Interesting. I play a lot different than this style online. Just ordered the book, will possibly give a review if I remember to.

Good ol' straw man.

I never said that only hyper-LAG can win, and I don't advocate hyper-LAG either. There is a lot of room between your style and hyper-LAG. I also objected that the nosebleeds are a totally different kettle of fish, so you can't say that 53/19 is fine for everybody. What's inconsistent here?


I never said "reverse float is nonsense". I said I didn't like your treatment of floating. If I am not allowed to, I'm sorry -- no need for innuendos. Sorry too for liking another PLO book (that I didn't even mention here).


I never said all my opponents are donkeys lol. I said that I don't worry about someone calling too much until he proves he is a threat. The random donkey was just an example, obviously. I also did not said that everybody is trapping when they check to you; that was not my objection against the pot/pot/half-pot line. Really, there is no need to distort my point of view that way.


I have no answer? Seriously, reread my posts.

Correct, I was assuming that you 3bet most of your premium aces -- which account for about 2%. But if you decide to call with some of them, eg. 1%, this leaves room for some other hands. Unfortunately, this also leaves money on the table, in my opinion.

I'm sorry you take criticism that way. You have a lot of positive comments, I thought you could put up with a few unconvinced readers. I said everywhere that I was just giving my opinion. I agree there is not much left to discuss though; I made my points, you replied, readers will make their own opinions. Thank you anyway for your replies.

For it to be only premium aces at 2%, 80% of AA hands would have to qualify as premium AA hands, and there would have to be a raise in front of me 100% of the time I get them. Clearly if I am opening at 12% and 3-betting at 2% (it might even be a smudge above that), I am not facing a raise 100% of the time.

Which again is all a non-sequitor anyway, because it is up to the reader to figure out what he is comfortable with.

+1

I also think Hwang's book is a lot better than Transitioning from NLHE to PLO.

Yes you are, the three bet stat starts ticking when you're facing a raise and I don't assume that you claim the longterm distribution of hands you hold facing a raise different from the one you hold first in.

Then my 3-bet% is significantly higher than 2%. I was running the old PT at the time and did not have the figure. My bad for any confusion on the matter.

I dont think thats even remotely close to why jeff is advocting small ball.
It has nothing to do with comfort zone and eliminating variance...

I interpreted that he believes increasing the SPR maximizes your positional advantage with a variety of hands because it gives you room to make plays.

In low SPR situations your opponents will often be stacking off with pair + medium/weak draw etc correctly and you have much less informaiton avaialable to you and less room to maneuver.
This is not really debateable IMO.

What is debatable is wheter the maneuverability aspect it, is worth the downsides.
Value of initiative a bloated pot in position, value of your hand in a bloated pot, putting yourself in poor relative position with a player left to act behind you who might sandbag a lot etc.

From what I recall reading, I personally believe not enough emphasis was put on the TYPE of hands that benefit from 3-bet pots vs small ball pots.
It's not just premium hands.. But hands with that flop a lot of dominating pair + draw combos and have smooth equity distributions.

I also believe jeff overvalued the profitability of floating. If floating was as profitable as he seemed to make it out to be in his book (people playing super transparent after you float thinking you MUST have a hand) then I think playing a 3-betting premiums only strategy in position is a very lucrative one.

I agree with that. There are advantages to playing hands IP with a large SPR, but there also are a lot of advantages to 3betting, and one should always weigh the pros and cons.

If the SPR are so low that a 3bet would make villain play more or less perfectly afterwards, then it is bad obviously, unless you have AAxx and there is less than 1PSB left on the flop -- but with 100BB+ stacks, there are often enough chips left to bet for several round of betting even after a 3bet. On the pro side, facing a 3bet is an uncomfortable situation, since if you don't have a premium, you risk calling with not-so-great equity (eg. with ace+big cards vs AAxx, KKxx vs AAxx, or if your rundown is dominated etc.). Besides, it is not so easy to adjust vs a good 3bettor: many players call way too much and play mostly fit-or-fold postflop, which is no good obviously. Some other are prone to spazz in 3bet pots, and you can stack them off while you would have won a smaller pot had you just called preflop. Some hands also play better HU or 3-way, while some other play well in a multiway pot. There could also be a donk to isolate (frequently happens -- and no, not all my opponents are donks, but table/seat selection is an important skill too).

Playing with a high SPR IP is just one facet of the question, imo.

Jeff, any chance this makes it into the full tilt store?

JDG - FTP hasn't ordered Advanced PLO at this time.

Matthew (publisher)

But 2k points at stars!

Stars rocks, but anyways, people here are just talking in circles, nobody actually wants to have to conceed a point.
It's just verbal masturbation now.

Wow, I was googling for reviews of Jeff's book and found this. Funny thing is, my favorite PLO book has always been TJ Cloutier's "Championship Omaha" (described as a "gossip book" elsewhere on 2+2) and is as good as any as a starter for the game. Add in some modern concepts and away you go. TJ didn't use the term "floating" but actually if you read the book carefully he was advocating it way back then, despite the ABC nature of his proposed strategy.

HI!
Advanced Pot-Limit Omaha: Small Ball and Short-Handed Play (or second volume) - does it have any strategy/hands for omaha high low players?

no, strictly for PLO high