Is doing business allowed in this game?

This game really looks like it's creeping into a 2-5 game with a 100 big bet cap.

At this point, the only difference between this game and a pure 2-5 game seems to be:

1. $3 big blind instead of a $5 big blind.

2. Minimum raise pre-flop is to $15 instead of $20 (am I right about this?).



If the goal was to create an entry level Pot Limit Omaha game, then this is the wrong approach.

If the goal was simply to play a 2-5 PLO game, then why aren't you playing and promoting the real thing?

Because this is incorrect for reasons I've already explained multiple times in multiple places.

The 2/3 blinds switch is a great.
Switching this to a time rake game may help stimulate action too.

Played in the game earlier today. Floor said it will remain 1/2 because they don't want it to take away from the 2/5 game. Had a ton of fun and will be back fr some more on Saturday.

Game started today at 4 p.m., with the second one going at 5 p.m., and lasting til about 12:30 a.m. or so. The game was basically full when I left at 2:45 a.m., though at about that time both Mike and I left and another player busted out as I was picking up.

So here's the deal with the $1/$2 vs. $2/$3. I stopped by Wednesday and brought up the idea of switching to $2/$3 to Tracy, the shift manager who agreed to help us start the game three weeks ago (we are now on four consecutive weeks of Thursday-Friday-Saturday action, as well as a few other days here and there). Tracy, along with the floor guys and a few dealers, agreed that the switch to $2/$3 blinds would improve the game, and that we would play with the $2/$3 blinds on Thursday.

That didn't end up happening, as they started the game on Thursday at 1:30 p.m., and nobody at that time knew we were planning on making the switch. And so on Thursday, we stuck with the $1/$2, planning to start $2/$3 on Friday.

On Friday, word came from Kathy Raymond, the poker room manager, that she wanted to stick with the $1/$2 blinds rather than switch to $2/$3 blinds with the same structure. And so as a result, they had two games of $1/$2 going (rather than $2/$3) when I arrived at around 8 p.m.

When I arrived, I bookmarked Part IX of my book (on growing the game and structuring sustainable games and stuff) and gave it to Kathy to look over, after which we spent maybe 15-20 minutes discussing the issues, as there are a couple.

Namely:

1. How a $2/$3 game with a $5 bring-in might affect future $2/$5 PLO games, and
2. Marketing the game at $2/$3 vs. marketing the game at $1/$2.

The $2/$5 Game
The first issue is a non-issue at this point, as what really needs to happen now that we have the smaller game is that the buy-in structure of the future $2/$5 games will have to be adjusted. Kathy brought up the subject of capping the $2/$5 game at $1,000.

But almost regardless, the minimum buy-in on the $2/$5 game should be raised to $500 (a) to remove the overlap between the $2/$5 uncapped game and the small game we have now, and (b) to fix the problem of having a $200 minimum buy-in on a $2/$5 game that is played with a straddle (a bigger issue when the game is uncapped and there are several $2,000 stacks than when the game is $1,000-max).

What the ultimate solution with regard to the $2/$5 PLO game will be has not been resolved at this point, and may not be until the demand returns for $2/$5 PLO (probably during the next Deep Stack series).

Marketing
Marketing the game is the real issue. Kathy wants to market the small-stakes PLO game to the public in their advertising material (such as flyers or magazine ads and such). She read the material I gave her, and while she concedes that playing the game with $2/$3 blinds might make for a better game -- particularly when short-handed -- the bottom line is that she feels that it would be easier to sell the game as a "$1/$2 PLO" game rather than a "$2/$3 with a $5 bring-in."

Personally, my preference is to deliver the best game possible and not worry so much about the appearance. My view is that you give the best product, and eventually substance will win out over appearance. Moreover, we have a big enough player base now that we don't have to suck players in -- pretty much anybody who has played the game at $1/$2 would not get chased from the game if we switched to $2/$3, whereas if we eliminated the game as is and changed it to $2/$5, we would price out many of the players who otherwise would not have showed up.

That said, it is Kathy's room, and I agree that sticking with $1/$2 is a safer bet because we are pretty comfortable that the game works as is. And so we are going to stick it out at $1/$2 for the time being.

Jeff

Just a thought Jeff 1/3???? we play that with a 15 max raise 5 for every limper. Start mixing hilo please ill be there in nov see you then.

the 2-5 plo has a min buyin of 200 i just played in it couple weeks back

on a side note, if you win a big pot ($500 plus) in PLO is it common to tip the dealer 1 red chip ($5)? or should the tip be more?

and second, because of all the shortstackers that play this game, is it common to see the shortstackers hit-n-run after they win a big pot?

I brought up this topic in Jeff's book thread, but I thought you guys would have some useful input as well:


Assuming sufficient demand, are there any viable PLO structures that play about as big as 1/2 NL that a cardroom would be willing to spread?


Jeff had argued in Part IX of his book that a 1/1 PLO structure would be impractical for operators. I think it may have something to do with tracking $1 chips.

I replied that I thought a 1/1 game that used $1s and $5s, with $5s mostly used postflop, would be workable.

Do you think such a structure would prohibitively sloppy or otherwise unappealing to either players or operators?

If so, do you think there any other realistic structures for a Omaha high game would play about the same size as 1/2 NL? PL/NL hybrid, progressive spread limit, higher rakes, etc?

Hey guys, on a cruise so don't have much time. Just wanted note Game On Thursday, Friday, and Saturday at 8 p.m. if not before (the game started last week at 1:30 p.m., 4 p.m., and was full with two people on the list when I called at 8 p.m. on Saturday, so it'll probably run before). I'll be back Saturday, if not Friday.

We are on Week 5 -- so far, so good.

Jeff

I cant wait to play some PLO this weekend! thanks for doing this jeff as 2/5 PLO is outside my bankroll.

At venetian you can probably get 2/3 to run with 1 tables. however I think 1/2/5 or 1/3/5 is probably the best option expand the people who will try the game. Hearing 1/2 or 1/3 may interest new players as that is a level they have already played. Outside of LA there arent many areas with 2/3 nlhe. If you really want a 2/3/5. Why not have 1/1/(first in min.) 3 300 max with open raise allowed up to 5. During busy times you would get a 1/1 games, 2/3 500 and run 5/5 as uncapped.

hijack/
ugh, so gross. finished 5th in the legends $550 rebuy plo tourney (my 2nd plo tourney ever) just now. i'm loving to get it in on the flop of J94 with T867 vs 99xx. brick brick.
/hijack

re-hijack/
now playing 1-3nl omaha high at the bike. siiiiiick action, have quintupled up in 15 min at the table.

I heard about that game. So how often are people getting all-in preflop?

And is PL way slower than NLO?


Btw, pm me if you're looking for a 25PLO home game out in Riverside.

we ended up calling the game "1-3-100-200" cuz for a while we just had chip runners standing by cuz at least 2 people were all in preflop every hand. 1 guy was in the game for over $2k.
(sorry jeff for the hijack)
back to your regularly scheduled thread....

I stopped by the Venetian tonight briefly to check up on the game (I had another engagement at XS). The game has now run Thursday-Friday-Saturday for five consecutive weeks, and the game has picked up considerably. The games are starting earlier and earlier, and no longer need the 8 p.m. start time to run. And apparently they had both the $1/$2 with $5 bring-in and a $2/$5 game go on Thursday as well.

We are off to an excellent start.

Jeff

On a side note, on the way out I noticed that they had a $1/$2 PLO interest list (nobody on it) pasted on the board at the Wynn poker room...

Played the 1-2 this last Friday, and it was fantastic.

I managed to win a flip for 300bb pot and my last two hands were aces full and a flopped sf so I cant complain.

will be out there labor day weekend. definitely will play in this at least a couple times. can't wait.

I played there around 4pm on Thursday aug 20th. Half nits and Half gamblers. One old guy shipped his whole stack with bottom set vs top set and one outered the guy for about 1100 dollars. It was sick watching it live.

There was this one middle aged Asian guy, thought he was Jeff, lol

When I read this thread I get the feeling that this game is made just to bring some new money to the $2-$5 Omaha players game, after all its almost the same game but with a cap.
If you really wanted to make a newbie Omaha game why not make it like a $1-$2 or $2-$2 game and make it a redchip game after the flop, then you will see alot of $1-$2 TNL players try it out.
As it is now the newbis will realize pretty quick that the game is just so much bigger then it first seems to be couse of the "$1-$2" blinds.

/P

^^^ I had a similar question about making a 1/1 game. Jeff made some kind of argument in his book suggesting it would be too hard to count the pot, and/or there's some kind of rake issue.

I asked for clarification but he didn't reply.


If the goal is to popularize PLO, there definitely should be a 1/1 game, with reds after the flop.

Well, I don't recall anybody complaining thus far that the game plays too big. While we have had people clamor for $2/$5 blinds instead, I don't recall having anybody play the game and wonder why we aren't playing straight $1/$2.

Sorry, I've been out of town. But yeah, it's hard to see $1/$1 working when straight $1/$2 is a mess. If the solution was as simple as playing straight $1/$2, then everybody would be doing it by now and there would have been no need for me to the Venetian and set up the game.

You gotta come out and try it.

Jeff