Odd hold\'em structure
 

Hi,

I need some input on how to adjust to this (slightly odd) variation of holdem.

The blinds are .25/.50. The small bets are $2. The big bets are $4. THERE ARE NO RAISES --- there's only a single bet on each street.

Let's say the game is played 9-handed, with 6-7 people in for $2 preflop and 3-4 staying for the showdown.

What sort of hands are profitable in this game?

Thanks,
PP

Re: Odd hold\'em structure
 

Drawing hands (suited connectors, small pairs) go way up in value, and big offsuit cards go down in value. Big pairs become more vulnerable. I would simply play more hands, because pot odds will go through the roof.

Re: Odd hold\'em structure
 

My first thought is to either find a better game or knock some sense into the host.

If you must play in this game, play a lot of suited connectors, Axs, & Kxs. Draws would be pretty valuable in this game. Poket pairs probably don't have much value unless you trip up or the board is ragged.

TONY

Re: Odd hold\'em structure
 

Whoever says that you should find another game is dead wrong. That structure, given the level of participation is awesome.

Playing a lot of hands, w/ very little blind money in is obviously wrong except when the SB and BB always complete anyway. Since everyone else seems to be doing it...I would see many many flops w/ just about any hands that can flop made hands and raise all big cards. Since you stand to get so much action when you flop a big hand I would not worry so much about ideal PF standards.

Seeing lots of flops for 1 bet and folding when you whiff will not DQ you from being one of the guys. Playing like a nit in a 2-4 homegame will either have the effect of turning you into the beer wench or the wet blanket if not both.

Try to introduce Omaha high w/ the same blind structure. You will then get 5 to showdown.

Re: Odd hold\'em structure
 

[ QUOTE ]
Since everyone else seems to be doing it...I would see many many flops w/ just about any hands that can flop made hands and raise all big cards. Since you stand to get so much action when you flop a big hand I would not worry so much about ideal PF standards.


[/ QUOTE ]

You must have missed the part in the first post where he said there are NO RAISES allowed in the game.

Re: Odd hold\'em structure
 

Without worrying too much about the "social" aspect (playing like a nit in a home game), there are a few things I'm trying to figure out...

1) Is position important? I don't think it is, if it's a guarantee that 6-7 will go to the flop.

2) I think tight is right. It costs you less than 1 SB to play 2 full rounds. You can wait for premium hands and it doesn't cost you much to do so. But what are premium hands in this game? A7s and 66? QQ+?

3) Are speculative hands (small pocket pairs and suited connectors) profitable? If you flop a quality draw, you don't have to worry about being raised off your hand. On the flip side, if you do hit your hand you can't extract multiple bets later on.

3b) If the game suddenly got "tight", with only 3-4 seeing the flop and it usually being heads-up at showdown, do you still play little pocket pairs and suited connectors?

PP

Re: Odd hold\'em structure
 

[ QUOTE ]
I think tight is right. It costs you less than 1 SB to play 2 full rounds.
PP

[/ QUOTE ]

Just to be clear:

PF, the betting is limited to calling the $0.50 BB
Flop, the opener for $2 is the only bettor allowed.
Turn-river, the $4 opener is the only bettor allowed.

Is that correct?

I'd LOVE to hear the logic that went behind the development of this game that vaguely resembles "poker".

Re: Odd hold\'em structure
 

[ QUOTE ]
The blinds are .25/.50. The small bets are $2. The big bets are $4. THERE ARE NO RAISES --- there's only a single bet on each street.

[/ QUOTE ]

Dude, this isn't poker... It's a "card holding" contest. It basically comes down to this:
1. deal out cards
2. push in some money
3. show hands and declare winner
4. repeat

Without raises, I would seriously suggest finding another place to play.

Re: Odd hold\'em structure
 

Hi Larry,

Sorry I wasn't more clear. Although the blinds are .25/.50, the bet preflop is $2. Both of the blinds have to complete to $2 to see the flop.

PP

Re: Odd hold\'em structure
 

[ QUOTE ]
Flop, the opener for $2 is the only bettor allowed.
Turn-river, the $4 opener is the only bettor allowed.


[/ QUOTE ]

I assume that it's not just a single $2 bettor. If someone bets, you have to call the $2 to stay in the hand. (I wonder if checking is allowed, though).

Re: Odd hold\'em structure
 

Hi crackhead,

I respectfully disagree. It's not a very interesting or tactical poker game, but it's certainly more poker-y than 2-card guts or acey-deucy.

Although you can't raise, you are allowed to fold. There are wagering decisions to be made on every street. As long as my decisions are better than everyone else's, the game should be profitable.

PP

Re: Odd hold\'em structure
 

Yes, of course. There's a single bettor, and then many callers (many, many callers).

Checking is allowed. I don't know if checking around was allowed or not; the situation never came up [img]/images/graemlins/wink.gif[/img]

PP

Re: Odd hold\'em structure
 

Your best adjustment would be to find a real game, or to get your friends to learn the real rules. If you insist on playing here guess you could play etremely loose PF. IE call the blind without looking, then only proceed when you flop a monster.

.5 to see flop. If you have a monster you'll make 10 bucks (a single bet on the flop, turn and river), if not you fold and you've lost 50 cents. It still is a complete crap shoot though without raises.

Good luck, But I'd stay away
Matt

Re: Odd hold\'em structure
 

[ QUOTE ]
Hi Larry,

Sorry I wasn't more clear. Although the blinds are .25/.50, the bet preflop is $2. Both of the blinds have to complete to $2 to see the flop.

PP


[/ QUOTE ]

I didn;t see that yet so disregard my first reply. This game is retarded. I guess play really tight, but without raising you can't put yourself in many favorable situations.

Re: Odd hold\'em structure
 

If you could find out, I'd like to seriously know why they created this limitation and why they keep it. If it's a stakes limitation, then lower them and play poker, not call-along.

As for this format, I'd play a lot of suited connectors, if not all of them. One- and two-gap straights, big pairs. Small pairs are tough- you get the odds to catch, but you can't shorten the odds for others once you do.

Stay away from high-low card hands and don't let yourself be bothered by suckouts, because I assume there are a lot of them.

Why don't they just put $10 in the pot each and play blind-man's bluff? This isn't poker, it's just finding out who gets lucky.

Silly game, but if you have to play in it....

Re: Odd hold\'em structure
 

Hi Larry,

Okay, I lied a little bit. It's actually a .50/1.00 game with standard betting rules (one bet and 3 raises), but everyone's a maniac so it's capped on every street...typically one street per orbit isn't capped. So, it plays almost exactly like the game I described.

In SSHE it says that you can't play small pairs and suited connectors for multiple bets preflop, except for a few exceptions. I was wondering if this was one of the exceptions.

PP

Re: Odd hold\'em structure
 

[ QUOTE ]
Hi Larry,

Okay, I lied a little bit. It's actually a .50/1.00 game with standard betting rules (one bet and 3 raises), but everyone's a maniac so it's capped on every street...typically one street per orbit isn't capped. So, it plays almost exactly like the game I described.PP

[/ QUOTE ]

A LITTLE bit? Not even close. What exactly was the point of making up your stupid scenario?

Re: Odd hold\'em structure
 

Explain to me how's it's different, Larry.

If you get involved on one street, it costs you 4 bets. Period. There's no limping and hoping it doesn't get raised this time, because it does get raised.

It's capped 6-ways preflop, and gets down to capped 3- or 4-ways at showdown.

I honestly don't see how this is different than the game I described in the original post. Please explain to me why I'm wrong.

As to why I posted it the way I did...I wanted to emphasize the essential features of the game, and pare away any of the extraneous distractions. At worst, the game in the OP was a slight abstraction and simplification of the game I saw, but it seems like a reasonable starting point to start thinking about the game.

PP

<<added the last paragraph in the edit>>

Re: Odd hold\'em structure
 

[ QUOTE ]
Explain to me how's it's different, Larry.

If you get involved on one street, it costs you 4 bets. Period. There's no limping and hoping it doesn't get raised this time, because it does get raised.

It's capped 6-ways preflop, and gets down to capped 3- or 4-ways at showdown.

I honestly don't see how this is different than the game I described in the original post. Please explain to me why I'm wrong.

As to why I posted it the way I did...I wanted to emphasize the essential features of the game, and pare away any of the extraneous distractions. At worst, the game in the OP was a slight abstraction and simplification of the game I saw, but it seems like a reasonable starting point to start thinking about the game.



[/ QUOTE ]

"At worst, the game in the OP was a slight abstraction and simplification"

You're kidding me, right? SLIGHT simplification? You change the game completely with this little "abstraction."

If you think that this:

"The blinds are .25/.50. The small bets are $2. The big bets are $4. THERE ARE NO RAISES --- there's only a single bet on each street.

Let's say the game is played 9-handed, with 6-7 people in for $2 preflop and 3-4 staying for the showdown"

is ANYTHING like this:
"It's actually a .50/1.00 game with standard betting rules (one bet and 3 raises), but everyone's a maniac so it's capped on every street...typically one street per orbit isn't capped. So, it plays almost exactly like the game I described"

then you need to restudy raising in poker.

The only thing I'll say is, you play your made-up scenario a LOT differently that your "real" scenario.

Stick to the actual facts if you do this again- don't waste our time.

Re: Odd hold\'em structure
 

I must be an idiot [img]/images/graemlins/confused.gif[/img] -- I just don't see the difference.

In both games, if people want to play, they put in $2 preflop/flop and $4 turn/river.

In one game, they do so all at once. In the other game, they do so in .50/1.00 increments.

As a matter of fact, towards the end of the night, they stop going through the motions of "bet-raise-raise-raise" and simply put out the full amount at once "to save time".

Please explain to me how the games are different, Larry, because I just don't see it.

As far as "wasting your time" -- well, I don't know how to respond to that. I had a question that I didn't know the answer to, so I asked it.

PP

Re: Odd hold\'em structure
 

[ QUOTE ]
I must be an idiot [img]/images/graemlins/confused.gif[/img] -- I just don't see the difference.

As a matter of fact, towards the end of the night, they stop going through the motions of "bet-raise-raise-raise" and simply put out the full amount at once "to save time".

Please explain to me how the games are different, Larry, because I just don't see it.

[/ QUOTE ]

It's hard to say- you keep changing the conditions of the game. You make up a scenario to represent nofold holdem, but then you say sometimes they fold and sometimes they don't jam it. You don't talk about the hands they play- it can't REALLY be random hands, can it?

It may be that your $0.50/$1 game plays just like your made-up scenario, in which case there actually may BE little difference. However, I doubt this is true.

"As far as "wasting your time" -- well, I don't know how to respond to that. I had a question that I didn't know the answer to, so I asked it."

Next time, just give us the facts and ask the questions you are looking for. Don't make up some bizarre pseudo-structure that you think represents the same thing- look at all of the replies that responded to Silly Structure without answering your question.

Re: Odd hold\'em structure
 

Hi Larry,

<<It's hard to say- you keep changing the conditions of the game. You make up a scenario to represent nofold holdem, but then you say sometimes they fold and sometimes they don't jam it.>>

I don't think I changed the conditions of the game that much -- just how they were presented. In the original post, I said that people folded: 9-handed game, 6 or 7 to the flop, 3 or 4 to showdown. The only change was that rarely (maybe once per orbit, but that's probably more it actually happened), one of the streets wasn't capped. That was the river, and it was almost always for 3 bets instead of 4 (although I did see it go only 2 bets one time). This has the effect of reducing your implied odds a bit, but I wanted to ignore that effect to concentrate on the overall picture.

<<You don't talk about the hands they play- it can't REALLY be random hands, can it?>>

<shrugs> Not completely random I guess, but how many deals in a row can 6 to 7 people get quality hands worth taking a flop?

<<It may be that your $0.50/$1 game plays just like your made-up scenario, in which case there actually may BE little difference. However, I doubt this is true.>>

I firmly believe that it does, which is why I posted the way I did. I wanted to avoid this entire line of conversation and focus on the adjustments that needed to be made. But, you did ask nicely about how such a variant of poker could be developed, so that's why I explained the real situation -- it's hold'em, but always capped on all streets.

<<Next time, just give us the facts and ask the questions you are looking for.>>

Point taken. My main question was which style of play was better -- waiting for premium hands or playing speculative hands like Axs and 33.

<<Don't make up some bizarre pseudo-structure that you think represents the same thing- look at all of the replies that responded to Silly Structure without answering your question.>>

I still don't think it's that bizarre. It makes you focus on the essential differences -- a small blind compared to the size of the bet and the inability to manipulate the size of the bet -- without changing the nature of the game or getting into distractions like why people would choose to play like that (no clue), or am I exaggerating (no), or if sometimes you could sneak in for cheap and get lots of action later on if you hit your hand (not a chance).

For what it's worth, I imagine that if I posted about a game where multiple players were willing to call a cap on every street with hands as weak as a single overcard, the game would be described as a gold mine, not as a card-holding contest that I should stop playing in.

Cheers and happy holidays!
PP