I was just browsing SS and noticed players like Fishbone72 (5-card draw) or mmmccckkk (Razz) with absurd ROIs in the 20-30% range on the big sites. I was blown away by this because I thought these games were older than holdem and supposedly less complex. Similarly, experts claim Omaha hi/lo is only more complicated than PLO while learning the basics, after which PLO is more complex and offers a bigger edge. However, Omaha hi/lo consistently shows greater profits on SS despite likely having a smaller player pool. tatta maintained an incredible 14% ROI mass multi-tabling over 60,477 games. What's going on here? I realize action is slower for other games, but why aren't more people playing these given the potential? Or do they just keep quiet... oops. :D Unless one is playing $200+ stakes, aren't these games more profitable?
I'm guessing quality information on these games is very scarce. A lot of the games you mentioned aren't natural to go into from NL background and automatically win (aside from PLO perhaps, but there are definitely some PLO winners that do well in HUSNG too).Very good players can learn anything and profit in a shorter amount of time, but those players are usually found at triple digit buyins and once they reach that level for husng it doesn't make sense to attack a very low action form of poker for them (at similar stakes).That's my hunch at least.
after reading this, I went to play my first game ever of Razz: 6$ stake versus wjw1970 (he won 13 000$ playing razz). I still dont know how the fuck he won... HE HAD 72 CHIPS LEFT!!!!! And he seems to won all the flips after... I have to admit that im kind of piss
I've won from 40 chips several times. It happens... and it feels great. :DAnyway, I'm still confused about PLO vs PLO8. Since I assume PLO is more popular and every thread on 2p2 claims it's also more difficult to play at a high level, why is PLO8 more profitable? Is it because PLO8 has a higher initial learning curve? I expected this to be offset by supposedly bigger edges against competent opponents at higher stakes.PLO ROIs in general are pretty shocking to me. There are a myriad of excellent NLHE training sites as well as books and most people have been playing it almost exclusively for years. Even the most clueless donk has at least seen it played on TV. In short, NLHE has reached a point of maturity and apart from the economy, that's a big reason for the reduced edges compared to five years ago. However, PLO has relatively few training resources and is less analyzed in general. It's also claimed to be more complex, which should give better players a bigger edge. However, the ROI for PLO HUSNGs for the top players is just about the same as for NLHE HUSNGs from my brief sharkscoping (a real word from this point on).If this is the case now, when the game is nowhere near as mature as NLHE, I only expect things to get worse. What's going on here? I expected that PLO HUSNGs would offer a higher ROI but with the downside of being more difficult to multi-table, reduced action and increased variance (meaning that the stakes played should be lower relative to NLHE).Does this suggest that PLO isn't more complex or that it's only more complex than NLHE with deeper stacks than 75bb? A large part of the skill element in NLHE is due to the fact that most times no one has much of anything and there are many bluff and rebluff spots. Moreover, having only two cards means that a good player can read hands much more precisely than in PLO and can thus make thinner value bets or bluffs etc. Could it be that PLO is just slightly too nutted and that actually reduces its complexity?BTW: It's interesting that on PTR 1/2 PLO cash winrates above 250K hands are no better than for NLHE. Given that PLO has an even higher "long run" than NLHE, 250K hands is probably the minimum for a reliable winrate. Thus, it seems that the hgiher BB/100 on PTR for PLO top winners is mainly due to variance. Otherwise, a similarly higher winrate should be observed over 250k+ hands.http://www.pokertableratings.com/top-hold%27em-winners-year/1-2-NLhttp://www.pokertableratings.com/top-omaha-winners-year/1-2-PLAgain, I'm not sure how to reconcile this with the idea of PLO being a more complex game that offers better players a bigger edge.
Coaching page + Blog
That's funny Roamus. I'm sorry for your $6, but that was a funny post.
I've thought about this more and I wonder if the endgame is the problem. Since preflop equities run so close together, perhaps severely shortstacked PLO becomes even more about luck than NLHE.
Coaching page + Blog
Brief list of thoughts:Split-pot games are not well documented anywhere, especially PL/NL split pot games. Many correct plays in those games are extremely counterintuitive even for the skilled gambler. Because of this (and the lack of good training sites like HUSNG.com), the edge in those games is massive for a skilled player. However, the barriers to become a skilled player are much higher, and due to their unpopularity, there is often a cap on how much you can make playing one of those games.PLO8 winrates are probably the highest of any game for a skilled player. Still, a great PLO or NLHE player will make more money -- or at least, as of last December I think that was true. I haven't been following poker.Shortstacked HU PLO is practically coinflipping -- far worse than NLHE. Basically if you fold you made a mistake.6max winrates in PLO are slowing down because PLO is getting better understood, and rake is much higher in those games compared to NLHE.
Do you expect PLO8 winrates to continue to be the highest among good players? When I asked this question on 2p2, the consensus was that PLO8 is harder to understand at first and sucks fish dry faster but that among skilled players it is less complex than PLO. http://forumserver.twoplustwo.com/38/small-stakes-pl-omaha/variant-omaha...I also commented in a thread very similar to this with many more details trying to understand if PLO would really offer a better long-term edge than NLHE. http://forumserver.twoplustwo.com/15/poker-theory/holdem-vs-omaha-800921/ So far, the answer is unclear to me.
Coaching page + Blog