Bill_Hollorian said:Every game gets boring for me.
What I try to do is find something new about the game when I get bored. Holdem, Omaha, etc. are so complicated that when I get bored I try to blame myself. Each game has a different way of gathering and processing information. Explore the games intricacies, find one new way to make a positive result. a new squeeze play, a way to capitalize on an evolved play, etc.
When you think the game is boring, look inward.
-Bill
Stu_Ungar said:didnt someone once describe NLHE as
'hours of boredom punctuated by moments of sheer terror'
NuRelic said:It can greatly depend on the player and their style. But I don't really like the way the question is phrased, I'd rather see it read, "Is Omaha Hi/Lo more challenging than Hold 'em?". The answer there is a resounding YES!
There are a greater variety avenues for you and your opponents to travel down and reading the board is all-important. Likewise, getting a handle on your opponents playing style can really dictate your profitability. I like both games equally and I'm rarely board with either, but if I get distracted while playing Hold 'em I generally don't get lost where as if I get distracted while playing Omaha I can easily find myself screwed before I even realize it.
slipknot4life said:Omaha h/l is an action game, and if u like to play alot of hands that is the game. Hold'em, to be a winning player or to win tourneys you need allittle more paitience to wait for good hands to play, so sometimes it can get boring. But play what ever your having fun with.
slipknot4life said:Omaha h/l is an action game, and if u like to play alot of hands that is the game. Hold'em, to be a winning player or to win tourneys you need allittle more paitience to wait for good hands to play, so sometimes it can get boring. But play what ever your having fun with.
OzExorcist said:I find it's got a much different character to regular PLO, which has more of a reputation as being a degenerate action game.