Omaha Is better than Holdem!

  • Thread starter Thread starter riverokker
  • Start date Start date
I like holdem, but I am interested in omaha although I feel that it is not so funny
 
Omaha for variety, Hold 'em for serious poker..

Omaha is nice for variety, actions, endless outs. Hold 'em is the serious, cautious game. I l ike Hold 'em because it is the serious game for me, I've played it more, and am comfortable with it, win or lose.
 
Love Omaha, I've proably won more money in Omaha relatively to Holdem, and when Im down on my luck, you can always count on Omaha to get you through the hard times.
 

I like Holden more because I feel that in OMAHA, despite having a good hand, you can lose more easily, or it is also the case that you win with a hand that has not crossed your mind; At HOLDEN you have the option to study more.

 
How rare are royal flushes in Omaha?
Hit one on the flop a couple days ago in an ACR freeroll
Shame it wasn't real cash. A couple different people did huge bets and I just called behind them
 
dlam said:
Been playing PLO high and it’s harder to bluff with small bet at the river. As there are lot of decent hands at the river that will call and it’s hard to figure out a bluff as player can have so many 4 hand combo that you can go back and figure it out like you can in hold em. It’s more of a calling game
Click to expand...
Omaha is such a difficult game for bluffing as its harder to put people on hand ranges and with it being pot limit most good players tend to almost always make those calls
 
riverokker said:
Which game do you like better?
I love Omaha 4 cards are better than 2!
Click to expand...







I prefer texas, because it is difficult, I think that even more pleasant too.









ZPfBTNanAAAAAElFTkSuQmCC




[COLOR=rgba(0, 0, 0, 0.54)]



[/COLOR]
 
Omaha is good, but much harder.
Four cards in hand and you can use two cards.

Holdem is easier.
 
Omaha is easier, cos anytime you just need to see the best possible hand (there are too many cards) and have a strategy to win it.
Holdem is more... aggresive. Less cards give more combinations, so it's more difficult to oversee what people have and what they want to get.
 
Hey,
Omaha can be very difficult especially if you're playing Hi/Low
There is definatly more action but then again you could be drawn out on a good hand.
 
Hold'em is the main game for me. I've tried playing Omaha several times, but there are more combinations. It is difficult for me.
 
Love Omaha but the varience is huge, need a big bankroll and a good bankroll managment to play it profitably. Also Omaha can tilt you like crazy, have to be carfull unless you play for fun.
 
HL

Hold'em does not change. Hold'em is more academic. Therefore, only Hold'em.
 
Omaha is better than Holdem!

I love playing Omaha more than Holdem because you can make more money playing Omaha. I have found playing Omaha, my Holdem game came better.
 
It is a much more draw heavy game. When people a complete wrap and you have top
set with no flush draw, I don't like my hand. I used to PLO 8 or pot limit. It was an
game blinds were 5-10, min buy was $200 , and the pots ran in the thousands. If I was
lucky, I brought 3 min buys, I could be up 2000 in 5 or 6 hours. The game is long gone now. I seen aggression in that game like no other. And poeple will do their stacks with AA and 2 good cards if they can get it heads up.
 
I love me some PLO. No gamble, no future. It's easier to get involved in pots and you're not always having to nit fold like in NLH. Atleast in PLO the most someone can raise is the size of the pot generally giving you great odds preflop depending on position. PLO is my go to.
 
Omaha is better, by far.
Just kidding, both games are just perfect.

And we can never forget Omaha is not only about PLO. We have FLO, FLO8, PLO8, NLO8. So is a great universe of possibilities. NLHE HU have insane volume but i'm enjoying playing more PLO HU, believe me or not.
 
Back
Top