Best places to play Omaha or Omaha Hi/Lo?

[starfall]

I'm wondering which sites are the best for playing Omaha and Omaha Hi/Lo (preferably Omaha Hi/Lo). I'm thinking more about fixed limit ring games, but would also like to know more suggestions for tournament options, too. The best games for making a regular profit seem to be the full ring games with a large percentage seeing the flop.

There seem to be only tiny stakes Hi/Lo games on Titan/Noble/CDPoker - 0.02/0.04, so they're fun to play on, but not really something that you can build up a big profit on.

pokerstars has a few games going, from $0.02/$0.04 up to $30/60 games. I haven't played on there yet - has anyone played Omaha Hi/Lo on there to be able to comment on the quality of play there? From the lobby info at the moment, it looks like the $0.02/$0.04 and $0.05/$0.10 stakes are loose, and then the next stakes with a full ring game is $15/30, with 51% seeing the flop, which is much tighter. Does anyone have any comments on whether 51% is too right to be readily profitable? The $30/60 is 41%, which I'm pretty sure is then mostly solid players, so I'm ignoring that completely for the time being.

I've played mostly on Paradise Poker and pacific poker. Paradise mainly has $0.50/$1.00 and $1/2 stakes, and with 49%-57% they're around as tight as the $15/30 games on PokerStars... I did OK on those stakes for the most part (they're what allowed me to cash out my initial starting money)... but they're definitely not the loosest games around.

party poker I fared OK on, but I can't compare their games quite so easily since they don't give the %age seeing the flop, which I tend to find an important indicator of a good Omaha game. Has anyone played a reasonable amount on Party to say how they find it compared to Paradise or Pacific?

Pacific so far is looking to be the best one to play at for profit - at the weekend I was finding the $0.05/$0.10 mindlessly profitable, because over 80% were seeing the flop, and I've had profits at $0.25/$0.50 and $0.50/$1, too, but haven't played the higher stakes.
I'm currently playing on there at $0.05/$0.10 mainly, since I cashed out most of my money from there and am building up a bankroll from just $9, so I've had to start at the lowest stakes again. The thing that got me thinking about this was that some of the time (definitely not all of the time), there were full $3/6 and $5/10 games with 75%+ seeing the flop. The total pot sizes were slightly smaller compared to the stakes, but not hugely so, suggesting that the play was almost as loose at those stakes compared to the micro stakes. For reference, the games at the higher stakes seem to come and go - they may be there for a few hours, but there's by no means a decent game going all the time there, but has anyone played the higher stakes who can comment on how they've found the profitability of playing there?

I've looked at 32red (Prima), InterPoker (Cryptologic), and a few others, and established that they don't have any decent-stakes, regular Omaha H/L ring games, but does anyone have any suggestions for sites worth playing Omaha at apart from the above-mentioned Party, Pacific, Paradise and Stars?

On the tournament side I know a lot less - I've fared best at ring games to date (although the most profitable Omaha games actually running on Noble proved to be the SitnGos, and I played a couple of nice tourneys on Paradise), so does anyone have any suggestions for good Omaha tourney sites?

 

[t1riel]

I think poker.com has some Omaha tournies.:hmmmm:

 

[Dorkus Malorkus]

Party players are worse than Stars players (both have horrid players abound at the micros though), and there are generally more LO8 games going at Party than Stars (Party only offers >.50/1 though). However, just about everything else about Party is worse than Stars (support, software, interface etc). Stars is by far the best option for tournaments, too (from $1 45-player SNGs to $1k 5-max, with most buyins imaginable in between).

There's usually a .50/1 LO8 table going at King Solomon's, and the play there is as atrociously bad as I've seen anywhere, probably becaue of the contributed rake bonus and the link to a casino ala Pacific. The software there is pretty poor though (usually circa 24 hands/hr only), and there's usually only one LO8 table running.

I guess it depends on what's most important to you, quality of opponent (KS > Party > Stars), game selection (ring - Party > Stars > KS, tourney - Stars > Party > KS), or good software (Stars > Party > KS).

 

[ChuckTs]

PS is an absolute fish tank at the micro (.25/0.5) OH8 tables...
Though i'm somehow losing money there from so many bad beats, so its a mixed blessing for me

 

[JAMILE1]

It's pokerstars for me, lots of choice as far as buy-in, ring games. Though I play mostly SnG's there are lots to choose from. check it out see how you like it, money to be Had there LOL

 

[titans4ever]

PS will pay you off even at the micro level. If you have the patience to wait for the good hands people will pay you off nicely. People there will play marginal hands preflop and then not let them go till the river since they can't figure out the nuts. Scooping is not that hard if you wait for the right preflop hands.

 

[starfall]

Stars looks tighter than Pacific, but I would be interested in trying them if I manage to work up to the higher-stakes play... and to have as a backup for when the Pacific games break up. It looks like they're comparable in toughness to Paradise, but with somewhat different stakes generally running.
On bad beats, I find it less of a problem than in HoldEm - you're only playing hands with a good chance of winning at least half of the pot. It's generally hard to push out draws, but check-raising can do that sometimes (making people call a double bet instead of just one), and when you're drawing, you can have enough outs to make raising yourself a good play in the long run, which also disguises your hand when you do hit the nut flush or full house.
In the loose games, sometimes you'll luck out, but if you're making the most of the pot in a very loose game, then you can win 1 in 30 or 40 hands that you're dealt and come away with a comfortable profit (based on play at $1/2 games and below - doubtless there are on average slightly smarter players at higher stakes). In the very loose games, even just mostly splitting can be profitable, since there are enough people contributing to the pot - on the loosest games, getting quartered can make a profit, so then if you make a low, you're set.
Party I used to play on, but like I said, I like to know the flop percentages as that's pretty key to my playing strategy, and they don't tell you that, so it's only going to be a backup site at best.

I've now moved some more of my poker funds across into Pacific, so I've now got nearly $70 in there, which I think is enough for the $0.25/0.50 game, and I'm trying to build that up to $100 for the $0.50/1.00 games... at that point it may be better to put money in Party or try King Solomons. Generally I'm finding that 20 Big Bets is enough to cover the swings in one session, but in the past I've dropped more than that before hitting a hand, so I'm being cautious in ensuring an reasonable bankroll, although my experience does indicate needing less in your bankroll than for the same stakes in HoldEm as the swings are smaller.


Thanks for the responses - I'll have to try the Stars tournaments at some point to see how I fare, although for the moment I'll look at tournaments as a sideline to the main profit-making exercise of playing ring games...

Summarising the responses, and my investigations, it looks like Pacific Poker is ideal for micro limits ($0.25/$0.50 and under), with poker stars as the alternative (it's tighter, but sometimes there won't be a game at Pacific), then for the small stakes ($0.50/$1-$1/2) again Pacific, Paradise, Party or King Solomons, and then for small-medium ($2/4-5/10) stakes Pacific, Party or Paradise, medium-high ($10/20-15/30) stakes is Party or Stars, and high stakes ($20/40+) is Party or Stars still (although above 15/30 the games look very tight, so I'm not going to want to play on them any time soon).

Pacific looks to have the loosest games (70%+ flop percentages even up to $5/10), and Party, Paradise and Stars look for be fairly comparable (~50-60& flop percentages at good times, although sometimes much worse) until you reach the top end of the stakes that site has full tables for, which should be beatable, with King Solomons possibly worth an honorable mention...

$0.02/$0.04 - Noble Poker/CDPoker/etc, Stars
$0.05/$0.10 - Pacific, Stars
$0.10/$0.20 - Stars
$0.25/$0.50 - Pacific, Stars
$0.50/$1.00 - Pacific, Party, Paradise, Stars, King Solomons
$1.00/$2.00 - Pacific, Party, Paradise, Stars?
$2.00/$4.00 - Pacific, Party, Stars
$3.00/$6.00 - Pacific, Party, Stars
$5/$10 - Pacific, Party, Stars
$10/$20 - Party, Stars
$15/$30 - Party, Stars
$30/$60 - Party, Stars

Anyone have any amendments? The order for the stakes is based on which sites have the looser players (from a quick survey), except for King Solomons which just gets an honorable mention.

 

[starfall]

Just want to add a note of warning about the Pacific games... I played Omaha for a while on Paradise and Party, and very rarely had a game completely break up - a couple of people would come and go, but on Pacific I've seen tables break up in 2 hands from a full ring to 2 players left playing, and this has happened in 2 out of the last 5 sessions, and another time when I was considering joining the game. Doesn't seem to happen much at the $0.05/$0.10 stakes, but $0.25/$0.50 upwards look to suffer from that... for that reason I'm moving my money into Stars (and to earn a sign-up bonus)... it still looks to have the loosest games, but the games at Paradise and Party didn't change so fast... the reason it's bad for Omaha is because you gradually lose bits waiting for a hand, and then make a large chunk in one go, so if the table just empties out, often you'll be down because you're waiting for that large chunk, and you'll then never get it... the Party and Stars games may be slightly tighter, but if they don't break up as readily, then it's an acceptable change.
That then, basically, puts Stars as the recommendation for any particular stakes from micro to high stakes, with Paradise for low stakes, and Party for low stakes upwards... but I'll post back with comparative experiences once I've got my money transferred into Stars...

 

[tenbob]

Nice topic Starfall. But is there much of a difference in the Rake between the different sites, i know you didnt cover it but it has to make a difference long term.

 

[starfall]

Yeah, the rake would make a difference. I think Pacific may have a slightly higher cap on their take, but the amount up to the cap is similar across most of the sites from what I've seen (although I haven't really be paying full attention).

The other option would be looking for rakeback offers. As far as I can tell, Pacific don't allow rake-back systems (although if you knew an affiliate that would offer you rakeback on the quiet, they do pay a generous proportion of their mean gaming revenue out to affiliates, so an affiliate could unofficially offer rakeback if they wanted to take the risk). Party doesn't allow rakeback, and I don't think Paradise does either, and Stars doesn't pay affiliates a %age of mean gaming revenue, so nobody can pay rakeback, so unfortunately, for the most part that rules out the rakeback systems for the main Omaha games around. As a result, there's really not much to choose between them when looking at the rake.

The remaining deciding factor then for profitability is the bonuses. Since I've already used up the Pacific and Party bonuses, that makes Stars an easy choice for me, but I haven't really compared the current offers at each site - someone else feel free to post which site has the best sign-up or reload bonuses?

 

[tenbob]

The remaining deciding factor then for profitability is the bonuses. Since I've already used up the Pacific and Party bonuses, that makes Stars an easy choice for me, but I haven't really compared the current offers at each site - someone else feel free to post which site has the best sign-up or reload bonuses?

Just to remind you Stars does not have an ongoing deposit bonus as far as im aware. About every 3 months or so they do a 20% deposit/re-load bonus up to a max deposit of $600. Bear in mind they have just finished their last re-load bonus, but in fairness they are a doddle to clear.

 

[Osmann]

Ok, I know I'm hopelessly late on this topic, but I just wanted to give some oppinions anyway. They are not on the questions you asked, but I hope they might be usefull anyway

I don't know much about what sites offer the best LO8 games, because I just recently deposited at stars, and party, but if you're playing mainly for profit, PLO8 should be the game of your choice...

The best low limit PLO8 game I have found is definately on the Ipoker-network(Titan, Noble, CD). It usually has 60-70% seeing the flop at .25-.50$ games, so you can easely make a better profit than a very good player at a 1-2$ LO8 table.
At interpoker, the tables are much harder to beat, but they give you a $100 reload bonus every month, and you can clear this with around 40 hours of play at a .15-.25 table. Besides you have 3 months to clear the bonus, the rake payed is less than the bonus(if you play tight) and most rakeback deals is NOT deducted from the reload bonus. (The difficulty of the tables vary a lot, and with this does also the time needed to clear the bonus)

If however you decide to go ahead and play LO8, don't be to concerned about the high stakes having the average player seeing 40% of the flops, becasue when/if you get very good, all tables with above 30% players seeing the flop should be easy pickings. You should be aiming to see around 18-19% flops in LO8, so 40% is actually quit high.

I haven't played much at either pokerstars nor partypoker, so I don't much about how much traffic they offer at the games, but I do know the rake is lower than on most sites. So even if you're offered a rakebackdeal on another site, you may get of more "cheap" on one of thoose sites.

 

[starfall]

That's exactly the kind of advice I'm happy to see on this thread. So far I've played mostly Limit, because half the time that I play Pot Limit I end up putting all my chips in when I'm behind...
I've yet to see any substantial amount of advice on playing PLO8 - Steve Badgers site discusses it a bit, but most sites either discuss LO8 or PLO, not PLO8... any hints? I'd be interested in learning to play PLO8 better, but I'm not quite sure where to start...
InterPoker is a reasonable option for PLO and PLO8 - I played some PLO to clear the bonus, although I was generally playing ultra-tight.

 

[Osmann]

I to have never seen a really good PLO8 guide, and I don't know of any books that deal with it either, so it's difficult to learn. But if you're playing well in LO8 games, you only need to make a few adjustments to play PLO8 well.

Avoid playing for only half the pot!!! It doesn't matter that you flop a nut low if you don't have anything going for high. So fold! I can't stress enough how important this is, because it is without a doubt the biggest flaw in most peoples game. Ofcourse you can try a "semibluff with you hand, but don't call down to the river with it. In LO8 there's no way you're folding a nut low.

Freerolling a bluff on the river is also one of the most important plays in PLO8. When you're only "entitled" to half pot, try to buy the rest of it by making a big bet. I often see somebody making a 1/4 potsized with the high nuts, but no low, when a low is possible. Or the same sized bet with nut low, but ace high for the high hand. What is that all about? They could be getting the whole pot with a potsized bet.

Learn when you are more likely to 3/4 your opponent than he is to 3/4 you. This is very much depending on the reads you have on your opponents, and you will only learn this by practising.

I would recommend using Titan or CD poker for practising your PLO8 game because they have microlimits, and the play is VERY bad. If you are yet not confident in your skills I would also recommend bringing as few moneyas possible to the table, because when you only get 1/4 of the pot it won't hurt you as much.

 

[starfall]

For plo8 Stars looks like a reasonable choice - from 0.01/0.02 limits and on those you'll get multiple callers to most raises
Played on there for a few hands and the level of play there was awful - I will have to try them some more to see how I fare, and work up the stakes.

 

[starfall]

I was looking on the Prima Poker network (32red specifically) for Omaha games, and there are some PLO8 games running quite frequently. There are also some Sit-n-Go's, although the most popular Omaha Sit-n-Go on there seemed to be No Limit... I had a play of one to see what the play was like on that... I eliminated someone with a flopped full house, which they called with just trips. Someone else had A2345 and eliminated 3 players at once when they called with weaker hands. It was therefore fairly straightforward play to get into the money, and once it was 3 players, the blinds were high and the other players didn't seem to realise that putting all their chips in with a high-only hand wasn't the best of plans... so I took 1st. I'll have to play some more on there to work out whether it's worthwhile, but while there are no limit Omaha Hi/Lo games generally on the Prima network, it may be a bit more worthwhile for PLO8 or NLO8 games.

 

[the lab man]

You can always get a game at Poker Stars, They have lots of tourneys,sngs and ring games various levels

 

[starfall]

One recommendation for PokerStars, don't bother with the Turbo NL Omaha Hi/Lo Sit-n-Gos - if you try to wait for a half-decent hand you can get eaten up by the blinds... you can't wait for a solid hand without that happening unless you also get lucky. Tried one and quickly realised that the blinds were rising far too fast to be able to wait for a hand.

 

[ChuckTs]

ya those SnGs are ideal for the marginal-hand playing aggressive player.
Unless you get lucky PF hand-wise and get some real nice starting hands, the blinds eat you up as you're watching people play all in for low with 5-2 type hands.
Very difficult to beat IMO

 

[starfall]

I tried one of the Turbos and that's exactly the kind of play - it's a game that only suits a loose-aggressive style of play. I'm not quite sure how someone would try to win regularly on those. On the other hand, there are some low-limit Sit-n-Gos in Limit, Pot Limit and No Limit Omaha/8, which look to be worth playing. I haven't played enough No Limit games to be sure what I make of them, but so far I'm in profit from playing those No Limit Sit-n-Gos.

My strategy at the moment is playing the $0.01/$0.02 Pot Limit stakes on Stars to get a dollar or 2 each short session, and then use that money to play Sit-n-Go's and see which ones I like. On the $0.01/$0.02 stakes you'll commonly get people calling with 2nd best low-only hands and the like, because they don't really care about the money, so it's pretty easy to just wait for the nut hand and then hit it and still get callers... not a huge profit, but so far $0.01/$0.02 Pot Limit is looking as profitable (and more reliably so) than $0.25/$0.50 Limit games, because you can get just as much money in with the nut hand while putting up less in blinds in the meantime.

 

[titans4ever]

I play the 1c/2c PLO8 at stars and only bring $1 to the table and am disappointed if I can't walk away with $3 to $4 per hour. You wait for the good hands and people will bet into your scoop or call pot size bets while chasing on both ends.

 

[starfall]

So far I'm seeing much the same on the 1c/2c PLO8 games on Stars... you get some really bad play, so it's an easy way to build a few dollars to take to the next level up.

Then again, I was watching a $150/$300 limit game going on Stars this morning - 4 of the players were seeing every flop and in the 20 minutes I was watching one player dropped $5000 or so... I just wished I had the kind of money to join that table, only one player was any good. Now to build the bankroll from those 1c/2c games up to those stakes... just a small jump...

 

[starfall]

As an aside for those considering trying PLO8 on PokerStars, if you want to build up a few dollars gradually to then play on the higher stakes, don't bother with the $0.02/$0.05 - the $0.01/$0.02 ones are more profitable, because you'll generally get a lot more players willing to call with just about anything, so your premium hands can often be used to double up your stack, while on the $0.02/$0.05 there may be players like that, but less often, and there is a noticeable difference between the styles of play ($0.02/$0.05 is probably even more passive pre-flop, but they know how to fold after the flop, and sometimes even before it).

On the other hand, if you want to have to use a little more skill at playing PLO8, then the 2c/5c stakes are better, as you may need to work out those times that you'll win 3/4 or probably scoop, and when you can steal a pot, and how to get someone to put you on a bluff and play back at you.

The comparison is that on the 1c/2c stakes, you can often make a profit with 1-way-only hands, because you'll generally be able to get at least 1 sucker putting into the pot, often 2, which means getting quartered often won't cost you anything, and getting half will be profitable.