SI
SI
discoversearch

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor.  We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community.  If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.
Politics : Ask Michael Burke -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?


To: Skeeter Bug who wrote (103674)3/21/2006 5:26:17 PM
From: Knighty Tin  Respond to of 132070
 
Skeets, Yup. The main reason is a hold em tournament would have 5 to 20 times as many players, which takes much longer. By the time you get near the money, you are reduced to going all in about every 5th hand or so. The other reason is that Omaha is a by the numbers game, and that's what I'm good at. Somebody will often bluff at Hold em and win with nothing, but the nuts or close to the nuts is usually out there every hand at a full Omaha table. Once you get down to 4 or fewer players, it becomes more like Hold em.

BTW, I'd take third every time for the rest of my life. <G>



To: Skeeter Bug who wrote (103674)3/22/2006 6:09:18 PM
From: Knighty Tin  Read Replies (2) | Respond to of 132070
 
Well, I had a poor day in the Omaha Tourney finishing 13th out of 42, unpaid and losing my buyin. Ugh!. I got no cards for a decent Omaha hand. I impressed myself by making it to 13th with the garbage I was dealt. <G>

I hit paydirt in the 8 AM No Limit Holdem tourney on Full Tilt. I didn't win, but I made final table and the payoff.

I then won two sit and go tourneys on Full Tilt.

And finished out of the money in the 3:30 Pot Limit Hold Em Tourney on Full Tilt. I got zero cards in this one, too.

So, I am in the black today, but my lucky streak at Omaha hit the wall.

BTW, every time I lose, it isn't because I get no cards. Sometimes I get cards and play them wrong. But I can tell the difference. <G>