Would anyone teach me the nuances of going from NLHE to Microstakes PLO Hi?

wouldn't mind picking this game up, sometimes I need to play something different than nothing but NLHE day in and day out.

I've been playing NLHE for 4 years, and by my estimates, probably put in somewhere close to 1 million hands over the course of my lifetime.

Also maybe Hi/Lo might be worth learning but I think for now it might be best to keep things simple.

Everyone tells me until I master NLHE I shouldn't even attempt to play PLO.

I have skype, was hoping someone might teach me a few differences between PLO and NLHE beyond the obvious.

Also how does say the worst hand in PLO which I might assume is 2222 vs double suited AAKK hold up all in PF?

2222-QQQQ are drawing dead against AAKKds because they can't improve (all the 2s are out of the deck, drawing dead to a flush or a straight because two cards from your hand must play, etc).

One of the biggest logistical challenges with PLO is the variance and associated BR. Most people transitioning from NLHE to PLO either have an endless bankroll where they are overrolled for even the highest games offered by their casino/site, or they get staked, or they move down a couple of stakes. Unfortunately with the personal/financial issues going on with you right now, PLO is like the nut-worst thing for you right now.

I def. don't recommend letting PLO8 be your introduction to H/L games. There's too much else going on if you're not already a solid PLO player. I recommend playing 7-stud H/L until you really understand the opening ranges and their purpose.


PLO is a different game than NLHE.

Being an excellent NLHE player is a positive sign that you are capable of the type of reasoning and discipline needed to be good at PLO, but it's not a requisite or a guarantee.

Understanding ranges is far more complex in PLO... 4 cards instead of 2 means that there are a lot more combos to understand and play. Unfortunately, those combos don't fit into a nice square grid like 2 card hands do.

River ranges to call a big bet are equally frustrating when you transition from NLHE to PLO. Having the 2nd nuts might as well be a pure bluff when there's a b/r on the river. Calling with the 3rd nuts or worse is probably going to be a loss against most players. That amplifies the discipline you need to succeed at PLO.

It's hard to convince yourself that if you have the nuts OTT you should be betting big and raising a ton, but w/o a solid redraw for the river, you can often find that your turn nuts has turned into a middling hand OTR... and you have to fold after you've committed so much to the pot on the previous street. Was it wrong to bet/raise OTT? Prob. no. You had the nuts. You were forcing Villain to pay for his draw. Unless his draw was so strong that he was still getting a good price, then bet/raise was the correct play.

This makes for a very high variance game that will require hundreds of thousands of hands to establish a baseline of performance on your part. It can take years to even know whether or not you're a winning player. For me, this sounds like pure hell. Other people find it ridiculously exciting and worth it.

I'd say there's little to lose if you play a few sessions at the lowest stakes and try to play super-conservatively, acknowledging that your current skills are super-weak.

If it's exciting and fun, then keep it up. If it seems like a roller coaster from hell, then stop.