Question about this pretty ridiculous game:
(Open Face Holdem)
Hand 1: Your opponent picks their own hole cards. You pick their flop. You pick their turn. You pick their river. They do the same to you, and whoever has the best hand wins.

Hand 2: Your opponent picks their own hole cards. You pick their flop. You pick their turn. You pick their river.

What is different when you are picking the boards for your opponents from hand 1 to hand 2?

...it's not like you are going to give the villain quads or anything like that. The boards you are going to give your opponent is basically 2369J, with 3 spades (because there has to be a 3 card straight and a 3 card flush, right?). They are going to do the same to you. And then whoever has the best hand wins? Seems a little silly imo

Another leak that might not have been thought of during the making of this patent-pending game...

Pre-flop: You select 2 cards out of the 52 card deck to use as your hole cards.

Flop-round: Your opponent takes your deck (which now has 50 cards in it), looks through the remaining cards, and figures out what your two hole cards are by figuring out which 2 cards aren't in the deck. Creates your flop, turn, and river accordingly

He didn't say that they would be easy to solve, in fact, he said the opposite, that your suggestions for games could be interesting as far as finding a solution goes.

What he DID say was that they didn't seem like a lot of fun, which is a genuine criticism of your idea - something which you have been asking for instead of just insults.

So instead of just being mad that people don't like your ideas, why don't you respond to the direct criticism that you are asking for? To ask for genuine debate on a topic that pretty much only you have interest in, and then act all butthurt when people debate against you is pretty ridiculous.

And it's that ridiculous attitude that makes people think all of your threads are dumb. Among other things.

The community deck is reset after each hand. You won't give your opponent the same board cards every time. 2,3,4's are removed from the community deck. You give your opponent a 3 flush, 3 straight, and paired board.

Have you tried playing the games? How can you automatically say it's not fun?

Not mad at all, I asked for constructive criticism and replied accordingly. I asked him to solve the games if he can and I was being serious. That would be a great help to me and anyone else that might find these games interesting. I might be willing to even pay for his efforts. PM me guy.

And what ridiculous attitude? Now you don't even like my forum tone? dam man you're a hard sell.

So what you're saying is... Rename it Helmuth Hold'em and call it day?

maybe using a joker would work

What I found ridiculous is that you didn't actually respond accordingly to the constructive criticism. Your response did not incorporate anything that was said to you. He said "this game could be interesting in terms of solving", and you responded with, "you make it sound easy to solve". You're just being defensive instead of actually considering the criticisms that are being put forth.

"Easily solvable" does not mean "anyone can solve it in few hours", it means "it can be solved by a trained mathematician within few month or a year of hard work" - which is still bad for a future of a game.

In game theory, an optimal strategy wouldn't consist of picking one particular hand always. Do you literally have no idea of what game theory is?

can we just all agree that his screen name is pretty good

OP, am I understanding the game enough that this could happen? If so, I'll play heads up with you for $100 a hand

[ ] reading comprehension

If the board that you are going to give your opponent is so transparent, they will adjust their hole cards to exploit. If you always throw a 2 and 3 on my board, I will be spiking sets on you by starting with 22 or 33 preflop. It becomes a guessing game.

This game is basically an advanced version of Roshambo.

The board cards are chosen from a community deck. You don't get to look through your opponent's private deck to choose their board.

In some respects, but only in reference to Open Face Hold'em. Although when you have to give your opponent a 3flush, 3straight, and paired board, there are many more moves available compared to rock paper scissors.

Open Face Stud is a little trickier than Open Face Hold'em, and Open Face Omaha is much trickier. Open Face Stud is a little more tricky than Open Face Hold'em because players also get to pick their own face down river card from their own decks.

Open Face Omaha is a lot harder to solve. There are many more combinations available and hands are evaluated differently. Players must use 2 cards from their hand and 3 from their board. It's similar to comparing traditional Hold'em to traditional Omaha in that regard.

In the end, most if not all games are solvable to some extent and it's really just a matter of how easy it is to do.

This might have gotten lost in the thread. Here are a few points scoring models for contests. You could also convert these to $ games by assigning a dollar value and/or adding an ante:

Any comments or suggestions for this?

A. Progressive limit points scoring:

Each betting round is assigned a points value. For Hold'em and Omaha games it might look like, pre-flop = 1 point, flop = 2 points, turn = 3 points, river = 4 points.

For Stud games, it might look like, bring in = 1, 4th street = 2, 5th street = 3, 6th street = 4, final round = 5.

lf a player wins, they are credited with the corresponding amount of points to the betting round at which the win occurred i.e. 2 points for winning on the flop.

lf a player loses, they are debited with corresponding amount of points to the betting round at which the loss occurred i.e. 2 points for losing on the flop

In case of a tie, each player wins or loses the full amount of points. i.e. No split pots.

B. Show Limit points scoring:

No folding. Each player will progress through the hand until the final betting round. When the players reveal their cards, they will receive a score based on their own hand strength vs. the opponents' hand strength.

The number of players determines the amount of points that can be won on each hand. lf there are two players involved in the hand, then the winner would receive 2 points and the loser would receive 1 point. If played for $, players would ante pre-flop, and then hands would payout like a one hand stt tourney.

Do you see how you are effectively confirming his characterization of the game?

Why are you asking for comments and suggestions? You get mad anytime anyone says anything that is critical even if it's constructive.

You're trying to be creative and help the game, and that's awesome, but what do you think you are helping when a lot of people are telling you your ideas are bad and all you can do is get mad? Wouldn't it be better to accept that your ideas are bad and move on to something that might actually help the game?

To a limited extent, referring only to Open Face Hold'em. But you took what I said out of context.

"In some respects, but only in reference to Open Face Hold'em. Although when you have to give your opponent a 3flush, 3straight, and paired board, there are many more moves available compared to rock paper scissors.

Open Face Stud is a little trickier than Open Face Hold'em, and Open Face Omaha is much trickier. Open Face Stud is a little more tricky than Open Face Hold'em because players also get to pick their own face down river card from their own decks.

Open Face Omaha is a lot harder to solve. There are many more combinations available and hands are evaluated differently. Players must use 2 cards from their hand and 3 from their board. It's similar to comparing traditional Hold'em to traditional Omaha in that regard.

In the end, most if not all games are solvable to some extent and it's really just a matter of how easy it is to do."

Please contribute or stop polluting. You've made you're 1 and only opinion on this topic sufficiently clear.

You have to be trolling.

Even if I did attempt to contribute, you would just ignore my contribution and/or get mad about it.

So, contribute to what? Your monologue about game variants that only you find entertaining? No thanks.

Stop posting please, all of your ideas are not very feasible, and that has been made abundantly clear by more than one poster. I am honestly surprised you haven't been banned yet. What you are posting is clearly spam.

I am not advertising any service. Have you tried playing any of the games? In your own words, can you describe exactly why you think each game is not feasible?

Try elaborating on your criticisms with the next post, instead of rewording the same thing for the sixth time.

Then why bother commenting beyond your original message?

You don't like any of it just because. Ok, duly noted. You have nothing original to say, which is fine. Let others make up their own minds.