More winners and fewer losers in PLO?

I've always been interested in the maths of poker. Short term variance can be very misleading when we rely on experiential learning. Plays that come off can seem right and those that don't we can shy away from. Maths can help us gain a more profitable understanding of the game quicker.

One stat that I read early and have since observed to be very true is that only 5% of poker players are long term winners, the other 95% feeding the economy. In my early Poker Office days I would scroll down the list of observed players overall results and eventually, sure enough, about 5% would play big volume as winners and there'd be a long tail of small users.

I also know that in NLH we can be presented with opportunities that represent large edges pre and post flop, maybe 80/20. In Omaha this is more rare, the norm being closer to 60/40 as an edge that you want to push. So what effect does this have on the distribution of winners and losers?

After a very small sample size, just over 5000 hands observed, the winner/loser split in my PokerTracker Omaha is exactly 40.06% and 59.94%. If anyone has a larger sample size, perhaps you can share with me if this phenomenon holds true. If so, inferior players can be fooled more by short term variance into thinking their strategy is good. Just look at my recent premature entries.

In terms of my recent PLO results, they have slowed down to 9BB/PTBB. Last nights session was very LAGGY and the variance massive. I dropped 2 BIs early and recovered by the end of the session.

Psst ... Don't tell anyone

Having purchased PT Omaha, I finally have an idea of how I'm going. With Badugi, HORSE and all sorts of other distractions that I allow myself, including a Tilt at NLH400 which was a disaster my bankroll just doesn't give me that view.

I've always watched risk of ruin and been happy to step down, but when I get a few extra dollars in the roll I tend to splash it about (invest it) trying different things.

The good news is that I have a broad understanding of the mechanics of a number of the games. Bad news is that I still can't retire and play full time. Hopefully I am incrementally better positioned to transition to Bobby's Big Game though. Can always dream.

So what did I discover ...

- Badugi I didn't enjoy;
- Stud potentially has the complexity I like but I can't see it ever having the $$$s to go professional;
- FLH I really enjoyed but reached levels that I outgrew my ability / potential / bankroll;
- My transition to NLH was incredibly hard but Harrigton sorted me out with a break even TAG style so I can hold my own online and in card rooms now at sociable stakes. Best case, it was only a matter of time before I hit my ceiling in a "solved" game.
- Split games I think I could get to like. Balancing scooping with nut lows is deceptively difficult. This is on hold for now.
- PLO8 combines a lot of concepts, is a lot of fun and is way too complex for me to transition to straight.

PL Omaha, I love! After only a short period I feel that I can hold my own at meaningful levels.

In September I had no real clue about PLO and had only just had my first shot at 4-tabling NLH100. Last night I 4-tabled PLO100, PLO50 and 2xPLO25 for a modest profit on all 4. How can that be? I know I'm making lots of mistakes.

I set up my PTO Categories last night - groupings of hands like Strong Aces. According to 2+2, you should be positive in all categories. I'm way off that. In fact the best hands Strong Aces I'm down almost $300. Clearly overplaying them post flop losing to flushes on co-ordinated boards and trips on uncoordinated. Like slowplaying AA in my early NLH days, I'm clearly making some very costly basic mistakes, yet after 4000+ hands I'm up over 8BB/100 - almost breakeven now on $$$s.

Now for the psst ... Online PLO must be really, really soft right now ... because I suck at that game compared to my 4 years of NLH study and experience ... or I've experienced a variance heater as a fish.

My prediction ... the games are only going to get softer. It is such a buzzy gambling game, I'm convinced that it is the game of the future.

Best of all ... it is a long way from being solved so it is intellectually stimulating.

PokerTracker Omaha

New Years are good for fresh starts. And one of mine was getting serious about PLO. I've been playing and really enjoying the game on and off for a few months now. I got the mechanics at micro stakes and quickly started playing way beyond my bankroll for the variance of the game. I decided to try and ramp up my learning curve even if it cost me a bit - which it did initially.

So I purchased PokerTracker for Omaha yesterday and instantly gained an insight. When I imported my Hand Histories I realised that I was a winning BB/100 player but a losing $ player. Needless to say that what I win at PLO25, I lose at PLO100. That said, my PLO100 is showing signs of breakeven. This is over 3000+ hands so isn't yet a statistically significant sample size.

Omaha is such a different game that I didn't know where to start looking for leaks. No starting hands dominate as much as Hold'em so your pushing smaller edges all the time. If you hate bad beats, you'll hate Omaha. If you realise that no poker beat is really that bad, you'll do well.

In my search for guidance for analysing my play, I stumbled across the best little website I've found in a while. Check this out! I wish I'd known this when I was playing NLH.

http://www.hand-histories.com/opp_prof.html

I'll write some more on PLO when I learn some more ... I really feel like I am only starting out as I now have the tool to study. I can't believe that I routinely push $$s in a single bet greater than the cost of PokerTracker and have never before purchased it.

Go figure ... or go buy!