OK. if im truly a newb what numbers would you suggest to play tighter with?

And i want to play 6 max even though it may be better for me to play FR at the moment because of the availability of tables. what (roughly) would you suggest my VPIP and PFR should be at a 6 max game for a newb?

We suggest playing very tightly while watching very carefully in a full ring game for newbs to Omaha-8 in order mainly to minimize their losses and maximize their exposure to the game while they're learning. If you don't want to follow that advice, then that's up to you.

Also, it's fun and easy to play Omaha-8 loosely, but perhaps difficult to play a disciplined game. I think it may be useful for newbs to make sure they truly can play a very disciplined game if needed. Perhaps sticking to rigid rules forces some undisciplined individuals to learn self discipline while playing Omaha-8 poker. Perhaps that doesn't apply to you.

Your case is complicated because you're evidently not new to poker (although you may be relatively new to Omaha-8 poker).

What makes me think you're not new to poker is you made the following post in the VPP milestones thread:
If that's what you insist on doing, then good luck to you. You don't need my permission to play where you want to play.

As a true newb, I don't think you should be in that game at all. I think if you follow my advice, you'll learn better in a full ring game.

But if you insist, what your VPIP and PFR should be depends on what you truly want to accomplish.

Assuming you want to win money and also learn the nuances of the game, there's a sort of trade off. Simplistically, to win money find a game with opponents you can beat and beat them. That will win you money. Simplistically, to learn the game better, play tougher opponents and learn from their example. That will teach you the game. (I hope you can see these are in opposition to each other - that's the trade off).

Simplistically, in order to minimize the skill advantage of your more advanced opponents, jam before the flop whenever you have a playable hand. That won't necessarily win you money, but will decrease the skill advantage of opponents who understand the game better than you do. That throws the outcome more in the hands of luck.

As a newb, voluntarily play only about 13.7% of the hands dealt, approximately one out of seven hands dealt. As a start, follow the list provided in a post above. Gradually add more hands. The starting list was intended for full ring, but since you'll gradually add more hands, the list will also work for six-max.

Pre flop raises, in my opinion, are to achieve some particular effect when it's possible to achieve that effect. For example, if you want to steal the blinds and if a pre-flop raise has a high probability of success, then raise pre-flop. As another example, if you want to isolate a particular opponent, and if a pre-flop raise will knock out another particular opponent then raise pre-flop.

I was going to write, "Don't raise just because you have a particularly good starting hand" but it occurs to me that if you're in a game where your opponents so pre-occupied with their own hands they are oblivious to your pre-flop raises and are unable to read you for a particularly good starting hand when you raise and less when you don't raise, what the heck, go ahead and get it in there when you probably have the best of it.

It all just depends on your opponents.

Buzz

Hey. Thanks for your advice buzz, it is highly valued even if it doesnt come across that way.

I played 6 max predominantly when i was learning the ins and outs of the game, before i had read much on 2+2 about it. Im now seeing that my results at 6-max then must have been a big upswing, because i cant seem to win at 6 max the past couple days no matter what i try. I have been getting coolered a lot.. but anyways ive taken your advice and have changed to fullring. I dont have much of a sample here, so i was wondering if you knew the average VPP/hand rates here at FR, from .5/1 and upwards?

What sthe biggest game you regularly see running at FR? I currently see one 15/30 table going, and its been going for hours now. i think i saw it the other night too... im assuming thats the highest people play FR?

As for your comment about me knowing about poker, yes i do, but you took the wrong context from the post of mine you quoted from that thread, when i said i made 18,000 last year i was talknig in tersm ov VPP's. not cash. in terms of $ i roughly broke even last year. (However i havent had a consistent database to properly reference that, but its my best guess).
I do however know poker well, I learnt the game when i was 7, playing a video game i had for the super nintendo. the poker variant it had then was NL 7 card stud however. I Played a lot live in the local casino between the time i turned 18 and the time i left for university, (about 10 months) and made a decent amount during that time. (that was 3 years ago now though). I went to uni, was too far away from a casino to travel to, and my internet connection to stars and FTP sucked, so i pretty much only played the student poker stuff. I carried on spending my money like i was doing before i left for uni (when i was spending a lot of my casino winnings) and ended up getting into a load of debt, so i got a job. Jobs are pretty few and far between here atm, and as such it took me a year to get one (getting into worse debt along the way). The first job that came along was a job working as a poker dealer in the casino, night times only, dealing poker. I couldnt beleive my luck at the time. However, working 40 hours a week and trying to keep up with uni as well didnt work out too well. I ended up with a choice of carry on going to uni with no job and not afford to finish my course, or to leave uni and work off my debt, so one year down the line, thats exactly what im still doing. (although ive moved to the casino i once used to play in, so i could move back home to save a bit of money).

Anyways thats who i am lol.

You're welcome. You might get better answers to your particular questions by asking them in other places than the newb's thread. The newb's thread is to spare regular posters from reading the same beginner type questions over and over.

I don't know.
Every once in a while someone posts stats. Those kinds of posts might give you an idea. Just as in Texas hold 'em, different winning players have different styles. Some winning players voluntarily play more hands, others play fewer hands.

The supply of fresh new players with money fuels the game. As the economy tightens or continues to be tough, the supply of fresh new players with money will continue to decrease. The easy pickings in poker of a few years ago will tend to be fewer and farther between. The good money winning players tend to stay in the game while the losing players tend to lose their money or get discouraged and quit.

As a newb, I don't think you should get in a big game. I saw a $75/$150 Omaha-8 game last week in a casino I visited. I don't expect that to last.

I don't think so. I've seen higher games.

I made a careless mistake. I caught on after I posted and then went back and edited, deleting the mistake. (I think you can see the time I edited. It was before you posted a reply).

Many posters here have noted that the games are tougher now than a few years ago. Seems that way to me too.

That happens to a lot of people who think they can beat the game if they just have a spot of luck. Most lose money.

Times are tough.

It's tough working to earn a living while taking classes, studying, and dating. I had the problem too.

I worked the whole time I went to college as an undergrad but just 20 hours per week. (I had a nice fellowship for most of grad school and didn't have to work too).

Fortunately I wasn't distracted by gambling at the time. And I managed to stay out of debt.

I don't think I could have handled full time classes, dating, and working a forty hour week (although I know a couple amazing individuals who did).

If you're already making big bucks playing poker, you don't need my advice. If you're not, don't be lured by the promise of easy money.

Buzz

I had a quick question for Buzz: I've read through the entire newb thread, and saw where you advocated sticking to this starting hands guide:


A beginner's list of starting hands:

Probably only about fifteen or sixteen per cent of Omaha-8 starting hands are profitable against competent opponents, if you let the cards more or less play themselves.

If you don’t know which starting hands belong to this elite 15% of starting hands group, you’re not alone. Start by choosing any hands belonging to the following three groups:

• all hands with an ace and a deuce (but not trips),
• all hands with an ace and a trey where the ace is suited to one or more cards in the hand (but not trips),
• all hands with a pair of aces (but not trips) where at least one of the aces is suited to one or two cards in the hand.

These three groups of hands make up about 13.7% of the hands dealt, approximately one out of seven hands dealt, including some hands that are borderline and probably not profitable, but also including most of the safely profitable hands.

That's a beginner's list of playable starting hands. In a real money game, you probably won't get in too much trouble playing those hands, you'll practice discipline and learn how to play tightly, and if you keep your eyes open and stay focused on the game, you'll survive while learning and enjoying the game.

There's another more detailed beginner's list referenced in the FAQ that you might try if you're interested (Hutchison).

Buzz[/QUOTE]

This third point seems to be in direct conflict with advice you give in post 214 where a question about playing A-A-A-2 was asked, and you indicated it could be played even without suitedness (I think). I believe an example of equity vs. different hands is also provided as an example of why this is an above average hand (or at least playable).

Is this simply because of the fact that the trips are Aces? Is this an exception to the rule? Clarification would be appreciated. Thanks in advance.

Well... yes but I don't think as a beginner you should play, for example,
A, A, A, 9, even though it has trip aces. To do well consistently, you have to use good judgment, rather than sticking to rigid rules.

Yes.

And remember that list is just a simple list for beginners.

Buzz

Thank you.

You're welcome.

Buzz

any good omaha hi lo huds and trackers???

Omaha Manager or Poker Tracker Omaha both are very good pieces of software.

If your first starting PLO8, it would be much more in your interest not to use a HUD. I would focus on solid O8 theory before interpreting the witch-bones that is the HUD.

are either of these omaha trackers... free? is there any free one out there?

http://forumserver.twoplustwo.com/sh...postcount=3386

FPDB is free and open source. I've not used it myself and haven't seen it mentioned here in the O8 forum, so if you do use it maybe you could review here how you like it for O8 for us if you have time please.

Also the two main paid for versions do have free trials so you can evaluate if they are worth it for you.

Each out to a scoop with one card to come is worth just under 2% in equity, close enough for the "Rule-of-2" to be a good enough estimate.

What is the equivalent value for an out to half the pot?

When facing a bet, how does the fact that when you call and hit you only get 1/2 your call back affect the calling decision?

whitewolf, if you, for example have a nut low draw and just a nut low draw, and are calling for the nut low each out is ~1%. however you must also fator in the fact that you may be getting quartered if you do hit your low. if you knew for example, that someone else had the same nut low draw, then each out is now ~0.5%.

There are differences between Omaha or Omaha-8 and Texas hold 'em. For one thing, your Texas hold 'em opponent is less likely to be holding one or more of your outs. For another, if you're drawing to a flush, for example, you may not want to count as outs cards that make your flush but also pair the board. In my humble opinion, these differences make the "Rule-of-2" less accurate for Omaha or Omaha-8 than for Texas hold 'em.

Excellent question. Alas, the answer is a bit complex, probably too complex for the newb's thread. But since you've asked it here, I'll try to answer it here.

Your question is easier to answer for fixed-limit than pot-limit or no-limit, but in any case, if you're playing in a full game, winning with high (but not a straight) is probably worth more than winning with low. That's because of the quartering effect. It's called "quartering" but it should be called "fractionating" since sometimes you'll get sixthed for low and more rarely you'll get eighthed for low.

When you're dealt a hand containing one ace and one deuce, one or more of your opponents in a full nine handed game will also have been dealt a hand containing at least one ace and at least one deuce about two times out of five. In other words, you figure to get fractionated, assuming your opponents have not folded hands that would tie you for low, roughly two times in five (about 34.7% by only one opponent, about 4.2% by two opponents, and about one time in a thousand by three opponents).

(A good approximation for getting fractionated in a full game is 2/5. Two times in five when you make low using an ace and a deuce from your hand, another opponent in a full game (nine handed) will also have been dealt a hand containing an ace plus a deuce).

In a fixed-limit game, when there are already 8 big bets in the pot, starting on the third betting round, and estimating you and one opponent will each put in one more bet on both the third and fourth betting rounds,
• when you scoop, you'll win 10 big bets.
• when you win for high-only, you'll win 4 big bets.
• when you win for low-only, because you'll get fractionated two times in five, you'll average 4*3/5+1*2/5=14/5 or 2.8 big bets.

So if a scoop out wins 100% of the pot, an out for high-only when there probably will be a split with low is worth ~40% and an out for low-only is worth ~28%. (I emboldened that sentence because it's the short cut answer to your question).

I don't think that way.

I think of the third and fourth betting rounds if I make my draw (and just the third betting round if I miss).

"call and hit" implies both third and fourth betting rounds.

And then I think of getting 100% of my own bet back if there's an even split, but getting nothing additional from my opponent, and thus simply getting half of what was in the pot after the second betting round. If I'm reasonably sure my opponent is not going to fold, I'm basically gambling to win half of what was in the pot after the second betting round, and my stake, assuming I will fold if I miss my draw on the river, is what it will cost on the third betting round.

This is obviously complicated when there is more that one opponent. And the amounts are going to be not exactly the same, depending on how much is already in the pot after the second betting round, and how much it will cost on the third betting round.

What happens frequently is you'll have some outs for scoop and some outs for either high or low. I count the outs for low as worth about three tenths and outs for high-only as about four tenths of the value of a scoop out. And I don't count some cards one way or another (as outs, partial outs, or bricks).

To further complicate matters, sometimes I might be drawing with several different possibilities, including a non-nut (perhaps second nut) flush draw and a straight draw. I wrote an article about that recently, but it's not really newb's thread material.

Buzz

Do you have a link to that article? I' be interested in reading it.

I wrote a couple of recent articles relating to the topic. One is in the current issue of the 2+2 on-line magazine. The other is in last month's issue of the 2+2 on-line magazine. I think these links will work:

http://www.twoplustwo.com/magazine/i...-or-better.php

http://www.twoplustwo.com/magazine/i...a-8-better.php

Gotta warn you. Although I try to simplify and explain the math, it's tough reading.

Buzz

I`m new to the game. What are the major things I have to learn and consider while playing O8?

http://forumserver.twoplustwo.com/44...-wells-753588/

check this thread

How to read your opponents and how to evaluate your hand in terms of the board cards and your opponents actions.

Buzz

FLO8 questions:
The magic line in the Hutchison point system is 20 for other position.
Whats a rule of thumb for starting hands as SB in a not raised pot with 3 limpers?
Is the Hutchinson system useful at all or is it misleading?

Many posters disagree with me about this, but I think the odds you're getting from the small blind are deceptive. Although you may be getting great odds for that first call, if you figure what it will cost you to get to the river, those implied pot odds are not as favorable. And if BB hasn't acted yet and raises, then you won't be getting such great odds to see the flop. After that first betting round, you have to act first on every betting round. It's not as nearly as much of a disadvantage to act first in a fixed-limit game as it is in a pot-limit game, but it's still a distinct disadvantage, more so than in Texas hold 'em.

You do have what is called "right of first bluff" when you act first, but it's not generally as wise to exercise that right in Omaha-8 as it might be in Texas hold 'em. Depending on the players involved, there's generally less bluffing by strong players in Omaha-8 than in Texas hold 'em. That's because outright bluffing in Omaha-8 doesn't generally work as well as in Texas hold 'em. (There is bluffing by strong players in Omaha-8, but I think it's generally "selective" bluffing. Maybe I'm wrong about that for some).

At any rate, my bottom line is I don't think you should generally play a hand in the small blind position that you wouldn't play from UTG. That's my opinion, and of course it depends on the situation.

(I think there are some excellent players who disagree with me).

I never used the Hutchison system myself, but I learned it because I thought it would be worthwhile knowing since some of my opponents would probably use it. A reference to it is provided in the FAQ. (There's only one letter "n" in Hutchison's name, the "n" at the end of his name.)

Over the years I've read some posts by players who swear by the Hutchison system. I think adopting the system might be useful to someone who plays too loosely.

Whatever works for you seems right to me.

Buzz

Buzz, an important reason why many players play "looser" from the SB, compared to their play from UTG, is that from UTG, and especially in a FR game, there are still many players yet to act, who may decide to raise.
Hero may want to see the flop for one bet with a speculative hand (by the way, IIRC, Mark Gregorich wrote in SSII that in O8, all hand are speculative. I didn't quite get that...), but would fold if there were a raise in front of him.
The risk of a raise behind him is much greater when he's UTG and therefore, might decide to pass on hands he would have called from the SB, considering there's only the BB left. less players that can raise behind hero's limp, less chance there will actually be a raise, and more chance he will get to see a flop for the minimum, as he wished from the beginning.

Good point.

Good point.

Good point.

Thanks for a well reasoned and ably presented dissenting point of view. As I stated in my response, everyone doesn't agree with me.

Not to be stubborn, but my advice for newbs when posting the small blind is Don't generally play a hand in the small blind position that you wouldn't play from UTG. I think that will save newbs money and grief.

Buzz