General PLO

[Rexas]

Basically, I've not had a winning week this year. In fact, I don't believe I've ever posted a winning week in my life at anything online poker related. I have like 25k PLO hands saved on my computer, is anyone willing to go through them with me? I can't understand what it is that I'm doing that is so, so wrong compared to what everyone else seems able to do.

[doubleup]

The rake is pretty mental at low limit zoom plo and there aren't really enough bad players.  So many 60/40s and 40/60s with 5% rake being clipped from the winner.

[Rexas]

The rake is pretty mental at low limit zoom plo and there aren't really enough bad players.  So many 60/40s and 40/60s with 5% rake being clipped from the winner.

I've been told this before, but it's got to still be beatable, right? I mean, it's plo10, even with the high rake you should be able to win at like 2bbs per 100 with a decent understanding of the game?

[doubleup]

The rake is pretty mental at low limit zoom plo and there aren't really enough bad players.  So many 60/40s and 40/60s with 5% rake being clipped from the winner.

I've been told this before, but it's got to still be beatable, right? I mean, it's plo10, even with the high rake you should be able to win at like 2bbs per 100 with a decent understanding of the game?

To do that you have to beat the game by 15-20bbs before rake.  I really think you have to be pretty good to make a profit including vip stuff.

[SuuPRlim]

Hit me on Skype we'll chat

[GreekStein]

yup the rake really sucks for low stakes PLO.

[rfgqqabc]

http://forumserver.twoplustwo.com/153/high-stakes-pl-omaha/no-money-plo-everyone-raked-1315665/

Furthermore my friend bought a ridiculous number of iPoker PLO100 hand histories. I can't remember the exact number but the amount of winners was tiny over any sort of sample size. I wasn't joking when I said its unbeatable. I'd imagine plo10 is about as close to impossible to win at as it gets. The rake must be an absurd bb/100

[SuuPRlim]

.25/50 and .50/1 PLO are 100% beatable, most people who can beat it just don't need to.

I'd back myself at odds on to win over 100,000 hands

[rfgqqabc]

.25/50 and .50/1 PLO are 100% beatable, most people who can beat it just don't need to.

I'd back myself at odds on to win over 100,000 hands

If I had the money to make it worth your while to play 500k hands of 50plo I would take you on.

[SuuPRlim]

God I'd be so bored after 200k hands lol I'd prolly just spew my nuts off lol.

[gouty]

Have a think about different BR strategies with low stakes PLO maybe? I get bored online super easy so I just short stack these and move up levels min buying each time. It's a spin but that's what you want paying that rake.

One of the advantages of ss PLO is that better players will actually avoid playing pots with you due to lack of value. This is exactly what you want. You can even do a martingale sort of staking plan up and down the levels. It's not classy PLO but is profitable (sober). Hic.

[DMorgan]

Looking at the people that have played the most hands at any given stake is a really bad way to try and work out who has the best winrate

[DMorgan]

Looking at the people that have played the most hands at any given stake is a really bad way to try and work out attainable winrate

[DMorgan]

^^ Was supposed to be an edit

#sausagefingers

[rfgqqabc]

Looking at the people that have played the most hands at any given stake is a really bad way to try and work out attainable winrate

Need a good sample size though and that's a bunch of hands. I'm quite aware the best players will move up quickly and the guys playing the most tables will both a) have lower winrates and b) play the most hands.