Cash Game Introducing Omaha: modified limit structure? (1 Viewer)

[Beakertwang]

My group hasn’t always only played NLHE. I’d like to expose them to Omaha to get a feel for all the chasing and coolers, without everyone busting all night. Eventually, we’d switch it to PL. We usually have a $10 buy-in.

I’m thinking this:
Stacks: 25¢x20, $1x5
Blinds are 25¢/25¢
Preflop: 25¢To play, no raises
Flop: 25¢ min bet, no raises
Turn: 25¢ min, max 50¢
River: 25¢ min, max $1

Maximum lost per hand would be $2. Any issues with this?

 

[trigs]

If you really want to do something like this maybe just play limit Omaha. However, as someone who loves PLO, you are doing a disservice to the great game of omaha. It's meant to be crazy swingy and high variance.

 

[detroitdad]

I don't like it. IMO it isn't teaching anyone the game. Your simply doing $2.00 flips. Part of the game is know when to act (check, bet, call, fold), and when to get rid of the hand.

 

[Beakertwang]

If you really want to do something like this maybe just play limit Omaha. However, as someone who loves PLO, you are doing a disservice to the great game of omaha. It's meant to be crazy swingy and high variance.

That would be my goal. But most of my players barely know hold’em, so I want to introduce the game with less risk.

 

[ruskba]

Stacks are way too shallow for the blinds. Make it .05/.05 or .05/.10. If you don’t want to do pot limit, make it spread limit, max bet of $3 or $5 or something.

 

[Schmendr1ck]

I've been introducing PLO to my group with per-hand caps.

We typically play .25/.50 NLHE with $100 max buy-ins. On nights when we mix in PLO, we play with the same blinds, but there is a 40bb ($20) cap per player. Once you've got $20 of your money in the pot, you're considered all-in.

The upside of the cap is that it limits losses and allows players to get a good feel for preflop and flop play. The problem with this approach is that with a 40bb cap, turn decisions are almost always shove or fold, and there are never any river decisions. To help combat this, I'm planning to increase the cap to $30 (60bb) the next time we play.

 

[DoubleEagle]

Really bad idea. No one will be able to learn the game. If they are not Omaha players just stick with NLHE.

 

[Rhodeman77]

Agree with everyone here. You are playing way to shallow for a $10 max. Your blinds should be much smaller.

Players need to be able to bet and raise. I have played in my game were we put a cap on how much a player can put in the pot when we mix in circus games and my players like it a lot.

If you want to teach them the game without any rask then just deal out hands and boards and let them see the winners/losers and explain after the hands what makes some hands better than others.

Or play a $10 tournament. No real risk and they can learn cheap still.

 

[trigs]

Or play a $10 tournament. No real risk and they can learn cheap still.

This is a good idea. PLO tournament for one night and see how they like it.

 

[Venturalvn]

I agree with all above. Just play spread limit if you want to limit the damage per hand, but let's be honest with a 40 BB buy in does it really matter? Its going in one way or the other anyways.

 

[TroyMan]

+1 on the tournament proposal. You don’t want to modify the betting structure such that it doesn’t require real decisions to be made early and often. And you want players to get a feel for the real game.

Personally, if I wanted to get a feel for the game without risking much, then I’d rather just play with lower stakes, but keep the structure relatively to same For example, .10/.25 or .25/.50.

Perhaps another option that would not alter the game too much is a 2 raise cap instead of 3.

 

[Beakertwang]

I appreciate everyone's input. I suppose the best way is to teach the game is to play PLO, but I was trying to devise a way to introduce it so they can see how much playing Omaha sucks in a friendly social environment, and only win/lose a little money. I considered the .25/.25/.5/$1 structure as a way to play hands for a little real money (albeit only $2/hand), and get the thrill of the chase, and the agony of set-over-set losses, without the pressure of calling off pot-sized bets on the turn for their entire stack. I could play .05/.10 PLO, but that would easily play bigger than my proposed structure. Maybe that's ok, but I don't want to scare them off. Likewise, a tourney could easily bust players fast, and then

Omaha is very confusing at first. Several of our players barely know how to play hold'em. We've got a couple guys who used to deal, so they know other games, but it would be a whole new experience for everyone except a couple of us.

 

[BGinGA]

Best way to teach Hold'em players how to play PLO is in a low-risk tournament setting with re-buys. Long blind levels so that the slower play doesn't result in the escalating the cost to play too quickly. 200bb stacks, low entry fee, low re-buy fee. Limit it to two or three re-buys per player.

They will catch on faster than you think. And when you move it to cash, start with low-stakes Limit Omaha before moving up to PLO.

 

[Shaggy]

I was trying to devise a way to introduce it so they can see how much playing Omaha sucks in a friendly social environment

I disagree... and if you think it sucks... why are you introducing it?

 

[Beakertwang]

I disagree... and if you think it sucks... why are you introducing it?

That was tongue-in-cheek. I should have added an emoji, like this:

But it can be frustrating to make the transition to Omaha from hold’em.

 

[DoubleEagle]

I was trying to devise a way to introduce it so they can see how much playing Omaha sucks

Many people that play Omaha consider it more fun beacause it is a more social game. More players playing more pots, big draws and big swings on the river. What’s not to like. NLHE often puts me to sleep. :zzz: