Hold'em or Omaha?

  • Thread starter Thread starter wilpinsi
  • Start date Start date
I tried to play Omaha but I had difficulties. I learned to play holdem and I get too attached. So I prefer Holdem.
 
I'm more experienced with hold'em, but find I'm getting a bit bored with it at times. I really like Omaha. I'd play it more if my bankroll was bigger.
 
blott said:
PLO8 holds my interest longer.

Love to win with full houses ans straights rather than ace high or top pair.

To be honest I don't understand the fixation with NLHE.
Click to expand...
Ditto. NLHE is pretty boring.
 
Always my choice is Hold'em, and nothing will make me change my choice.
 
ответ

I only play hold'em to Omaha is also played but I don't like.
 
No-Limit Hold'em VS Omaha 😛

after a long period of playing in No-Limit Hold'em, I discovered for myself, do you think that the profit from Omaha is greater for weak players?
 
I friend of mine has the same oppinion, hes says that Omaha is easyer than NLH
 
The profit margins should be roughly the same. The winning hands are just higher in Omaha because of the additional cards to make your hand. It is rare that a pair of aces will be a winning hand...even two pair is not that strong because straights and flushes occur more often.
 
PLO easier to play than NL Holdem i think and if there is PLO8 you has more chences to win but also you can lose.
 
marakhovskii said:
after a long period of playing in No-Limit Hold'em, I discovered for myself, do you think that the profit from Omaha is greater for weak players?
Click to expand...
It really depends on how you handle variance, and your bankroll.
A small bankroll gets murdered in PLO.
If you have a temper, or react badly to losses PLO will hurt you much quicker than holdem.
 
I've always played holdem but would love to get some PLO experience under the belt!
 
NLH and Omaha they are very good
but in my personal opinion I prefer NLH
 
don't even know I always play only with this play style, I would not say that it is worse than others
 
Back
Top