Re: 13-card Nim Poker
 

I like this a lot. I can envision it being played hi-lo with no qualifier, then, after the 5th card is rolled, bet-declare-bet.

One of the great things about anaconda is watching the cards travel around the table and trying to deduce who is taking which card. With this variant, it might be even more difficult to do so.

Re: 13-card Nim Poker
 

well actually, in magic, where you draft 3 packs of 15 cards, first pack left(if I remember correctly, it's been a while, if not then reverse all directions I list) then right then left, some players(ie not me) are able to deduce which colors you are playing and such.

Re: 13-card Nim Poker
 

3 Ace NLHE

Simply enough, No Limit Hold'em (could be other games) with the A[img]/images/graemlins/spade.gif[/img] removed from the deck. Despite being a seemingly minor change, it would considerably alter the game:

- Big Aces become weaker as they have five outs to hit a pair rather than 6.
- Pocket Aces become considerably rarer, and slightly weaker as they only have 1 out to a set.
- Broadway and wheel straights are even harder to hit.
- Spade flushes are harder to get, which also reduces the value of suited spades preflop.
- Having the Ace as an overcard to your pair is less of a problem, because (a) there are fewer Aces in the deck that an opponent could have paired and (b) they are more likely to have been folded preflop due to the Aces being weaker.

Re: Bored now. Invent a novel poker variant.
 

From a conversation with 2461Badugi, most of the ideas are his:

"Three's a Crowd" stud variant: if three or more people go to showdown, the high hand wins. If two people go to showdown, the low hand wins.

Idea: Standard poker rankings have the property that if A beats B, and B beats C, then A beats C. "Nontransitive" games like rock-paper-scissors lack this property.

"Roshambo Stud Hi/Lo": Play Stud/8, but at showdown: a straight beats a full house, a flush beats a straight, and a full house beats a flush.

Of course, this only works at all when heads-up. Is there a way to extend nontransitive rankings to multi-way showdowns? Perhaps something a long these lines:

"Cripple Mr. Ace": applied to Hold'em, Omaha, Stud, or Draw. At showdown, deuces outrank aces if both are present in the same type of hand. Thus, if the showdown is 22, AA, and QQ, the deuces win, but if it is 22, 77, and QQ, the queens win. KQJ53-flush beats J9872-flush, but AQJ53-flush loses. A2346-flush beats AKQJ9-flush because the deuce is a higher kicker.

Re: Bored now. Invent a novel poker variant.
 

Here's an idea that I've been kicking around for a while. It works with any hi/lo split game.

There are 3 classes of chips -- normal chips, low chips, and high chips. The chips are marked in an obvious way such that there is no confusion over which chips are which.

Normal chips behave as always; low or high chips can only be used to win that particular half of the pot. Once you put a low chip into a pot, you can't win the high half of the pot, and vice versa. You can't put both low and high chips into the pot -- if you have put one or more low chips into the pot, and you run out of low and normal chips, you are considered all-in even if you have high chips left (and vice versa).

If you run out of normal chips, and have not put any low or high chips into the pot, you must declare at the time that you put your last normal chip into the pot whether you are all-in or not, and that decision is binding for the remainder of the hand -- which means that if you state that you are NOT all-in, you may be forced by future action to effectively declare your hand high or low prior to showdown. This means that an opponent could make a min bet into you for the sole purpose of making you declare your hand.


Each split pot (main and side) is distributed as evenly as possible, within each class of chips.


When a player buys in, they get normal:low:high chips in a ratio of 3:1:1. (This could be tweaked of course.)


Analysis -- obviously, the chips do not all have equal value. Normal chips are most valuable, and low chips are least valuable (assuming you're playing with a low qualifier). However, the ability to set your low or high chips 1-for-1 against an opponent's normal chips leads to interesting ideas. Take effective pot odds for instance -- although the odds may not support a call with your valuable normal chips, they might easily support calling with your less valuable low chips. If you're playing Stud/8, and you get your strong low heads up against an obvious monster high, you should probably jam the pot with your low chips; he'll be forced to call with normal or high chips, and at showdown, even though the pot is split, you'll end up trading some of your low chips for his high or normal chips.

Re: Bored now. Invent a novel poker variant.
 

Razz where the second best hand wins, who knows what a good starting hand would be.

Re: Bored now. Invent a novel poker variant.
 

[ QUOTE ]
Razz where the second best hand wins, who knows what a good starting hand would be.

[/ QUOTE ]
A rough anything.

Re: Bored now. Invent a novel poker variant.
 

ok here's something I've been throwing around in my head. I call it "Lo-Hi" as opposed to "Hi-Lo"

This is any game where your pool of cards exceeds 5, 7stud, HE, omaha, etc. If it goes to a showdown, the winner is the one whose best high hand is the lowest of all those comparing.

thoughts?

Re: Bored now. Invent a novel poker variant.
 

[ QUOTE ]
ok here's something I've been throwing around in my head. I call it "Lo-Hi" as opposed to "Hi-Lo"

This is any game where your pool of cards exceeds 5, 7stud, HE, omaha, etc. If it goes to a showdown, the winner is the one whose best high hand is the lowest of all those comparing.

thoughts?

[/ QUOTE ]

I have referred to this idea as "true inversion" ranking. True inversion Omaha is Lomaha, which has some interesting properties.

Re: Bored now. Invent a novel poker variant.
 

Here's a game I dreamt of playing last night that actually could be a fun game. I'll name it Asspoke, since it is very similar to the game of [censored]. It could be played in two different ways:

1. Each player is dealt a fixed number of cards (I haven't decided the best number), and starting to the left of the dealer, each player plays one card into the middle. Once five cards have been played, play then continues around, but when someone plays a card, they must remove one card from the "hand" in the middle, and replace it with a card from their hand. The replacement they make *must* improve the value of the hand. Play continues until nobody can make a better hand, and the last person to play wins the pot. This can be played either as a limit game with betting rounds after the deal, after the first five cards have been played, and then every time a card is replaced, or it can be played with antes only.

2. The entire deck is dealt out, and play proceeds in the same manner as the first game, except that instead of ending the hand when the best hand is made, the cards in the middle are removed and a new "hand" is begun. Play continues until one person runs out of cards. That person wins the hand. Again, it can be antes only or there can be a round of betting after the deal and each time the cards are removed from the middle.

Sorry if I don't make any sense, I just woke up.