I posted this in Draw and Other some time ago but have since realized it might be better here as people can try it out at their home games. It's called Commie Stud. It's my own invention, and I would love to hear comments from people who try it. I Have played it a number of times now and find it incredibly fun.

__________________________________________________ ________
GETTING STARTED

Each player puts in an ante of $1. 3 cards are dealt to each player

BETTING ROUND 1 ($2 limit)

The person to the left of the dealer has the option to check, fold, or bet $2. Then it progresses around so that the dealer acts last. Even though you could check, folding even when not facing a bet here might actually be a good idea if your hand consists of all low cards to avoid paying the bring in on the next round.

THE DRAW

Starting with the player to left of the dealer, each player can discard 0, 1, or 2 cards. The player then chooses one of his remaining cards (or his only remaining card if he discarded 2) and places it face up on the table. He is then dealt replacement cards for his discards.

BETTING ROUND 2 ($4 limit)

The person with the lowest up card has the option to pay a $1 bring in or complete to $4. Betting then proceeds around the table clockwise with each player having the option to call or complete (or raise $4 if bets have been made).

THE FLOP

Each player is dealt 2 more cards face up.

BETTING ROUND 3 (Pot Limit)

Betting begins with the player who has the best hand showing. Can check or minimum bet is $4, maximum is the pot.

THE RIVER

Two community cards are dealt to the center of the table.

BETTING ROUND 4 (No Limit)

Betting begins with the player with the best hand showing including using the community cards. Can check or minimum bet is $4, the limit is whatever you have in front of you.

IMO sounds ok, but how many ppl are you playing with? if you had a full table you would/could run out of cards.

Not a fan of the river either, and the change between L/PL/NL could get confusing.

Havin said all that, would be interesting, esp with each player being able to expose a card of their choice.

I dont know I have mixed feelings I guess

I suspect this game crushes the bad players pretty quickly.

@HGW: Since exchanging two cards at the draw round in Commie Stud is not required (you could change 0 or 1 card), it is actually less likely that we run out of cards at a table of 8 people than it is to run out of cards in 7 Card Stud and that game is regularly played with 8 players. 8 is the max though. the rule for running out of cards is similar to that of 7 Card Stud. If there are not enough cards left to deal each player two cards after the draw, each player is dealt 1 card and there is one community card. The river is dealt normally making a total of 3 community cards instead of 2.

What is it that you don't like about the river? More specific feedback would be helpful.

@LL: The first two rounds being limit helps the bad players lose their money a little more slowly.

Hmmm... perhaps, but I'm wondering if it cuts down on their overall win rates?

Why "Commie?"

Because "Socialist Brother of the Felt" Stud is already taken?

short for "community" as in community cards.

I thought Commie Stud is a game where everyone goes all-in and divide what's in the middle equally

too soon?

That was the original idea, but it turned out that game was much more fun in theory than in practice. Therefore, over time, it mutated into the convoluted mess it is today :-)

I guess I hate rivers in general, IMO I would like to try and have it in after the first draw. Your game tho so however you want it to play. Just as a river I would guess you would have more players holding on the see the community cards in a desperate hope their hand would improve.

Relook at what you wrote at the end... and you might want to rethink the beginning statement.

I would like it to be a fun game for other people besides only me to play, so that's why I posted it and do actually want feedback, so no need for the disclaimer.

Here's my take:

So, I take it you only play 5 card games because any other kind of game will have (bad) players staying in with a "desperate hope their hand will improve" but if you think about it, that desperate hope is how we make money.

Texas Holdem, for example, is over after the flop in most cases, especially when played no limit. If there was no turn or river, though, bad players wouldn't call bets with speculative hands and there would be no money to be made. There has to be some small chance of improvement to keep people calling bets. And they have to hit sometimes so they keep doing it. If you don't like people drawing, you could go back to playing 20 card straight poker like they did on the river boats back in the day, but that seems like a pretty boring game to me (and I imagine most people hence why it hasn't been played in a hundred years so)

I understand your desire to get it in after the first draw, and I imagine a lot of people would like to. That's a big reason why you can't (the first two betting rounds are limit). If everyone was just drawing to trips or a big pair then betting the farm, it would be a pretty boring game to play.

The limit betting and the fact that you never get less than two cards at once makes the game pretty friendly to drawy hands in general. On the third betting round where it's pot limit, even if someone bet the pot, if there is at least one caller, flush draws will have the odds to call if all their cards are live.

Drawing is what makes the game profitable and not being able to price out draws 100% of the time makes the game more interesting.

The first line was a joke btw.

You wanted feedback and I gave my point of view that is all. I'm not trying to discourage anyone from playing because like you said with a close bunch of friends in a home game it would be a fun alternative.

If at any time I thought you would just jump down my throat about my point of view I wouldv'e said nothing. But then why ask what people think.

I understand your point of having FL/PL/NL but as I said it could get confusing that is all.

I'm sorry if I have misinterpreted your last post but it felt like more of an attack than anything else.

Sorry that you felt that way as it was nothing of the kind. I presented a counter-argument, but not with the intent of personally attacking you. I honestly wanted your response to the points that I raised.

I was most certainly not trying to offend you, but was hoping you would respond with a counter-argument to my own. It is in this way that the most productive discussion can take place. I suppose I could have merely posted "thanks for your opinion" or some such thing but that would have no chance of resulting in an interesting discussion of any kind.