Why is there no Lowball Texas Holdem?
 

I've been wondering this forever. It seems an obvious game, but nobody lays it out. Any reason?

Re: Why is there no Lowball Texas Holdem?
 

too strict a game. playing without an ace marks you as an idiot. Also the flop is too determinate - there's not much drawing

Re: Why is there no Lowball Texas Holdem?
 

Yup - the hand values don't change enough as the hand progresses. A2 would stay the nuts roughly 50% of the time against any number of opponents.

It would be nit central.

Re: Why is there no Lowball Texas Holdem?
 

That largely depends on if you count straights and flushes against against your hand, and whether you have to use both hole cards.


Either way though, i dont think it's necessarily worse because hands change less. If you want to avoid nits, just play 6max. It's really no different than O8, when you consider the overwhelmming strength of any A2. Except in O8, it's a lot easier to wait around for A2 combos because thye're so much more common than they would be in this. If you tried waiting for good aces in hold em lowball, you'd get killed by the blinds even in full ring.

Re: Why is there no Lowball Texas Holdem?
 

[ QUOTE ]
That largely depends on if you count straights and flushes against against your hand, and whether you have to use both hole cards.


Either way though, i dont think it's necessarily worse because hands change less. If you want to avoid nits, just play 6max. It's really no different than O8, when you consider the overwhelmming strength of any A2. Except in O8, it's a lot easier to wait around for A2 combos because thye're so much more common than they would be in this. If you tried waiting for good aces in hold em lowball, you'd get killed by the blinds even in full ring.

[/ QUOTE ]

You can try it if you want, but trust me - it's going to be really dumb. You might as well deal out one card before the flop and play "mine's smaller than yours".

Re: Why is there no Lowball Texas Holdem?
 

[ QUOTE ]
Yup - the hand values don't change enough as the hand progresses. A2 would stay the nuts roughly 50% of the time against any number of opponents.

It would be nit central.

[/ QUOTE ]

So you mean like O8?

Couldn't help myself, but really, the perceived ill-temper of Omaha players has little to do with people who are actually waiting around for good O8 hands. O8 has play, despite the fact that A2 is unquestionably the nut low draw, because of (1) boards where low doesn't make and (2) counterfeiting.

In HE 8/b you couldn't get a premium low hand like A23x, but you would certainly have people call all kinds of bets with A3 just hoping it's either good or spikes a deuce. Moreover, A3 more likely would BE good -- just as AA unimproved is actually a hand to be proud of in HE, but not in Omaha.

I believe UB spreads HE 8/b, yes?

Re: Why is there no Lowball Texas Holdem?
 

[ QUOTE ]
You can try it if you want, but trust me - it's going to be really dumb. You might as well deal out one card before the flop and play "mine's smaller than yours".

[/ QUOTE ]

I have tried it.
Works fine in my opinion.

Re: Why is there no Lowball Texas Holdem?
 

I love HE/8, though we usually play it hi/lo without the qualifier now. It's a good game. If players are too nitty then adjust your games, put a straddle on or do something...

I don't know why people beat up on this game so much, it plays just fine. I guess for some people anything other than NLHE (with exactly x/2x blinds) is "dumb."

Re: Why is there no Lowball Texas Holdem?
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Yup - the hand values don't change enough as the hand progresses. A2 would stay the nuts roughly 50% of the time against any number of opponents.

It would be nit central.

[/ QUOTE ]

So you mean like O8?

Couldn't help myself, but really, the perceived ill-temper of Omaha players has little to do with people who are actually waiting around for good O8 hands. O8 has play, despite the fact that A2 is unquestionably the nut low draw, because of (1) boards where low doesn't make and (2) counterfeiting.

In HE 8/b you couldn't get a premium low hand like A23x, but you would certainly have people call all kinds of bets with A3 just hoping it's either good or spikes a deuce. Moreover, A3 more likely would BE good -- just as AA unimproved is actually a hand to be proud of in HE, but not in Omaha.

I believe UB spreads HE 8/b, yes?

[/ QUOTE ]

The split game might be better - never tried it. But just the low would be almost as silly as Omaha played A-5 low.

If you guys are all in such a lowball mood, shuffle up and deal some London lowball or KCL with a big ante. That'll keep you entertained [img]/images/graemlins/laugh.gif[/img]

Re: Why is there no Lowball Texas Holdem?
 

hello people, OP was asking about Lowball HE. That is a stupid game.

Some of you are arguing over hi-lo split, which is very different. the format known as crazy pineapple hi-lo is decent, because there are three initial cards to tempt people into playing. Furthermore, there's decent play involved due to the high.

But lowball HE is rubbish. abbadabba made an interesting point about a 2-7 version, which would be much more interesting. but i disagree with his comparison between a2 in omahahi-lo and lowball. the a2 is far more relevant in lowball - lowball has no qualifier, and there's no split with high. a2 in O8 turns to trash often enough, since low doesn't always get there, and splits with hi, so it is not such a great hand as in lowball.

but actually he's right about waiting for low aces. i exaggerated when i said you couldn't play without an ace. You'd have to form a position chart with the hands, but in full-ring EP you'd be an idiot to play without a2, a3, a4, or 23. Probably the only starters in this game are any 2 distint wheel cards.

there's far more play in hi-lo split, and crazy pineapple hi-lo is a decent game.