I've hosted a microstakes spread limit game for a few years. A couple of friends, usually around 6 or 7 of us. Everyone takes poker at least a little seriously (we would all be easy favorites at your average low stakes casino poker). Only two of us read up and try to improve on a regular basis (Bob and I)

We play a dealers choice mixed game with every game in the book, plus some more that have been made up along the way. I am considering playing no limit once a month, but would only like it to be Holdem. Others have expressed interest in adding PLO to that night as well (including Bob)

I shouldn't care. As Bob and I would be huge favorites in PLO against this bunch. But I think it would cause a bunch of early nights for people and quickly end the idea of a monthly no limit game before it even started up.

Do I just give them what they want, even if I think it might hurt the longevity of the game? And if not, how should I keep it out?

In case it matters, I think Bob is better than me at Omaha. I also think Bob knows he is better than me, and I believe he knows I think he is.

Two thoughts:

1. Assuming you are the host, insist that the first night be NLHE only.
2. Make the stakes low enough that people can re-buy when they get felted. Tell everyone that the reduction in stakes is because omaha is high-variance and will make sure everyone can play all night.

It seem like it would be nearly impossible to keep a group that already plays mixed games from playing mixed games...

PLO is a great game. Allow people to run it multiple times when all in to reduce variance, and have fun.

If you've been playing spread limit Omaha, then perhaps the jump to PLO won't be as devastating as you think. It's not like you are the only one pushing for it.

I think there is a big change from spread limit to no limit. Even playing NLHE will quickly felt some of the weaker players, who continue to play spread limit style. I think there are bigger advantages to be had in NLHE than PLO.

Maybe run a NLHE/PLO night as a one time test... see how it goes before committing to once per month. Do you plan to lower the blinds for that game?

PLO may work out or it may not. You won't know until you try it, so give it a go IMHO. PLO fans are a smaller but vocal group, and many NLH players just don't like the swings, BUT your group seems like they might embrace it better, maybe not. Good luck with it!

In addition to reducing the blinds for PLO, you could play with a cap on the total amount each player can risk in a single hand (e.g., 100bb).

Cap PLO, smaller blinds, multiple runs, start PLO after 10pm, all viable...

You could try some cheap turbo PLO S&Gs to get people used to it.

You're the host. You can say "no PLO" and that's that. You're right to be cautious... the people who understand PLO are the often ones who insist it won't be a problem. While it is possible to have a sustainable game, I think it takes a good, strong group with deep pockets and a larger roster. I've seen experienced PLO-playing 2+2ers kill a game in under an hour.

We play holdem only until 10pm. After 10, dealers choice between holdem, omaha, and O/8.

Do NOT make the jump to PLO!! I did it and it nearly killed my game. It took over because the good players and the guys who like to play big loved it. It's all they wanted to play and we broke or nearly broke all the bad players and we lost ALOT of long time regulars. I couldn't get the game under control and get us back to playing NL or limit Omaha.

I would tell everyone that we were playing NL that night but 3-4 hours in people would be getting bored and Omaha would be mentioned. I always had a rule that everyone had to agree to change games. Every time the bad players would end up agreeing, even against my protests and I'd give in. If grown men want to donate their money who am I to be the only stick in the mud? Sure enough they would go broke fast and lose 10x what they would have in NL. Seems like the fish were chasing huge losses from the week before and they felt like they could only get even playing PLO.

Just as an example of how crazy it was, we lowered the stakes to .5/.10 PLO with an initial buyin of $60 max and by later in the night we would be pushing $500 pots. It got NUTS and the only word people know is POT!lol

I finally got the game back to NL and/or limit O8 but it was too late. We lost alot of regular players, several of which don't even play poker anymore. It nearly broke my game but I got some new players and kept it going another year or so and now I'm about to lose the game after nearly 8 years. I just lost too many old regs in the PLO debacle.

Home game wise, I too would opt for it, only as a tournament game.

Of course BOB wants it!

I'd add Crazy Pineapple if you haven't already, before PLO, if spice was needed.

Fixed Limit is a wonderful format and allows for literally dozens of game types. NLHE/PLO players tend to shy away from it, but your casual low-stakes players tend to love it. We played 75c/$1.50 using quarters (and fives for the next chip, not dollars), and had a blast. Thermonuclear Armageddon Pineapple! 3-2-1 Omaha HiHi!

Limit is such an awesome format, it's so much fun, great for new or lower skilled players and easily exploitable by good players. Too bad everyone, fish included, want to play the "all in" game.

^^^

Seriously this. I hate that NL is the popular game now. Limit poker is the nuts.

Sent from my EVO 3D

I thought I was the only one! I 100% agree!!

When I got to my "home" casino (Horseshoe in Bossier City, LA) I am literally ecstatic when I see the $5/10 full kill Omaha hi lo game is running. I love that game so much, I'd be content being a long term loser at it.lol Even $4/8 HE; so much more fun to me than NL.

Gosh I love limit poker.