[Quads]

This came up in another discussion which I thought would make an interesting discussion. BigKyle mentioned it in the pink chip game thread and I thought it deserved a thread of its own.

The format in which HSP is played is NL Cash Game, $300/600 blinds, with a $100 ante from each player.

Taking that into consideration, would you consider, play or host a lower version of that. For example, in my game which is typically $5/10 NL, there would be a (in theory) $2 ante from each player.

Another version could be a $1/2 NL game with a .25 cent ante. Something in relation to the blinds which would get some money in the pot preflop from all players and generate action.

So, for the discussion, do you host or play such a game format?
or-
If someone was hosting / playing in this game with this ante / format, would you play it?

Please discuss:

[Quads]

I personally really like the idea and think it would generate more action in some cases, but create a stronger or tighter game in other respects. (thinking about the typical crew I play with) I think it would only work in a NL game format an wouldn't consider it for a limit game.

[scottwire]

I have not played in a home game like that.

I would in a heartbeat though. Especially if the other players are tight.

If everyone is tight you want to play a little loose in general, with or without antes. The antes make it so that there is more money in the pot each hand and therefore you should be playing looser as well. If you play well post flop you are in an ideal situation.

I agree that antes in limit is not a good idea.

[brdway_blu]

I agree. I recently hosted a NL tourney but strongly considered playing a .50/$1.00 NL cash game. My concern was that everyone would play too tight with their own cash and the game would be very dry / boring. I think antes would loosen things up a little by forcing some action. Have to try it next time

[ToddWDraper]

The home cash games I play in don't need anything to generate action. .25/.50 NL, UTG raise to $3, entire table calls. Sigh.

[Guma]

I feel your pain and second the notion that the game I play in does not need an ante to create any more action on the table.

Originally Posted by ToddWDraper

The home cash games I play in don't need anything to generate action. .25/.50 NL, UTG raise to $3, entire table calls. Sigh.

[Ranman]

I like the idea as well and agree with all the comments so far. I just wish I could find players to play in a game like this.

My first problem would be getting anyone to play in a game with stakes as high as 1/2, 2/4, 3/6 etc.

I actually consider this lucky with the caliber players in my area. Don't get me wrong, I play with a (small) number of good players who could and would play the game "properly" but most of my players think that TV and tavern poker is the way the game is/should be played at all times and could/can not make the transition or even understand the difference in the games.

Most of the players in my area have not played ring games and are just now getting the urge to do so. They have begun playing low stakes NLHE with $5 buy-ins (unlimited reloads if busted out) .05/.10, .10/.25 blinds.

They won't play 1/2NL because it's too much money, but because they're maniacs and still insist that any Ace or small pair is the nutz they frequently end up with pots equal to a civil 1/2 game anyway, go figure . I know of some that end up losing $25-$50 in a night (playing .05, .10, .25 poker!).

[MeridianFC]

When I've done any form of lower stakes NL cash game I've not really needed to do much to create action. The ante seems superfulous. Now if I raised the stakes it might do as I can see a sort of panic driven rock style of play.

The normal format in my game for these things is $25 buy in, unlimited rebuys but you must be down to $5 to do so. I wanted to create a structure like the casino min/max where some deep pocket can't sit down and own the game just based on initial buy in size. It works pretty well. I'll have near a grand in play sometimes. Funny thing is if I started the buy in at $100, which most of my players can and would do, I think the action would really dry up. Funny thing that. It reminds of eBay where if you start your item at $100 dollars you'll hardly get any bids, but put it in at a quarter and people will get hooked and the bids will fly.

That said I know a few of my more gung ho players how might be down for a more serious cash game night, so I might give it a go. I'll report how it compares.

[Jambine]

Originally Posted by Quads

I personally really like the idea and think it would generate more action in some cases, but create a stronger or tighter game in other respects. (thinking about the typical crew I play with) I think it would only work in a NL game format an wouldn't consider it for a limit game.

I would agree it makes more sense for a no limit game, or even pot-limit. We occasionally play $0.50/$1.00 Pot-Limit with a $0.25 ante.
With 8-10 players that means UTG can raise up to $4.00 right away. The action gets going pretty fast and there are typically 2 to 4 players to the flop (it’s amazing how folks will protect that quarter ante).

We played a similar structure a few weeks ago with pot limit 7-card stud, $1 bring in with a $0.25 ante. It was a bit slower starting out with 8 players, but there were usually 3-5 people going to 4th street, so it still made for some nice pots.

[MeridianFC]

Originally Posted by Jambine

We played a similar structure a few weeks ago with pot limit 7-card stud, $1 bring in with a $0.25 ante. It was a bit slower starting out with 8 players, but there were usually 3-5 people going to 4th street, so it still made for some nice pots.

How'd that work out overall. I love Stud, it doesn't hurt that fewer people play it now and are therefore no good at it, but have only ever worked the limit format. It seems like the larger number of betting rounds allow for decent action in the right circumstances.