So I know conventional wisdom is you want an aggressive player to your right so you can act after them, however hear me out, does it make sense for them to be on your left.


Although this is a home game it does apply to the casino. We play all omaha games and play them as no limit. Big O, Double Board High Omaha and single board high omaha.

Our stakes are 1-2 and this player makes it $40 quite regularly preflop. He was on my direct right and although I had position on him my decisions were difficult due to a bunch of people acting after me. Also most of the time he bet $40 preflop he would then make it $150 on the flop. I was wondering if having him to my direct left would be easier since I would be last to act and could call wider if other people folded or there was just 1 caller.

Too often I would call the 40 then 4 other people would call and my hand values shrank. Curious what people think.

There's Maniacs and then there's just regular LAGs. If he's truly a maniac with proven showdowns then you want him on your left since everyone is going to be trying to trap him and you need to see who springs to action first. What you dont want to have happen is you try to isolate him with a 3bet and then someone on your left 4bets or jams to get both of you. However if he's on your left then you get to see who 3bets HIM and then decide if YOU can continue with your hand.

If he's just a general LAG then you definitely want him on your right because otherwise he's just going to run over you nonstop.

If maniacs who are always raising most of the time are on my left then my opening range shrinks to ultra tight and is not good for me. So I move ASAP. Or I switch tables. Or I take a meal break.

I have no problem when they are on my right. And if I 3-bet and somebody 4-bets it is an easy fold for me because people are virtually never 4-betting without incredible hands (unless I seem like a maniac too...).

The beauty of a maniac being on my right is that they never stop being maniacs. Their bluffs are always disproportionately high and they will eventually bust.

Unless we are redefining maniac, I think this is wrong and the first reply is correct. My definition of maniac is someone who is PFR is well over 50% and their sizing is very large making pre-flop the most important street. By being on his right you are essentially acting last most hands preflop. Then post if maniac also bluffs all the time you are in position to allow him to bluff every street.

I could see your point if maniac simply PFR high percentage and amounts then played soundly post flop. But most do not, they keep on maniacing the whole way.

Yeah we have some LAG players in our game but this was a friend of a friend. He would raise $40 in limped pots then bet $150 on flops. A couple times I called with medium hands only to be reraised by people trapping. I was thinking him to my left is better because if I act last I can see what everyone else does.

He was in 90% of hands making huge bets. Not surprisingly he lost about $1,000 which is a lot for our game. I won a couple pots off him but was unsure a lot if someone behind me had a bigger hand.

That right there tells you what your problem is. You should be playing a tighter range, but not calling the 40, instead 3 betting when you do play a hand. That is basically what your non-maniac opponents are doing, and your $40 calls only make that strategy all the more profitable for them.

If you’re not comfortable with adjusting against a maniac, then probably best to be across the table where you don’t deal with them quite as much. But if you are comfortable I definitely think to your left is better than being to your right. As you said, you get a lot more information and basically get to act last preflop.

Yes op is correct you want him on your left.

Clowns to the left of me, jokers to the right

The real problem is that the OP playing No Limit Omaha and is right in the middle. The reason most Omaha games are limit or pot-limit is because the correct strategy for NL Omaha is to go all in pf with a strong hand and ride the variance train.

Obviously you want him on your left so you’re in the effective cutoff every hand.

100% ^^^^^^^^^^^this

Maniac' to your left is where you want him to be.

I don't get this.

If a maniac is on my left and I raise preflop and he 3-bets and somebody 4 bets exactly how is that to my advantage? I have to fold unless I have a monster. This is why I have had to tighten my range so drastically and it means I play very few hands. And for the record I don't limp preflop. Ever (well if I am in the SB I do HU against the BB though sometimes it is a limp/re-raise). And if nobody 4-bets then I either have to 4-bet vs the maniac and be playing a huge pot OOP (unless of course he 5 bets and then maybe we get all in preflop) or call which puts me OOP post flop.

The thing is if the point is to get all in preflop then it doesn't matter whether I am on the left or the right of the maniac. But if I want to play the hand postflop then being in position vs the maniac is the best option.

If I am on the maniacs left and he raises over 50% of the time, my 3-bet range which is widish is perfect. Very few people will 4-bet me because I am not a maniac. What it means is that I get to 3-bet raise before the other guys. And yes if somebody 4-bets then if my 3-bet was weakish (like A5s or 76s) then I fold. But mostly I am playing hands in position post flop against a guy with a freakishly wide range.

Your “for the record” is why you don’t get it.

You start by limping. Maniac raises. Then you get to see whether anyone else 3 bets, and can decide how much you respect them, before deciding whether or not to invest real money and 3 or 4 bet.

Note: I’m not advocating, just explaining

this ^^^^^^^^^^^

adjust to the game conditions and table set-up your in :

if you never ever limp then your exploitible ; you just identified a leak in your game congrats !

Plus plo vs Holdem

This is the only correct response itt

True maniac in PLO you want to your left for reasons stated!!!

Nope. The answer is to your left (in PLO). If he's to your right and staying there, it's correct, but you aren't going to be playing many hands, and it's going to get expensive.

Note: They are playing no-limit Omaha, not pot limit.

lol can’t you just shove all in with any good hand after someone raises and collect the dead money or flip with odds?

It’s a horrible game type but I feel like if you have a maniac he is going to be punished so hard in NLO

Good point. Still four cards vs. two, and I'd rather have him on my left. I want to see what everyone else does before I put (too much) money in.

I wouldnt say jam preflop, but more like jam the flop so nobody has odds to draw which defeats the spirit of the game.

You dont raise, you limp AA

A typical 70/30 maniac you might want on your right because he's unpredictable.

But at a certain point maniac play changes from being unpredictable to being super predictable. When they cross that line, for example, guy with an 85% PFR, you want them on your left Instead.