uncovered cards. If he had A2 he could
> easily have a better low draw (ie. a backup low card) and a better high (a
> suit, an additional wheel card, etc.) and I could be playing for half of
> the low and behind on the high.
>
> Anyone agree or disagree with this play and have a reason why? Is it
> standard? As I said, I don't normally play PLO8.
>
> Wayne Vinson
> http://cardsharp.org/
> Wayne (dot) Vinson (at) gmail (dot) com

completely insane play .. dont ever play the game again


Those who can make you believe absurdities can make you commit atrocities.
Voltaire

----- 
RecGroups : the community-oriented newsreader : www.recgroups.com




  
Date: 15 Jan 2009 00:31:56
From: RussGeorgiev@aol.com
Subject: Re: Serious PLO8 Starting Hand Question
I gave you and explained the reasons you don't play that hand except
in very rare situations.





On Jan 13, 6:02=EF=BF=BDpm, "Wayne Vinson" <a7a8...@webnntp.invalid > wrote:
> > completely insane play .. dont ever play the game again
>
> You didn't read very carefully. =EF=BF=BDI only care about opinions from =
people
> who have a reason behind them.
>
> And I'll keep playing as long as I keep making money. =EF=BF=BDSo far it'=
s been
> extremely easy.
>
> Wayne Vinsonhttp://cardsharp.org/
> Wayne (dot) Vinson (at) gmail (dot) com
>
> ____________________________________________________________________=EF=
=BF=BD
> looking for a better newsgroup-reader? -www.recgroups.com



   
Date: 15 Jan 2009 09:34:41
From: Wayne Vinson
Subject: Re: Serious PLO8 Starting Hand Question
On Jan 15 2009 2:31 AM, RussGeorgiev@aol.com wrote:

> I gave you and explained the reasons you don't play that hand except
> in very rare situations.

I wasn't complaining about your post. I found it valuable. I was
complaining about Doggy's useless "contribution".

Wayne Vinson
http://cardsharp.org/
Wayne (dot) Vinson (at) gmail (dot) com

----- 
: the next generation of web-newsreaders : http://www.recgroups.com



  
Date: 13 Jan 2009 18:02:27
From: Wayne Vinson
Subject: Re: Serious PLO8 Starting Hand Question
> completely insane play .. dont ever play the game again

You didn't read very carefully. I only care about opinions from people
who have a reason behind them.

And I'll keep playing as long as I keep making money. So far it's been
extremely easy.


Wayne Vinson
http://cardsharp.org/
Wayne (dot) Vinson (at) gmail (dot) com

____________________________________________________________________ 
looking for a better newsgroup-reader? - www.recgroups.com




 
Date: 13 Jan 2009 05:51:14
From: GrouchySmurf1002
Subject: Re: Serious PLO8 Starting Hand Question
On Jan 13 2009 1:28 AM, Wayne Vinson wrote:

> Anyone agree or disagree with this play and have a reason why? Is it
> standard? As I said, I don't normally play PLO8.

70-30 for me.

While it's true that UTG+1 has the AAxx he's representing, that also
leaves only one Ace in the deck, so it's not all that likely for UTG to be
coming back over the top here.

That leaves you with both good immediate pot odds and good implied odds
(as many in the micro areas will stack off with AAxx unimproved). Your
hand actually plays pretty welll against AAxx (about 40% equity).

So given you have position, deep stacks, and a read on the opponents, I
would take a flop a good portion of the time in this spot.

I also disagree on you being in bad shape against another A2 hand. Yes,
you don't have counterfeit protection but having the AK combo can be very
valuable against a A2-W-L type hand, and even A2-W-H hands (W= wheel,
L=low, H=high, obv)

______________________________________________________________________ 
looking for a better newsgroup-reader? - www.recgroups.com




 
Date: 13 Jan 2009 04:52:18
From: CincinnatiKid
Subject: Re: Serious PLO8 Starting Hand Question
On Jan 13 2009 1:28 AM, Wayne Vinson wrote:

> I almost never play this game, but today for some reason I did. Game is
> PLO8 full ring microstakes on Stars. Action is as follows:
>
> UTG min-raises. He does this frequently and has shown crap afterwards
> several times
> UTG+1 pots - read is that he doesn't play many hands and I've never seen
> him raise before. His stack covers mine.
> 3 players fold to me
> I have AKT2 rainbow. My stack is about 150BB. My play is?
>
> I folded. The reasoning was that if UTG+1 has aces, I was drawing pretty
> slim for high with KT2 as my uncovered cards. If he had A2 he could
> easily have a better low draw (ie. a backup low card) and a better high (a
> suit, an additional wheel card, etc.) and I could be playing for half of
> the low and behind on the high.
>
> Anyone agree or disagree with this play and have a reason why? Is it
> standard? As I said, I don't normally play PLO8.
>
> Wayne Vinson
> http://cardsharp.org/
> Wayne (dot) Vinson (at) gmail (dot) com

Pretty weak fold. You obviously don't play that game much, because those
idiots in that game haven't a clue 1. You gotta take a flop with those
cards, bud. A suited ace would be nice, but come on. You can't wait around
for AA2K double suited all day.

----- 
RecGroups : the community-oriented newsreader : www.recgroups.com




 
Date: 13 Jan 2009 04:16:32
From: FellKnight
Subject: Re: Serious PLO8 Starting Hand Question
On Jan 13 2009 1:28 AM, Wayne Vinson wrote:

> I almost never play this game, but today for some reason I did. Game is
> PLO8 full ring microstakes on Stars. Action is as follows:
>
> UTG min-raises. He does this frequently and has shown crap afterwards
> several times
> UTG+1 pots - read is that he doesn't play many hands and I've never seen
> him raise before. His stack covers mine.
> 3 players fold to me
> I have AKT2 rainbow. My stack is about 150BB. My play is?
>
> I folded. The reasoning was that if UTG+1 has aces, I was drawing pretty
> slim for high with KT2 as my uncovered cards. If he had A2 he could
> easily have a better low draw (ie. a backup low card) and a better high (a
> suit, an additional wheel card, etc.) and I could be playing for half of
> the low and behind on the high.
>
> Anyone agree or disagree with this play and have a reason why? Is it
> standard? As I said, I don't normally play PLO8.
>
> Wayne Vinson
> http://cardsharp.org/
> Wayne (dot) Vinson (at) gmail (dot) com

It's a standard fold against 2 raisers, especially with one live player
behind, but could be debated in this case if you expect the min-raiser to
come along with any 4 and not be likely to re-pot (as he does not need to
have another A2)

Fell
--
Be Loud. Be Proud. Be Considerate!

________________________________________________________________________ 
RecGroups : the community-oriented newsreader : www.recgroups.com




 
Date: 12 Jan 2009 22:45:48
From: RussGeorgiev@aol.com
Subject: Re: Serious PLO8 Starting Hand Question
Pot Limit Omaha 8

Whatever you think you know about playing this game is probably WRONG.
First
and foremost bluffing is seldom done in Omaha 8, except on minute pots
or with
the 4 card hand. The name of the game is not scooping pots but a
concept known
as the 3/4 scoop. I don't care what you read about this game, this
game boils
down to one thing only, knowing how to bet the hand. Knowing the best
starting
hands are definitely a must, but betting makes you the money.


Pairs


The best Omaha Pot Limit 8 hands contain no pairs. Playing the hands
right is
the most important issue in the game. I read posts where people try
taking the
pot for peanuts, while having decent draws. This is a wrong approach
to this
game. A poster recently mentioned a hand where he held A,2,4,J with a
"dry Ace"
[meaning lone Ace with out the flush draw]. The flop came 3,5,10 with
the flop
containing two spades. The poster stated he held the "dry Ace of
spades" and
proceeded to pot the hand, getting one caller.


Analyze this hand and the way the betting should play out. The bettor
potted
this hand on the flop. Why do this? Look at the hand. It is a decent
hand, but
definitely no monster. Yet it has many possibilities including an
uncounterfeitable low and possible scoop. Once low hits, the bettor is
assured
a piece of the pot with a possibility of a scoop. The pot bettor had
position
as he was last to act. Thinking about this hand let's you realize you
crave
multiple action. You don't need the pot too big, in case someone is
planning on
check-raising with a set, forcing you into a big bet call and probably
being
isolated with this person. Is this something you think is beneficial
for you
with this hand? Far better to have several players in with you and
reduce the
gamble. Make low and then gamble if you must.


Play for this hand would be a small bet on the flop. Possibly as small
as you
can make to ensure all parties call. Does it hurt to have everyone
call you in
this hand? Definitely not, as you have an above average hand to attack
with. By
potting the hand on the flop, how much money can you make? All you
would take
down are the opening rounds of bets, which isn't much for you did
receive a
pretty fair flop for your holdings. The proper bet for this hand on
the flop
would be approximately the same amount as the opening bet. The more
the merrier
and if you get quartered, a smaller loss for you.


Betting this smaller amount makes others take shots, as they think
they are
getting pot value. They are wrong [they may get it from others, but
not from
you] and you control this hand at this point, especially with
position. The
next card was a Q if I remember right. The betting will likely be
passed around
to you again. What do you do now? The same thing you did a card ago,
bet a
small amount again and hope all the players call. The best card you
can catch
is an A. Now you come out betting enough to warrant a nice win. You
don't have
the "nut" for high but you do have the nuts for low and the 2nd nuts
for high.
Milk these people and make something more than just the initial
opening bets.


What would happen if instead of the Q coming on the turn an 8 did. Now
you are
sitting with the nut low with a possibility of scooping by making a
wheel. Your
hand is very good but nothing special. Again you send out a bet,
slightly
larger this time as you know you are ensured a piece of this pot. Let
people
draw and don't commit yourself into a situation where you are one on
one. This
is not a hand that warrants this. Give everyone a chance to make
something and
perhaps your low will improve and you may scoop. You are also adding
more money
to the pot and leaving yourself far less vulnerable to someone trying
to slow
play or isolate you. Who knows, you may also split a decent pot.


What you want in this game is "nut high", but this usually doesn't
make you as
much money as you think. Flushes look good enough but once the 3 flush
hits the
board most actions goes to a crawl. The same can be said if a pair
hits the
board. The name of this game is to 3/4 the opposition. The players
able to do
this and understand this concept are among those able to totally
destroy this
game.


the 6


The 6 seems like a useless card to most of you. In Pot Limit Omaha 8
it is a
very important card to hold when playing the concept of 3/4. Hands
containing
7's,8's,9's, are basically useless as you are playing one less card
than your
opposition. People that go for the 3/4 concept know the best staring
hands
contain NO PAIRS. Pairs are fundamentally useless in this game no
matter what
any book tells you. I am telling you different and whether math tells
you will
earn this much with this, the play of the hand is not taken into
account.


Staring hands you should relish include four cards starting hands to a
6 low,
giving the highest priority to the ones containing A, or 23. These are
the
hands that allow for the making of big pots and they allow you to 3/4
many
hands. Many combinations of wheels exist, with the worse combination
being the
ones that have Aces in them. Three card wheel boards with an Ace will
either
get you all or half if this is the nut high.You have been taught to
attack this
game from the A,2 perspective. You weren't taught this is not the best
concept
for Pot Limit.


Having three wheel cards on the board is not an easy thing. Calling an
opening
bet with 4 cards to a six is not an expensive thing. Very easy to get
rid of
the hand if your board doesn't come and not expensive either. Take a
hand such
as A,3,5,6 and you may start to realize. Your key card from the
opening is
trying to hit a 2. If you don't, what do you lose except you initial
opening
bet. When you hit your key card or cards you are then in for a treat.
Say the
board comes 2,4,K. Now you are in business for if the wheel does get
there, you
have "nut nut". Take a bunch of cards and take combinations of these
cards and
see what kinds of hands you develop when you hit your key card.
Basically the
same premise as playing an A Q in holdem. In most of these hands you
also have
a secondary card to hit. With the A,3,5,6 the secondary card is the 4.
Now
stick two more low cards out on the board and see what your holdings
will be.
Easy to get rid of the hand for a small loss, but when you do hit you
capture
the hand or 3/4 the pot, giving you a tidy profit on a minimum
investment..


Obviously Ace flushes are good and double flush hands better. But
flushes don't
make you money in this game. You want the person's whole stack and
many lay
down at the sight of 3 flush cards. This is why the game should be
approached
from a low aspect. I prefer having four to a 6 than I do having 4 to a
wheel.
Remember when wheels come on the board, unless an A is on the board,
the wheel
will make for at least a six high straight possibility. It kills the
hands
containing A,2. So here we have you playing A,2,3, when realistically
at best
you will only win half of the pot. This is what having the 6 in the
hand adds
to the value in pot limit. People don't lay down "nut lows". If they
do, they
will lose anyway for if they are guessing if the person has a hand, he
will
surely be able to fool them before long. This is what good players
do.


the High Approach


High hands are playable in this game. The ones you imagine as being
the best
are probably not. Key high starting hand include any combination of 40
or 41
with no pairs [A=3D11, face=3D10. Meaning K,Q,J,10 or any of three of
these cards
with an A. Actually the Ace can be detrimental as the key card to this
hand are
the 9 and another face card. This hand is easy to call with and easy
to get rid
of without much loss. If the flop comes two faces cards, you can be in
decent
shape and can evaluate. Remember the key card is a 9 for it allows K
high
straights to be made, without a low. There are many combinations in
this game
but in pot limit Omaha 8 patience is a key. The betting is the lock.
Knowing
how and how much to bet is invaluable. When playing these hands for
high, you
also develop other outs while having the nuts.


Bluffing


Bluffing is basically non existent in this game, unless winning a few
opening
bets is called bluffing. People trap and slow play. The style I am
talking
about allows you to keep control of the pot. Potting comes when you
flop small
nut full houses early and don't have better draws. Potting is done
when you
make the nuts both ways and want to preserve the hand both ways. Omaha
8 is not
a bluffing game and small bets made by good players are called
sweeteners as
they are so small it invites people to put money into pots with little
or no
chance. This negates loses you may incur from being quartered and
keeps pots
where you want them. Having a low with no high is not a bargain,
though it can
be if played well, with knowledge you have the only nut low. Betting
will tell
you many things, if you understand.


One certain hand allows bluffing to occur in this game. It is a rare
hand and a
rare situation when it occurs. Most don't realize the strength of this
hand or
what is takes to call it. Take a board that comes A,9,7,Q,2 with no
flush
possibilities. Put your holdings on A,2,4,6. Looking at this hand in a
multiple
way pot, the hand doesn't look good. How wrong you are about this
hand. This is
the premiere bluffing type of hand in this game. Potting this hand
almost
assures you of half the pot or the whole pot. In fact, having someone
bet into
you while holding a hand like this would make me POT. You are holding
a highly
difficult hand for a single person to beat. Provided two people don't
hold the
nuts each way, your hand is very strong. In most probability it takes
two
people calling the pot to beat you. You hold a rare hand in the fact
all four
cards play. Most people are not aware of these types of hands and
think they
are weak. Thinking about this hand you realize when you pot this hand
or raise
the max, people are forced to make a decision.


Three Aces are the nuts for high and 34 the nuts for low. Many people
may want
to slow the action down with two pair or a number two low in order to
get a
piece of the pot. Realize a person must use ALL FOUR cards to beat
your hand.
This is not an easy thing to do. Having one caller allows you to get
half the
pot and most will throw number two's or three's away. This is the best
bluff
available in Omaha, for it normally takes two callers holding the nuts
each way
to beat you. From the betting you would have realized this was not the
case,
thus the play is very profitable.


Most players flaws in this game comes from their lack of knowledge on
how to
bet. Betting is the key as I have stated before. Gambling in this game
is not a
necessity as the hands I have told you will put you into ideal
positions in
pots. Hands like A,A, 4,J double suited may seem very nice, but there
is no
real need to get involved with these hands if you don't know how to
bet right.
Hands such as A,2 7,J double suited are also very susceptible to
fluctuations.
Pot Limit Omaha 8 is the "ultimate grind game". It is hard to really
get stuck
in these games playing well. Normally it takes double counterfeits to
get you
big loser. These are very rare but can't be avoided.


The main reason many people prefer Omaha is they like the action.
Having all
these cards allows you to come up with some kind of draw all the time.
With the
starting hands I have told you, many of your flops will allow for %'s
well
above 50. Pot Limit is far different than limit and the same hands
aren't worth
the same thing. Playing well more than compensates for people playing
bad
starting hands. If you want to win it is a very boring game. If you
want to
gamble go right ahead. I don't like my % in making a flush even if I
have 3
other people in the pot. Give me a 'wrap around" nut low with the
bicycle, 6
high straight possibility. This is the type of gamble I prefer.


I will answer all reasonable questions.


Russ Georgiev
Georgiev Cheating Analysts, formerly
Gambling Cheating Analysts


It is hard to fight the truth, logic just gets in the way


Question to skeptics? Do you doubt my knowledge of poker? If you don't
doubt my
knowledge, please explain why I would end my career in playing poker
in
casinos? If you doubt my knowledge, attack my posts.












On Jan 12, 10:28=EF=BF=BDpm, "Wayne Vinson" <a7a8...@webnntp.invalid > wrote=
:
> I almost never play this game, but today for some reason I did. =EF=BF=BD=
Game is
> PLO8 full ring microstakes on Stars. =EF=BF=BDAction is as follows:
>
> UTG min-raises. =EF=BF=BDHe does this frequently and has shown crap after=
wards
> several times
> UTG+1 pots - read is that he doesn't play many hands and I've never seen
> him raise before. =EF=BF=BDHis stack covers mine.
> 3 players fold to me
> I have AKT2 rainbow. =EF=BF=BDMy stack is about 150BB. =EF=BF=BDMy play i=
s?
>
> I folded. =EF=BF=BDThe reasoning was that if UTG+1 has aces, I was drawin=
g pretty
> slim for high with KT2 as my uncovered cards. =EF=BF=BDIf he had A2 he co=
uld
> easily have a better low draw (ie. a backup low card) and a better high (=
a
> suit, an additional wheel card, etc.) and I could be playing for half of
> the low and behind on the high.
>
> Anyone agree or disagree with this play and have a reason why? =EF=BF=BDI=
s it
> standard? =EF=BF=BDAs I said, I don't normally play PLO8.
>
> Wayne Vinsonhttp://cardsharp.org/
> Wayne (dot) Vinson (at) gmail (dot) com
>
> ________________________________________________________________________=
=EF=BF=BD
> : the next generation of web-newsreaders :http://www.recgroups.com