Tight Poker

[happycamper374]

I'm thinking I might want to give it a try.

[sfustsh]

Ray Zee's High Low Split is a good place to start

Amazon

I haven't read it but it's the bible for a lot of players, apparently.

It should be noted that, omaha, while hard to master, is easy to beat.

[happycamper374]

It should be noted that, omaha, while hard to master, is easy to beat.

That's what I've heard, and that's what's driving my interest.

[ugignadl]

It should be noted that, omaha, while hard to master, is easy to beat.

That's what I've heard, and that's what's driving my interest.

Ha! Ask Merv.

[biggle10]

Good primer.

http://www.o8poker.com/

[caffiend]

I haven't read it but it's the bible for a lot of players, apparently.

I honestly don't know what people see in it. It was one of the worst poker books I've read. The title's a real misnomer, Obvious Shit About Split Pot Poker would have been better. The only bright spots I can see is that it covers current games and it's very similar to other 2+2 books. If you're in love with everything they publish, you'll probably consider it ok.

One thing to watch out for is most of the book is duplicate text. They covered both games by doing two books in one, rather than a large section of concepts plus smaller chapters for each game. That means if you read it front to back you're looking at seeing the same thing all over again.

I honestly think Super System II is a better introduction to Omaha. The Stud/8 section in it's one of the worst in the book though. For anything besides the basics it may be a toss up. There will be the occasional nugget of wisdom in both. Super System II has much better writing and illustrates the key concepts better while Ray Zee's book probably contains a few nuggets of wisdom that you may otherwise miss.

Writing style aside, your poker background will also color your perceptions. I think the 2+2 one is heavier on general split pot concepts, making it more appealing to people who haven't played split games before. The Cardoza one focuses much more on the actual mechanics of the games, which likely makes it more appealing to people who just want advice on Omaha.

[sfustsh]

While I haven't read Ray Zee, I am not a fan of 2p2 publishing. Most of their books are basic to me now. (GOD I would love to read a book that REALLY helps my game one of these days).

Having said that, I know I am not the only person on this forum who knows a little something about Omaha 8. It's a very mathematical game, better tailored to the analytic mind than the psychological one.

Post hands. This thread has made me think about going back to Omaha.

Frankly I think more people need to stop and evaluate what their strengths as a poker player are. I can not believe that everyone's best game is no limit hold 'em. Each game is tailored to a different set of strengths. Think about what those strengths are and play the game that is tailored to them, not hold 'em just because everyone else does too.