Diese Frage richtet sich vorallem an die Langzeit FLO8 spieler.
Ich habe grade ein wenig bei 2+2 und bei deuces cracked in den foren gelesen bezüglich O8. Da habe ich das hier gefunden.
Is shorthanded FL Omaha8 worth playing?
What I mean is, can you have the same expected winrate in this game compared to, say, LHE (under the assumption of similar skill)?
Now, quite a few advocates of Omaha8 suggest to only play full-ring. For example, Bill Boston's advice on how to play a 6-handed Omaha8 game is "Go home or go broke!" That sounds a bit radical but he might have a point. Sure, if the game is really loose it might be worth playing. But too frequently the flop is just 2- or 3-handed and often you have to split the pot even if you win. I think the problem is that equity differences are just not that big, even if you are playing against one really loose player. And at stakes of 3/6 or 5/10 the rake is an issue as well.
So, I keep wondering if I shouldn't rather play LHE. I started out with that game and can achieve a good winrate. But I must admit that I really like to play O8 (more so than LHE). Right now I don't have the same expectation with O8 compared to LHE. But I don't play that game for so long yet (I played a few thousand hands some months back and just started again). Maybe I will become better. But my gut feeling keeps telling me that even with better skills it will never be as profitable as LHE.
Was sagt ihr dazu?
Ist FLO8 SH unprofitabel und ich sollte mit FR anfangen?
Wie sieht es im Allgemeinen mit der Profitabilität von FLO8 auf lange Sicht aus? Hat jemand irgendwelche Graphen oder Werte (BB/100 etc.)? Braucht man einen hohen Rakebackstatus um guten Profit zu erzielen?
Mir macht das Spiel schon sehr spaß, aber wenn es unprofitabel ist und ich auf lange Sich nichts gewinnen kann, macht es mir natürlich auch keinen Spaß.
Vielen Dank für euer Feedback.
MfG PK
