This is a big moment. This game is a play money variant and it's competitive! It's a proof that play money can be fun too. Check out my sick game:


Title: "ZEITER" - No limit play money poker game, based on Texas Hold'em and a FREE POT DONATION betting system. The game can be played from 2 to 6 players (cash game only, no tournaments). The game won't work with real money. Time measuring device (phone or watch) is required.

Betting: Players donate freely their chips to the pot. Every bet is a donation - player can bet whenever he wants and as much as he wants. The chips go immediately to the pot. There's no bet/call or bet/raise structure. There's no particular order for players to act. Player can be a part of a showdown without betting anything if he doesn't want to (except for ANTE). Game has 4 betting rounds (pre-flop, flop, turn, river) and each player can bet multiple times per round. It's up to the dealer when the betting round ends - no action means next betting round.

Time (and folding): Every time the community cards are dealt, a certain number of MINUTES (represented by dealing extra face down cards by the dealer) is added to the TIME AREA. The number of minutes added = number of active players who will see the flop (or turn, or river). For example in a six handed game, 2 players fold pre-flop and 4 players will see the flop, so 4 minutes will be added into the TIME AREA. And so on ... The maximum amount of minutes in time area is 18 (3x6) and minimum is 6 (3x2). Showdown activates the time area and players have to wait "X" minutes before they show their hole cards.


What this game does is actually force the players to fold even though there's a free pot donation rule. In first 3 betting rounds players with weak hands will fold because they want the number of minutes in the time area to be as low as possible with the showdown less likely to happen. In the 4th betting round players with weak hands will also want to fold because they don't want to waste time on waiting. Of course bluffing will be an exception here. The showdown will be a rare thing in "Zeiter" (zeit = German word for TIME).

author: G. Jakubowicz, Poland

And where's the fun in this? We're just piling chips when we think me hand look pretty.
Recreationals want some sort of emotional tension, like the one bluffing provides

There will be tons of bluffing here. Especially on the river. Donation bet looks strong because it's optional. Reading opponent's hand will be difficult, but still possible - so there will be strategic part, too.

Nobody wants to wait 6+ minutes doing nothing, so there will be plenty of folding and bluffing on the river. The showdown will take place usually when two strong hands collide, so not often.

Well, you won't earn money here, but I'm sure the game will be fun for everyone.

So there is no calling?
Why would anybody donate to the pot.

You're right that nobody wants to wait 6+ minutes doing nothing, yet you think it's a good idea for a game mechanic?

1) To trigger further chain of donations and make the pot larger.
2) To bluff.
3) To make weak hands fold.

Donating makes no sense only if opponent(s) stop donating completely. First donation will usually encourage other players to bet though. Chain reaction.

Waiting phase will rarely take place. It's about that psychological barrier that will discourage people from entering showdown.

How to bluff if you dont have to fold if some puts money into pot. Seem to that optimal play is never to put money into put(unless you have stone cold nuts) and wait for very SD.

This would be torture for you and your opponents - to never fold and never bet. That's not your goal when you sit at the table. If you have a good hand you want to extract as much as possible from your opponent, so you gradually start to bet and see if opponent follows you doing the same thing. If he does, that's great - the pot gets larger, you will win more. If he doesn't - then you stop betting. Player who bet less will probably eventually fold.

Showdown is inevitable only when 2 or more strong hands collide, like flush and full house.

Bluffing would be betting or counter-betting large on the river if your opponent made some decent bets in previous betting rounds. It's a donation bet, so it looks strong. Of course you can start bluffing even pre-flop to make a more complex bluff (2 or more rounds).

One more thing, when someone decides to wait 6+ minutes for the showdown he can make a fool of himself if he loses. Nobody wants to feel this way. It's like more than a usual loss. "I've been waiting 10 minutes just to see my hand lost" - this doesn't feel good even though it's play money. People will be a bit scared of that and they will fold or bet more.

Let's approach this from a game theory perspective. Donating is a dominated strategy. All you're doing is increasing everyone else's pot share without increasing your own pot share.

You think ppl will donate out of imagined social pressure, but there's literally 0 incentive to put chips in the pot since people don't have to match your bet to remain in the hand.

So the optimal strategy becomes playing every single hand, always realizing your equity, never folding. And all of that is confounded with a game mechanic designed to bore people to death. You could just deal everyone their cards and jump straight to showdown and it would be the same game.

If there is a hell for poker players, I imagine they are forced to play this game for all eternity.

I would agree with everything you've said if this was a real money game. But it's not. It's a PLAY MONEY game only, so in this case:

PTP > chips value

PTP = psychological time pressure. In a play money game PTP is more important than the value of chips.

If this was a real money game, the comparison would look the opposite way: PTP < chips value

Good joke at the end, it made me laugh

Play money chips value < Psychological Time Pressure < Real money chips value

You're all trying to tell me that a pile of plastic chips + personal satisfaction of winning are more valuable to you than time. I'm not buying it. Time is priceless and everyone knows that. It's not even about torturing yourself by doing nothing - it's about wasting something that is valuable. Look at numismatics for example: a 300 years old gold coin can be worth fortune mostly because it's old and not because it's made of gold. Time is measurable and valuable, that's a pretty obvious fact.

Then there is no point in wasting time to play this game.

It's a **** game bruv, gotta go back to the drawing board.
I remember a few of your posts and I'm not sure why you're so interested in creating a poker variant that works without money.
Just do strip poker or taking shots or smth

It seems that if "Zeiter" was officially released in a box with cards and chips as a family game, you would stomp on the box and tear it down, lol.

Connecting the word "competitiveness" to the long run result is in my opinion the source of the conflict here. I see "competitiveness" more as trying to have fun by doing something spectacular (crazy bluff or tricky play, etc.).

This is why you desperately want to focus on the optimal strategy. It doesn't work here. The optimal play would be to "just have fun, maybe I lose, maybe I win".

What's the point of focusing on the long run and optimal strategy if there is no bankroll at all ? It's mainly a live poker play money game for cash game sessions. The bankroll doesn't exist.

To make it clear, I didn't critisize this game for how silly optimal strategy would be, clearly it's not the point of the game.
I just think it's a boring game.
You have to compete with things like Uno or some silly board game

I wouldn't count WAITING as a part of playing "Zeiter". It's like a break between hands in normal poker. Of course it's up to you how you see it.

Wasting time is doing nothing. When you play a hand it's not a waste of time.

You think it's boring and I think it'll be pure adrenaline rush for recreational players and amateurs.

I think hole cards transparency in my game can sometimes reach higher level than ordinary NLH. Making a call doesn't make a hand as transparent as the bet does in NLH, where you are "forced" to call a size of the bet set by someone else. Of course you can raise, but you can't raise 1.5x or 1.8x, so some values disappear. Donating has no limits when bet sizing is considered. Plus you can multiply your bets. It's a bit more independent than No Limit - you can tell more "stories" with your bets.

This game is more tricky than you all think, although I know it may seem stupid at first. I'm analyzing it deeply right now, although still haven't played it yet.

And please don't discard it only because there's no real money involved, give it a chance. It's like the "chess of poker".

this aint it chief

Give me 3 reasons and I'll start considering changing my mind.

Plenty of people in this thread have already given you three reasons.

You don't need to change your mind, you are very welcome to think it's a great game.

Just because you do, doesn't mean that it is, or that other people will think it is or want to play it.

It's like the people who go on shark tank with a terrible product that they've invested all their savings in. The sharks give them a sobering reality and tell them it sucks and they need to give it up, but instead they just ignore them and keep wasting money on something that's not going anywhere.

I hate to sound rude, but I'm trying to be straightforward and honest.