My fav form of poker was all in 1st hand were it was a flip for huge rake

Fish get bored very easy by slow players time bank to just fold.pre even fast tables it is soul crushed if you only play one table like most fish

I can play good sound poker I just don't want to when am playing one table @25/50 cents with 3 bis

I am not from some poor arse country were grinding out $6 hr would make me wnat to quit life

Should be tables based on results as soon as I sit at 6 max table and see 2 players going to a flop every 3rd orbit am gone.

Zoom plo is about only game I can play but even then you get slow regs on stakes above 25/50 cents

No poker company can solve the need for recs and regs as what is good for one sucks for the other.

Buy a chessboard. Problem solved.

When luck shuts the door, you got to come in through that window I heard once

Nicely put.

Can an OP this uninsightful be good at poker?

A family pot every hand? No thanks.

By removing preflop action, you're removing the entire skill element of preflop battles.

Yeah, how would eliminating the basic decision of choosing starting hands, and letting every player see all flops, make it more skill-based as opposed to luck?

And how would sharply reducing draws and pot-odds increase skill? I mean, what combination of hands would be needed for the scenario you describe? "If player A shoves flop, player B and C calls, player B and C keep playing for the side pot, but player A only plays his five card combination on flop." Set over set over set?

Eliminate luck by having everyone just automatically see the flop?

This is totally backwards. Preflop play is one of the biggest skill edges available in most games.

If anything, you could add skill to a game by adding streets. For example, you could play omaha where there is a preflop betting street after 3 cards are dealt, and then everybody gets their 4th card, and then there's another round of preflop betting. This doesn't work for holdem though as any play with only 1 card is ridiculous.

How about a tournament with 10k starting stack, blinds start at 1/2 and never increase? The best player would almost always win, but the tournament would take decades.

Always using two hole cards is all thats really needed. All else just over does it.

most proposed changes to games are made by players that think making it more likely a tighter nit will win is important. in fact it is just the opposite.

tight playing and skill have no correlation.

change games so that if you play too tight you get crushed. so the recs. and the aggressive loose players with the skill have a better chance is the way to go. then the recs. win more often and have more fun as they get played with when they have the best hand..

The idea in the OP is just about the most stupid thing I have ever seen in my life.

he is just proposing solutions for the kind of game where the best players win all the time. and perhaps a good topic for discussion as it seems many dont know what determines the likely hood whether you win or not overall.

No he is not. I quote
He is not just proposing some hypothetical. He also thinks it should be the way the game is played in the future.

But can OP beat NL 1/2?

Sent from my Pixel using 2+2 Forums

OP has everything completely backwards.

Luck is an intrinsic element of any card game. How much or how little depends on the rules of the game.

You can't remove the luck in poker any more than you can remove a chromosome.

fold river.

I bet you are not a winning player, what we need is MORE variance and less rake. The more variance the better for the games, that`s why PLO is way better than nlhe in 2017 when it comes to edges.

No limit holdem: Use both of your hole cards.

I mean seriously. Why the f 93o can make 2 flushes and different kind of stupid straights.

All in close the action on current street



Why giving the losing hand more chances to win? If the all in is preflop, only the flop is show.

If there are 2 or more players in the hand, the player all in preflop plays only the flop.

I hate winning and losing by the mre of luck. I hate luck. I can read minds, so the luck factor in poker really disturbs me. And i love poker.

Im gonna start this thread (or bump) every once in a while. It could take years but im gonna make this happen.



Mods: Feel free to move this thread to an old thread of mine ( i can't find it, but it was "How to make Poker a skill game" or something like that)

Oh and btw, that stupid argument "but the luck factor keep the fish.." i mean, WHO THE F wants to beat fish. I prefer losing money to a person who is clever than me than winning against fishes. If you can't see the reason, well..

unfortunately had to read all the way to this before stopped reading


read the above then stopped reading

That's like saying you love sex with women but hate vaginas.

Yeah, THATS the problem with NL, it just is not that skill based to begin with.

Luck is what keeps fish having fun. Variance is a good thing. Go play chess then OP? Why would you even complain, if you're playing extremely well you'd be CRUSHING and swings a minor annoyance. There are extremely good and tough to beat strategies available for NL these days.

Fish are very often going to prefer a game more with 180bb/std dev and -10bb edge vs 30bb/std dev and -10bb edge. OP if you hypothetically had to choose one, which would you?

IMO the ideal poker game in today's climate is one with a HUGE game tree (difficult for solvers and studying) and lots of variance.

I came to post something very similar. I think you're spot on about what kind of game is best in today's climate.