I'm pretty new to omaha 8 and am looking for some coaching to get the basics right.
I checked the coaching forums but I don't think there's anything other than holdem on offer in there.
I'm a professional mtt player so I'm familiar with the rules and some of the basic strategies in plo/nlo8, but im bored of holdem and having played <100 o8 mtts in the last few weeks i can't help but notice how horribly bad people are ( or at least it seems so to me ) even in mid stakes decent mtts such as the sunday 82$. So i guess these are massively +ev still.

So yeah.. i suppose its been asked a hundred times before but, any recommendations or at least advice on where to look?

We don't allow advertising coaching services in this forum. My understanding is the 2+2 forums are set up so that posts offering coaching services belong in the coaching forum.

However, I don't see anything wrong with asking for a coach, and then someone reading this who is interested in coaching you can contact you privately. Or place your request in one monthly miscellaneous thread and anyone who is interested can contact you privately.

Beware, however, of getting scammed, or getting a coach who doesn't know his/her stuff.

Maybe a better way is to read the threads pertaining to the area(s) where you feel you need coaching and send a private message to someone you think can do a good job coaching. Please don't ask me... I'm not interested in providing private coaching.

We don't allow anyone to offer recommendations for coaches in this forum, I don't want the responsibility for recommending a coach, and I'm simply not interested in taking on the responsibility of coaching myself.

Post some hand histories and/or ask questions in this forum if you like. You'll probably get differing opinions and perhaps you'll get some useful advice. And if you like the way someone responds, you can contact him/her by private message and ask if he/she is interested in coaching.

Beware of getting scammed.

I hope this advice helps.

Buzz

Does anyone know the standard swings you should expect in LO8? I've been playing a bit of .5/1 6-max and full ring (mostly 6 max though), and my biggest swing in 700 hands (lol sample size, I know) is 35bb atm. It seems that every time I play I pretty much almost drop a buy in and then slowly grind it up to profit (23bb in total). Although this could also be because once I start losing I start tightening up.

I don't know.

I'm not aware of any "standard" for swings.

It seems to me swings mainly depend on two things.
• (1) how aggressively Hero plays on the first betting round, and
• (2) how well Hero plays relative to his opponents. For example if someone who doesn't know the game well sits down and plays foolishly, Hero generally profits, but if an expert sits down and plays perfectly, Hero generally loses (unless he plays perfectly too).

But I have no proof of that. It's just my own horse sense.

I think you should get a pretty good idea of how well you're playing in 700 hands. (I suppose you could have an extraordinary run of either bad or good luck and fall several standard deviations off the mean).

For example, if you want to know how often A2KK will win or tie low against a random, non-folding hand played to showdown, although you get a refined answer with 600,000 trials, you get a pretty good idea in just 700 trials. (It's about one third of the time, whether you run the simulation 600,000 times or only 700 times).

My guess is you play better (perhaps tighter) when you're down a buy in.

(I, on the other hand, probably play worse when I'm down a buy in, probably because I get depressed, a form of tilt - also maybe because if I get down a buy-in, I may be out classed by my opponents).

Buzz

Thanks, Buzz.

The reason I asked is because before I ever played a hand all I kept on reading was how LO8 was one of the lowest variance games, but that doesn't seem to be my experience so far. Funnily enough I just played a session, really concentrated and felt I was playing my best yet I managed to drop 2 buy-ins before grinding back to round about even.

Mtter,

Contra Buzz, I don't suggest that you interpret 700 hands as meaningful in any form of poker, including LO8. Overreacting to small samples--in this case, a very small sample--is dangerous because it causes you to change your game trying to fix "problems" that are just artifacts of small sample size. Don't do that. Instead, ask about specific hands.

The scientific way to answer this question is to look at your standard deviation in your software. I haven't played online in a long time, but in live play (after accounting for the kill as a certain % of hands) I recall my SD as being somewhere around 10 BBet / hour. Suppose I have a decent winrate of 1.0 BB/hour.

One online calculator gives me a 95% confidence interval after 10 hours of play of [-69 BB, 109 BB]. This means that 2.5% of the time, I could lose more than that despite being a winning player.

Ten hours of live play is about equivalent to 600-700 hands, so yeah, basically doesn't mean anything.

You're welcome.

I think if you play very tightly before the flop, you'll be playing starting hands that have a good chance to make the nuts, and then if you continue playing tightly after the flop, you'll be playing hands that fit the flop well and since they're hands that tend to make the nuts, you'll still be playing nut-type hands or draws after the flop.

Everybody doesn't do that when playing Omaha-8 - but if you do, although you won't make as much of a profit against strong opponents as if you play a bit more loosely, I think you will show a steady and relatively swing-free profit.

Although you might like to play that way in all games (What's not to like about having the nuts?), it's harder to do it in Texas hold 'em and various other games. (You do give up some profit by playing that tightly because you make the bulk of your profit from the mistakes of your opponents, and you have to be playing a hand to win... I don't play that tightly myself, although some posters to this forum evidently think I do).

There's a luck factor involved. And did all your opponents stay the same throughout the session, or could it be you faced stronger opponents at the start of the session than when you ground your way back to even. Or it could be that as you play your opponents, you gradually learn more about how they play than they learned about how you play. And if that is so, you may adjust better to the play of your opponents than they adjust to your play.

Lots of possibilities.

Buzz

I agree that 700 hands is a small sample size. However, I think you always should adjust to your opponents, and part of that is modifying your own game according to how well you're doing. For example, if something doesn't work, don't ascribe it to "bad luck" and keep trying it. Different opponents are different. Something that works well against one group of opponents may not work as well against a different group of opponents. Part of having good card sense is keeping your antennae, your feelers, out there to pick up signals, and then continually modifying your game to take advantage of your opponents mistakes.

I agree that it's a good idea to ask about specific hands.

I think at a full table in a brick and mortar casino you play of the order of 25 hands of Omaha-8 per hour. In other words, you play roughly 100 hands per four hour session. Thus 700 hands corresponds to about seven four-hour sessions.

Buzz

I don't know about standard, either. Here is a thread from 4 years ago that has some information about what can be expected.

http://forumserver.twoplustwo.com/44...gs-lo8-902739/

I've always thought that FLO8 could have a good deal of variance, especially if you play in games with lots of players giving action. These games can provide good value, but the less skillful the player pool, the more likely a crazy river card will hit an opponent perfectly.

Hi, guys!

One way I found to improve my game (I started to play poker 6 months ago) is through zoom poker $2. I have HM and leak buster, which I think is a wonderful tool, so I do my best to put my stats and my ranges the closest possible suggested by leak buster, according to the position I am playing at a given moment. I dont do this for Money, of course, since the limit is the lowest possible. I do this to improve my game, and I do with only one table opened. I usually do this 3 times a week for 1 hour. Because the limit is so micro, I think it is a cheap way to improve my game.

My NLHE has improved since them, at least Im +EV in NLHE micro. Im improving in tournaments too.

Im going to do that with PLO and O8, but I have a doubt, specially for the more experient guys:

because many pots are Split between hi and lo, do you guys think it is possible to play at least a break even cash game in O8?
I mean, when the pot is Split (splited? :P ) both players lose Money for the rake, right?

Thanks in advance!

Bruno

Yes. It is. You have to either be an excellent player or lucky (or both).

Yes. If you were playing in a heads-up cash game of Omaha-8, you would both lose money (because of the rake) when the pot was split.

However, heads-up cash games of Omaha-8 don't make much sense and are virtually unknown in brick and mortar casinos.

I have played heads-up Omaha-8 in tournaments (where no rake is taken).

Buzz

Without some seriously awful play going on, plo8 cash would be brutal with all the rake and splits. I've always thought plo8 is better suited for tournaments as a result and plo high better for cash. There generally is some pretty poor play going on in plo8 cash games though

Hi guys,

I've some questions (pokerstars related):

1) I've seen that there are some NLO8 steps(1-2-3) but I was wondering if somebody has some experience with them and if they run often? I've seen the step1 pop up once in a while, but I'm not sure about the 2nd and 3th.

2) this steps could be an ideal jump to the the weekly NLO8, but I was wondering how the level of play was in this event. (in comparison to the sunday million by example) Are there only players who are specialized in O8 or are there also just to get some variance in there hold'em lifes?

3) If I would decide to study the NLO8 game for STT and MTT purposes, what do you recomand. It looks like there is very little information about this (especially compared to other variants), or i just don't know where to look for it.

4) How do you see the future for NLO8, will it die out or do you see it become more popular?

5) Are there any televised events of NLO8 or other fun vids to watch about this topic?

6) Thanks alot and a marry christmas to all!

Hi.

Merry Christmas to you too.

I don't really know anything about NLO8 steps.

So I googled "pokerstars NLO8 steps" for you. The following might be of interest to you:

http://www.cardrunners.com/poker-vid...8-predator006/

Buzz

Which is softer for American players right now, FLO8 or PLO 6 max? Ty

Hello! I play on bovada and this is the rake they take...
http://poker.bovada.lv/getting-started/poker-rake

Could a player beat the rake at the lowest levels when playing a lot of HU and shorthanded aka table starting?

If so, how many big bets are needed for a level?

Appreciate the help!

Hi, I'm new to the 2+2 and relatively new to omaha hi/lo. I would like to recognize low hands more quickly when the board has 4 or 5 low cards. It takes too long for me to recognize who wins/splits the low. Are there any exercises, or advice, or threads to read that could help?
I finally understand the concept of "live cards," thanks to a thread from 2+2, and any other relevant threads or information regarding reading low hands would be greatly appreciated.

Hi.
You always have to play two cards from your hand and three cards from the board.

If the board has four wheel cards, then the player with two wheel cards who has the lowest wheel card not represented on the board wins with the best "live" card.

For example, suppose the board is A345K,
• player A has K642, and
• player B has K62A.
Who wins low?



If the board has three wheel cards plus another low card, then a player with both unrepresented wheel cards wins. But if nobody has both unrepresented wheel cards, then the player who can use the lowest non-wheel card wins. If nobody has two unrepresented low cards, then the player with the lowest low card plus any other low card wins with the best "live" card.

For example, suppose the board is A347K,
• player A has K752,
• player B has KQ72,
• player C has KQ65, and
• player D has QQ62,
Who has the best low hand and who has the second best low hand?

Buzz

Thank you Buzz. That is perfect.

I can only speak to plo 6-max and plo8 as I have not played flo8. On carbon the plo cash games are great through $0.5/$1. On bovada they are decent but the whole anonymous thing hurts me I think...if you can play optimally vs a range of average players that you will run into you should do fine though.

Your best bet is going to be just deal out boards and hands and practice reading the low. However, I suggest creating a stripped deck with all the aces through sixes, but only one each of sevens through kings. That way you'll be focusing on the most confusing situations, particularly those with four cards to a six-low on board.

Try to rank-order the hands (you can deal until you exhaust the stripped deck) ASAP, say ten seconds or less. Then test your intuition by working out, with pencil and paper if needed, the actual five-card low each hand is playing.

====

Note that the most confusing situations are those where four or five cards to a six-low (or less often a seven-low) are on board, and someone has to play a higher card from their hand to make a "two-card low." (Two-card low means two cards from the hand not matching the board play for low.)

This situation is confusing because usually but not always, we're used to a two-card low beating a one-card low. But when four to a six-low are on board, that goes out the window.

E.g., board:

643AQ

Hand X: A239
Hand Y: AKK7

Do you see why a six-low playing 2A (live deuce; you could also play 32 with no difference) in Hand X beats a seven-low playing 7A in Hand Y?

Sounds like this is review for you, but deal out these situations until you can nail them instantly. Well, usually. The Omaha 8 low gets the best of all of us occasionally.

Hi, I started playing 08 about six mths ago and enjoy it very much, but do you think I should have played Omaha first? Because I always seem to be going for the low pot.

I was shoved the low pot, but was this right?

Hero: 765 (4A)
"Loser": 765 (32)

Under the theory that the number 76,541 is bigger than 76,532, isn't the 32 the low?

Nope. You explained why.

Anyone at the table noticinghas an ethical obligation to point out the problem. Omaha players are nits so usually someone notices, but occasionally miracles happen.

No. Starting with O8 is fine, in my opinion. I myself started with O8.

That's a common mistake. Your aim should be to scoop more often than your fair share.

That's easier said than done and, in my humble opinion, generally takes some finesse. You have to manage to coax opponents into folding hands that would split the pot with you. And that involves "playing poker." The game is Omaha-8, but you have to "play poker" to be long term successful.

The game seems to be evolving, continually getting more and more difficult, but there's still room to be successful. You start your way to scooping by trying to use good judgement in starting hand selection. First learn what "good" starting hands are and what "poor" starting hands are. An immediate problem is once you get started playing, you'll see that the way your opponents are playing has some effect on determining what a "poor" starting hand is. Another immediate problem is you want your starting hand to fit well with the flop.

But these complex factors contribute to making Omaha-8 a nifty game, well worth learning, in my humble opinion.

Good luck to you.

Buzz