Ok so there’s this scenario that happens to me a lot when I play live..

I show up and call in and I’m 1st or 2nd on plo list. I hop on a 2-5nlhe table and grind a profit and literally face no difficult decisions. I’m up sat 20-50bb and the game just seems soft.

Then I get called for PLO. Lose a buy in and I’m second guessing leaving the soft NL table for a mine field at PLO.

Do people ever pass on their PLO seat if the game looks too reg infested and your current Holdem game seems decent. I’ve had the will power to do this maybe 2-3 times but 90%+ I snap take the PLO seat and let the chips fall where they may.

I think it is just a sample size situation where you are currently doing well at NL and not doing as well at PLO. Another thing is NL and PLO don't play the same blind wise. You mentioned the size of the Hold'em at 2-5NLH, but you didn't mention the size of the PLO game. Even a smaller blind 1-3PLO game might play bigger than a 2-5NLH game. And continuing the size comparison, there was a long running thread in the "New, Views and Gossip" sub-forum about how much you can even make playing live NLH, it wasn't a very impressive hourly, even for larger NLH games. But since PLO plays bigger, your future hourly playing PLO will be better, a lot better. This isn't a perfect example, but I'm in Southern California and my local casino PLO game ran 5-10, but the highest NLH game was 10-20. When they got rid of the $10-20 NLH stake, even NLH pro Johnie Vibes gave PLO a try because he knew the 5-10 PLO played bigger than the 5-10 NLH.

Even though you described the PLO as reg infested, my guess is you are being a bit biased. Next time you are at the NLH table, keep an eye on the PLO as observer and count how often players are getting stacked or nearly stacked for all their chips. It will be often at PLO, especially compared to NLH. Chips flow around the table fast in PLO, it is the place to be. Give the PLO regs credit for playing quality hands, and concentrate on beating the crap out of the 2 or 3 weaker players at the table.

The sample is tiny I get that… I also understand that games play at different sizes sometimes double the stakes.

But are we really going to make a blanket statement like the “chips flow around the table fast in plo, it’s the place to be”

And just disregard that one whale sitting at a NL table can change the equation in a nano second.

It’s more table selection… do we ever leave plo or pass on our plo seat if NLHE is a better lineup?

Obvs we don’t have sample size to dictate this in game decision so it’s usually a gut decision. Yesterday within an orbit or so of moving to plo I just wish I had passed on the seat, got back on list and played later. I wanted my NL seat back and was instantly distracted by how weak my Holdem game was and not that my plo table was hard it’s just why not take the path of least resistance?

It creates all sorts of second guessing. Maybe the answer is to not even sign up for NL. This can lead to long wait times. There’s dealer shortages everywhere so I only see this as being more of a problem.

I guess I should just set up a page and go for walk instead of playing 30 mins of Holdem and letting it get in my head.

yah I mean obviously you should choose the game that is best for you and your bankroll and your risk tolerance.

Let me see if I can find the live NLH hourly win rate thread. It was an eye opener for a lot of people who didn't realize live NLH at many stakes is close to McDonalds wages.

The main thing I am saying is that live No Limit Hold'em hourly win rates aren't that great unless you are playing high. It could easily be that there is NOT a high enough NLH game to be worth the time and energy of playing in your casino, but that same casino might have a PLO game that is worth playing.

And even in my example, NLH pro Johnnie Vibes moved from San Diego because the local casino got rid of $10-20 NLH and the live $5-10 No Limit Hold'em wasn't high enough stakes with a high enough win rate to support his lifestyle.

There are 'rules' in poker if you take it seriously .. including table selection consideration.

IMO you are in the moment, the NL game is 'very' beatable so far .. you stay in lieu of going over and being 1 of 5-6 Regs riding the variance merry-go-round.

This should be true even if you were considering just moving up in stakes for the same game.

I understand that in the long run you need to be in games that may offer higher bb/hour opportunities, but tonight, at least for now, this may be the best table for you to sit at and I'm going to roll my name on the PLO list. GL

Ya I get what you’re saying…

I wish there was a way to play enough to know my wr in either game.

I mostly play online so it feels like I have way more information w like 100x the hands played.

The live games are so soft though.. I never even think to play Holdem online w the exception of the random mtt. But the live scene is so different now; no tournaments and all low stakes cash.

I’m probably overestimating my ability at holdem. And I’m probably also being results oriented lately.

But during the day at non peak times it seems like more recs and randomsnare playing holdem.

Quite frankly the holdem players let you know how bad they are within a couple orbits. People open limping, flatting the cutoff, not squeezing bb, no raise or folding sb etc.. like basic mistakes are being made in these holdem games.

In PLO bad plays/players are protected by equities running so close.

In PLO while I do think my wr is higher it does come w the price of high variance.
I can win more often at holdem but obviously the wins are way bigger in PLO and it’s not even close.

Maybe I’m getting old and can’t take the swings. I just want steady profits.

Thanks answer…

Ya I tend to agree that we should never leave a soft table and just roll it here

i'd rather not play poker than play nl
but if the plo game sucks,your nl game is good and you enjoy it then play it.

Sometimes you just want to play PLO, but you should still avoid bad/tight games when possible.

And plo normally requires more decisions and tricky decisions than NL.

I'd just be wary that you are so eager to play PLO, that you are playing looser than you should and thus worse than you are capable of. I mean, you've been waiting to get in the game, and you are ready to go, so naturally you are going to want to play hands.

We don't go to the casino to fold, so I think that while you have no problems doing that in NLHE while waiting for your PLO table, you might be struggling to do that once you get into your PLO game

That’s a fair point..sometimes adjusting is tricky. The wait live can kinda throw a wrinkle in the game. Some days I’m there to start the game and other times the game doesn’t go or I wait up to 2 hours. It’s not even casino specific. It’s the nature of PLO and a limited player pool.

I’ll be honest.. I enjoy whatever game produces the highest wr. But again it’s hard to say what wr is in each variant so tie goes to the more enjoyable game of plo.

All the time I want to play PLO!

Ya sometimes the autopilot nature of NLHE is nice though..

Sometimes it feels like I’m complicating things by playing PLO.

At the end of the day I need to just be playing the softer game. Which isn’t always obvious right away.

I think it's important to understand are you trying to play against the tougher lineup in whichever game you want to play or would you prefer the easier lineup in a game that is not the one you were hoping to play.

Table selection could have the higher factor on ones win rates than ones skillset.

How is this even a question? I don't consider myself a plo player or a nl player, I'm a poker player, I'll play the best game available. So of course I'd sometimes stay in a NL game if it was better at the time.

It's not even just about winrate. Enjoyment levels are better if you're in a softer game. Your confidence grows, etc.

How do you know which game is best?

It's pretty obvious based on your OP that the NL game was best, not being results oriented but the way you described it. You could've described it wrong though because of the results.

But It's like the old saying, spot the suckers at the table. There will always be one table where you can spot more suckers more quickly. That's the "best" game.

This.

The OP has used the word “fun” too often in this thread for my liking. Poker is an awesome profession, but it can be a horrible hobby if you are looking for fun. Most people play too loose, wanting to have fun. And when I hear the word “fun” too often, I usually suggest they play online 6-max instead of live 9-max because the online 6-max game is played looser.

Live poker is often a battle of wills to play tighter than your opponents. If playing tight is boring, then find something else to preoccupy your time. I’m not a fan of the players that are watching movies on their phone or tablet, but hitting on waitresses is a damn good idea. I lived in Las Vegas for 10 years, I know the inside stories. Steve Wynn opened up the Wynn Casino and hired drop dead gorgeous models as waitresses. Those women were hot. Almost every single one of the original Wynn Casino waitresses married a poker player. Yup. Live poker players are in a great position to chat up waitresses all day long. Then date them, have sex with them, or just flirt with them.

Playing tight live PLO will win you significantly more than any style of live NLH play. And have fun with the money you win. Have fun flirting with waitresses all day. Have even more fun if you end up having sex with one of them.

Am I missing something ?

I literally never used the word fun once. I actually don’t play for fun, I don’t really enjoy live poker tbh. I much prefer to play online and not drive off the value of my car.

I’m also married so won’t be hitting on the cocktail waitresses anytime soon.

I should mention your assessment of me wanting to play hands and being excited to play PLO is a little off only bc I was already playing PLO on my phone.

The "fun" part was implicit.

Maybe you are an odd duck in today's world and can't choose which game to play. But most PLO players I know who end up at a NLH game while on the PLO waitlist, when their name is called for PLO, quickly stand up from the NLH game and say, "thank God I can finally get off this NLH table." And that is regardless of if they were currently winning at the NLH table or not.

I am not going to quote verse about serving two masters, but I highly doubt you are going to become a PLO beast unless it is the only game you want to play regardless of whether on any given session you are winning or not

Well ya that’s me 90% of the time… but a day PLO game w the wrong lineup isn’t something to get excited about.

And again table selection and wr does matter. Online I would have played both tables. Which reminds me of a funny time at this casino when i multi tabled live playing plo and nl before finally getting caught after 2 hours and crushing both tables

Not so humble brag but I kinda am a PLO beast.. but that’s irrelevant. I still think table selection trumps my skills.

Lol 5-10 can’t support johnnie vibes lifestyle 🤣