So many people limp in pre flop. Obviously in NL that's a bunch of fish, but is that true in O8?

From what I understand, most players think limping in O8 is definitely okay. I don't think it's that bad in NL or PL either, if it's a part of a coherent strategy.

In Limit it's fine depending on the dynamics of the game and what you're trying to accomplish.

If I have a playable hand, I try to think about how many players I would want to play against post-flop and decide to limp or raise depending on how many I think will call.

For example, in a tighter game, I'm more likely to call with (A2)34 in EP to try to get more people to the flop. However, if it's a wild game with people calling with ATC, I'm more likely to raise these type of hands for value since I expect to get a few callers and I'm confident in my post-flop play.

If I have junky aces, like AA(67), I'd be more likely to raise if unopened in EP in a tighter game, but limp in a loose, more passive game.

There are also some marginal hands that may be playable with a limp with in MP, such as (24)78 or (KQ)Q7. I don't think they play as well in aggressive games and should be folded if there's a good chance of a raise behind me with multiple callers. I think these types of hands play better in loose passive games where you can see a flop cheaply, and will get called down by worse after hitting the flop.

I've taken to limping a lot of A2 hands in early position because it genuinely seems wasteful to drive people out with them. I find it more profitable to take my chances against several hands where I can win part of a big pot than go heads up vs. the BB and play for a small one that is often chopped or doesn't get to showdown. There's a lot of money to be made when you have the only nut low and 4 guys are fighting for the high. That all probably applies less to high stakes games where I imagine people don't limp as wide.

In limit with split pot, raising pre-flop with many callers frequently leaves many with pot odds to continue after flop and turn.

But that only means that it's easier to realize equity. Thus it favors hands with better pre-flop equity, correct?

If there are 5 people in the hand, how high of equity pre-flop do you think you can have?

Why ask when you can check it yourself at propokertools? Or are you saying that equity edges are so insignificant that you shouldn't push them?

I guess an edge is worth pushing. What would you do if you had Ac2cAh3h, capped preflop with 5 players in. Flop comes down 9dTdJd ? fold?

Sounds like a good idea to me. Why is that a relevant question? Would it be better to not push equity pre? I am asking honest questions btw, I have no idea about O8.

Well, yeah. But that example you cite is extraordinarily unlikely.

AA23ds specifically will have like 35% equity in the 5-way hand, which is double the equity of each of the other players. Such an advantage is really, really, rare in O8, so I would hope that even players who like limping in many scenarios would advocate for capping here.

And the exact flop you mention drops your equity all the way down to about 2%. You generally shouldn't fold a lot on the flop getting more than 20:1, but this is a rare circumstance where you can do so without a second thought.

Yikes—these seem like trouble hands to me. I have certainly played them in the past, but I'm trying to stay away from them now.

(24)78 ranks 50.0 on ProPokerTools.
(KQ)Q7 ranks 51.0.

These rankings are similar to those of Q7-offsuit (54.0) and J3-suited (51.0) in Hold'em.

I do, however, agree with your comments on (A2)34 and AA(67).

In PLO/8:

Limping in general is fine, but not optimal sometimes.

You have to think about what you're trying to accomplish. All this talk about preflop equities is not important with full or deep stacks. What's important is having the nuts in multiway pots and playability of the hand. Trying to find the percentile rank of KQQ7 is pointless if you don't know how things are playing postflop.

Raising is good if you'll get called by dominated hands that will pay you off postflop. If you're getting folds, you want to limp or raise less. A2 needs some volume to make it pay off. It plays poorly heads up. Obviously A2KQ plays well, but not weak A2 hands. If you're only winning half the pot, or worse a quarter, then you need better odds and more volume for the similar situation in Holdem.

That is not necessarily correct. When you raise and everyone folds you are making 150evbb/100.

The cash games I find in MI, limping is a way to get to play some of the middle of my range, because I know nobody is ever going to raise. Examples of those hands include 2 wheel cards + 2 broadway, 2 wheel + Middle-ish pairs, 3 unsuited broadways, etc.

I like what people are saying about limping A2's in early position, but I generally just raise (even at the tighter games) because getting folds is still equity.

Out of curiosity where do you play in Michigan?

You have plo8 live games in Michigan???

Currently, I play 4/8 HK every Sunday at Gun Lake Casino just south of Grand Rapids.

I used to travel up to Soaring Eagle to play the same game on Fridays, but that game only goes until about 7PM nowadays. I can't get there quick enough after work.

I hear Firekeepers also runs 4/8 HK on Saturdays, but it starts at 9AM and only lasts until about 4PM.

I was referencing limit Omaha8, but there is (maybe not anymore) a 2/5 PLO8 game at Gun Lake Casino on Mondays. I played it a few times, but I'm not sure if it's going anymore.

Hopefully it was obvious that I meant folding out hands you want to call, not folding out everyone. But also, you can do better with a big hand and a big pot where people make mistakes postflop than you can just picking up the blinds with a big hand. Example: in Holdem my long term profit with AA is greater than 1.5 BB.

It wasn't obvious, but also I wanted to make the point that you need to beat 1,5evbb per hand, which is certainly not a given with many good hands. Certainly AA in NLHE has a way higher winrate, but equities run closer in o8, so not sure if that's so relevant.

Yes, will end up winning more, but also inducing more variance.