Everything is exactly the same, except that flushes are ranked low-ball style when compared to each other. A full house still beats a flush, and a flush still beats a full house. But a low flush beats a high flush.

I believe this would make flush boards play a lot more like paired boards, in which it is actually harder to have the nuts than to have the second nuts. The way it is now, it is combinatorically easier to have a big flush than a small one. Play on flush boards centers around the nut flush and the nut flush blocker, with all other flushes playing the role of bluff catchers. With the other style, any Q high flush or lower would be played aggressively and any single flush blocker would be valuable.

The vast majority of flops are two tone. Play on two tone boards is currently centered around the NFD, which is the easiest flush draw to have, and high single suit blockers. With the change in place, the NFD would be as combinatorically likely as quads, and all flush draws would be flattened in value.

Preflop hand values would flatten a bit as well. Any suit would still be valuable, just as they are now. Low connected suited hands would get a boost for sure, but high cards would still rule, and I doubt that preflop ranges would drastically change. Double suited aces would still be by far the strongest hands, but would certainly be taken down a peg from what they are right now.

I think this would improve PLO, but it would drastically improve 5-card PLO, where basically someone always has the nut flush or nfd in any given hand.

Thoughts?

You mean a straight?

But yeah, it's a good idea that would make poker a bit more interesting (even NLH), but in reality it would just be a bit too confusing for players and not big enough of a change that sites would implement it as a new game type.

More suited connectors would be played (currently there are some marginal folds) and they would replace the Axs-hands.

The suits would move away from the As-hands to jacks, tens and lower cards, like AJT8z would be the new AJT3s or so. The suit-blocker would lose some value, not only the nut-blocker, that would not exist. AAT2z, KKT2z.

Sounds good.

In some aspects PLO is simpler than NL. Boards revolving around flushes are well understood/studied (as they're not complicated,) on top of betsizing being capped. Complexity of the game varies greatly board to board.

I like it but I think the confusion factor would outweigh the novelty factor and ultimately lead to less recreational players.

Definitely will give this a try in a home game though

Str8s are played for high. Flushes are played for low. What about str8-flushes? For high or low?

Seems like a decent idea, although it's hard to imagine it would catch on. People don't like change.

How do flush boards work right now in 5-card Omaha High? Whoever has the nuts/nut blocker just wins? It seems game breaking that the nuts is so likely in 5-card.

Basically yeah. About half of 5-card plo dealt hands are double suited. When someone vpip's that number probably goes up to over 75%. And just like in hold'em, there are more Ax suited combos than Kx suited, more Kx suited than Qx suited, and so on. The other problem which is also the case in 4 card plo is that it's easier to have the nut flush than the nut flush blocker. This allows the nut flush blocker to just rep the nuts for 3 streets in any situation and the opponent still has to fold a king high flush.

Without thinking about it, I'd assume just like the regular game. But it might be more logically consistent to have the same lowball rule for straights vs straights as well. After all, on QJT its easier to have AK than it is to have 98, a similar dilemma.

Straight flush rank ultimately doesn't matter because they're so infrequent to have.

We've been playing some 3-card and 4-card short-deck PLO and it seems to induce more play with flushes and dry aces. It may or may not be a better option than introducing a new formula for reading lows.

This results in fewer combos of flushes in general, and more combos of the single suit blocker. The major drawback is that the equities would likely run too close and straight boards would be as badly locked-down as flush boards are currently in 5 card.

When straights are beaten by trips it could change the dynamics of straight boards.

This is honestly the best idea I've ever heard, I don't think its even confusing for recs tbh.

This is a great idea.

1. It encourages play with lower suited cards. While they will now make high flushes, low cards still suck. So it's good to incentivize playing low cards.

2. There is no more a nut flush blocker available. Having the 2s doesn't block the nut flush. (3s4s is the nut flushh)
Having the 3s doesnt block the nut flush. (2s4s is the nut flush)

Hmm interesting point. Not sure if that would be better or worse; should it be similar to the "high flush" where 2sAs would beat 3s4s so that nut flush blockers are still in play?