Hello,'

My casino Ameristar ( Blackhawk, CO) will allow ( 08/18) Mississippi straddle for the first time.
The issue is that the game is 2-5 spread limit( 100$ max bet, unlimited buy-in).

Should competed player should straddle in position ( Button, Cutoff, Hijack) every time?

This game is not true no limit( CO rules ) thus introducing straddle might reduce stack to pot/bet ratio even more.

Games are good with maybe one pro/wannabe, several bad regs and lots of gambling fun players. Usually players buy-in with at least 500$ and some with 1000+.

It would seem that under these rules, the value of implied odds hands (low pocket pairs, suited connectors, etc...) is reduced dramatically, while the value of big Aces (AK, AQ) and big pocket pairs increases even more. A nit's paradise.

Therefore, straddling would seem suboptimal (you get less value for your implied odds hands in position), unless you can get the whole table to straddle their button.

Makes sense. But I am willing to sacrifice some EV because I think that straddle might get some nits and predictable regs out of comfort zone.

I think you risk creating a limit hold 'em pot too quickly by straddling -- open raise would be to like $35, 3! is capped at $100, so now you're playing $100/street limit hold 'em post flop and won't be able to knock out draws.

Better off keeping it 2/5 and having the open be 15-20 and the 3! to 50-60, flop bet would only be offering 2:1 odds at that point (whereas it would be 3:1 in the former scenario).

Wrong wrong wrong. It is not $100 max PER BETTING ROUND, it is $100 max bet/raise. That means you can raise $100 on a $35 open to $135, and someone else can re-pop to $235 and so forth. I know, you out-of-staters don't understand our ridiculously stupid gaming laws, but that's what it is. Florida used to be the only state like Colorado when $5 was the max bet. Now Colorado is only like 1 other state where the max bet is $100.

I actually read that post to be exactly the same as what you just said. It does create a limit game at 100 per bet.

To answer the question, no. I'd never straddle in that game. It makes both premium hands and drawing hands with less. Premiums because you can't increase the size of the pot enough, and drawing hands because you can't bluff and you can't get paid off. With an unlimited buy in, if you get a large enough effective stack, you can just set and flush mine, but that's about it.

I agree that from a theoretical point it does not make sense to straddle ( even Mississippi straddle) but we are talking about human beings and getting otherwise solid/predictable players on tilt/out of comfort zone should be plus EV.

You're quite right, although you've missed the point of my post. I actually played a similar game in AZ for a few years (2-3-300) but the 300 rarely mattered because that was also the maximum buy, so I think I only saw a bet called down to a cap once or twice.

Even if the numbers don't add up, the strat part of my post remains -- if you make it $110 or $135 or whatever preflop, the most you can make it postflop is now $100. Your opponents post will be getting 3.x:1 on the flop, and then 5.x:1 on the turn, and then 7.x:1 on the river. The stickiness they ought to exhibit in this situation should be enormous.

I would completely agree that if you are playing against smart players with an unlimited bankroll they should exhibit extreme stickiness.
But the reality is that I am playing against players who have limited money on the table or rebuys thus they not always make correct calls.
This is why by raising stakes a putting people in uncomfortable spots denies them equity.

Anybody from Colorado? What are your thoughts?

I mean you have your answer don't you?

If these players are as bad as you seem to think they are, and you actually think they fold medium hands when they're getting like 6 or 7:1 then the way to loosen their money belts is to straddle.

Just remember, at some point, even a super nit at a max bet table is going to take a stand. Putting people out of their comfort zone sometimes has the opposite effect of what you want.

At that point, you just change table

Short Answer: No

Long Answer: Most players in the game are experienced and have some range of skill (low to moderate). This means, they are playing an 'evolutionary stable strategy' derived via experience over time. Players will not make the strategic adjustments which the straddle introduces. The metrics you beat this game (2/5-100) today are likely not to change in some time. This means, players will still make the same range mistakes in the same spots, the same hard-counters will exist to their strategy, and the same points of indifference within their player-profile are likely to exist.

On 1/3: You could probably table select a good game on the weekends. If the 2/5 lineup are bad, I go to the Gates for exactly this reason and look for the 1/2 game with an active Mississippi going on.

On Omaha: Some of the late night shorter(er) stack games I think there is a clear case for this (if Mississippi is allowed)

On 30: Pots go multi-way-cap often. However, this might get the tilt-player go bonkers and start getting more bets in. Last night, they said the floor might not let the straddle go in the 30-game (will see I guess ...)

This hurts ... :lol:

My guess is that since the WSOP its been slower than expected and the market is telling them to make some type of change.

With the cap you only need enough chips to do reasonable line construction. Its fairly seldom to get in more than 80-100bb in 20bb increments.

I did not have a chance to play with the new rules yet at the Ameristar. Anybody have an update?