Omaha vs Omaha split - which is more popular?
12 posts
• Page 1 of 1
Omaha vs Omaha split - which is more popular?
Do people still play high hand Omaha or is it basically now played as a split game. I was going to do some reading up but didn't want to dedicate time to the wrong one as the tactics are very different.
- Idaho
- Posts: 438
- Joined: Wed Aug 25, 2004 10:40 am GMT
- Location: Exeter Poker Club UK
Seems like split is much more popular. I'm trying to learn Omaha now, and it seems like on the three or four sites I play, you can always find a high-low game but not always just a high game.
Also, the card rooms here in South Florida more often offer the high-low variant.
Also, the card rooms here in South Florida more often offer the high-low variant.
-

flafishy - Posts: 1217
- Joined: Tue Aug 31, 2004 9:02 am GMT
- Location: Broward County, FL
I personally prefer split. It seems like many people have trouble reading a low hand and will call you down with things like 7-6.
I know that Omaha high is still played, but I don't think it's hugely popular.
I know that Omaha high is still played, but I don't think it's hugely popular.
-

golddog - Tournament Champion
- Posts: 1324
- Joined: Sat Jan 25, 2003 6:18 pm GMT
- Location: Denver, CO
It depends. I like to play them both anyway, but in card rooms Hi/Lo seems more popular, since they mostly run limit games. In Europe and Australia, however, Pot Limit Omaha High is a much more popular game. In short, in limit settings, Hi/Lo tends to be more popular, and in Pot Limit settings, High seems more popular, but both can be played either way.
Reinforces my theory when I play Omaha that too many players (particularly on the net) are overly influenced by their Hold'em experiences and have trouble adjusting their strategy for different games. This is less true with Omaha than with Stud, but there's still plenty of easy money to be found in non-Hold'em games.
Reinforces my theory when I play Omaha that too many players (particularly on the net) are overly influenced by their Hold'em experiences and have trouble adjusting their strategy for different games. This is less true with Omaha than with Stud, but there's still plenty of easy money to be found in non-Hold'em games.
-

xDiamond_CutteRx - Moderator
- Posts: 4703
- Joined: Sat Mar 05, 2005 5:26 am GMT
- Location: Northern California
I love/Hate Omaha, but I can’t get away from it.
I have come out way ahead in many of my sessions, but I have also lost my A$$ with this game when I had a string of second best hands. Even worse is when you are using three of your hole cards to make a straight flush. Imagine my surprise
I study Omaha because I feel a little strategy goes a long way in this game. Damn near everyone at the tables knows how to play a reasonable game of Holdem. So you have to play a really good game to have an edge on your opponents in Holdem.
So many people jump into an Omaha game thinking they can play it like a Holdem game yet the value of hands are very different. Then you add Hi lo split, some people just don’t get it. So many people make so many bad calls you can really clean up.
I have come out way ahead in many of my sessions, but I have also lost my A$$ with this game when I had a string of second best hands. Even worse is when you are using three of your hole cards to make a straight flush. Imagine my surprise
I study Omaha because I feel a little strategy goes a long way in this game. Damn near everyone at the tables knows how to play a reasonable game of Holdem. So you have to play a really good game to have an edge on your opponents in Holdem.
So many people jump into an Omaha game thinking they can play it like a Holdem game yet the value of hands are very different. Then you add Hi lo split, some people just don’t get it. So many people make so many bad calls you can really clean up.
-

Hank - Posts: 53
- Joined: Tue Oct 28, 2003 5:35 pm GMT
- Location: Sacramento,CA
Yeah, I think the Hi/Lo split is really hard for a hardcore hold'em player to get into.
I've tried out Omaha Hi and figured out what the best types of starting hands are, but it seems like most of the time when you get those great hands, the board never matches you. It seems like its much more of a mathematical game of figuring out outs and deciding which starting hands to play, rather than a feel/bluffing game that hold'em becomes at higher levels.
I still love how the winner of the WSOP PLO 2004 didn't realize that a 4-card straight doesn't do it ...
I've tried out Omaha Hi and figured out what the best types of starting hands are, but it seems like most of the time when you get those great hands, the board never matches you. It seems like its much more of a mathematical game of figuring out outs and deciding which starting hands to play, rather than a feel/bluffing game that hold'em becomes at higher levels.
I still love how the winner of the WSOP PLO 2004 didn't realize that a 4-card straight doesn't do it ...
-

TheSalche - Posts: 2141
- Joined: Sun Mar 20, 2005 10:35 pm GMT
- Location: calling down
TheSalche wrote:I still love how the winner of the WSOP PLO 2004 didn't realize that a 4-card straight doesn't do it ...
Oh gawd... Ted Lawson, that guy was a jackass who did not deserve to win. On top of it all, he was a cocky bastard. What a jackass.
And on that note, how many times has Lee Watkinson got 2nd in something? Always a bridesmaid that guy...
-

xDiamond_CutteRx - Moderator
- Posts: 4703
- Joined: Sat Mar 05, 2005 5:26 am GMT
- Location: Northern California
12 posts
• Page 1 of 1
Return to Non-Holdem Poker Talk
Who is online
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 0 guests

