Although poker hasn't interested me that much for many years it would be remiss for my first entry here to be about anything else.

And I believe the most important issue that players are facing is that the public is now considering the game to be too much like chess, backgammon, gin rummy, or bridge.

And unfortunately they are partially right. Especially as regards no limit holdem. More specifically the emergence of algorithmic play that mainly attempts to be non exploitable.

The main problem with non exploitable play as far as opponents are concerned, is not so much that it is theoretically unbeatable. Rather it is the fact that it makes both hand reading and deceptive play largely irrelevant. It takes away the two tools that most people used to think were the main talents of the expert.

For poker to have a resurgence the games must be more fun, have a structure that encourages loose play and multi way pots, and be harder to analyze game theoretically. I think here are many ways to do this. What do you think?

There definitely needs to be a new resurgence in interest. Moneymaker did it by playing online with a ridiculously recognizable name. When UIGEA took away easy access, the fickle public moved on to who knows what. The general public needs easy access to getting money on and off as well as plentiful games without the worry of having it all taken away.

You say there are many ways. I'd like to hear some more.

Welcome to the sub-forum of Blogs David.
Thanks for your help in contributing to the continual existence of this site.
Looking forward to reading your observations in future. I hope you can maintain a regular interest in this thread.

Omaha does this, and yet, why hasn't it caught on?

Precisely because of what you alluded to - the ability to hand read and deceptive play. I think HUNL is the only remaining form of poker where this skill is still valuable and even that has greatly dissipated over the years, and as a game, it will never become popular as full ring and 6 max.

I think what made poker popular - and unfortunately, what your books helped to break down - is the way it can make even the worst player think he's really, really competent. With so much literature and the general poker IQ having spiked hugely during the boom, it's far more daunting to a beginner than it was 20 years ago.

My 2c, as the completely average HUNL hobbyist that has broken even at every other game.

Welcome to the House of Blogs.
Interesting first post.
I'm looking forward to some proposals on how to 're-mysterious' the game.
It seems that, since you can't take away the knowledge players bring to the table, the modifications would need to happen in the construct of the game (but I'm not a real doctor).

When my father was second in command at the place he was working, he told me that most second in commands know far more about the organization than their bosses. Obviously the federal government is no exception. Look at the people in charge of the Secret Service, the Veteran's hospitals and the Obamacare rollout. Perhaps its time to appoint leaders based on competence only.

Leaders need followers. Followers say, "Yes, boss," whenever leaders clear their throat. Say "yes" often enough and you get good reviews. Results don't matter. Leaders are not doers, they lead the doers. Leaders only know how to lead, so that is their competency. Anything that actually gets done under them is an accident.

jmakin, Omaha isn't shown on TV, so nobody knows how to play it. Good luck getting people to try something new.

Online it has, live probably because it's too complicated for the average viewer and nl is considered the 'cadillac' which is a hurdle to overcome

Pretty sure this is backwards - HU poker is much easier to solve and thus these days the top HU players tend to be more gto-focused than 6max players, both in NL and PLO. Certainly what you said used to be the case since there's more room for exploiting one opponent, but as players get better at estimating gto I'm fairly certain that HU will be the first form of poker where reads and deception become irrelevant

i suppose there's lots of ways, but most that immediately come to mind are kind of gimmicky and wouldn't catch on because they'd alienate players. to encourage more action you could make it fixed limit preflop and no limit the rest of the way.

have a bonus bounty for winning a pot with two cards lower than 7 or something, some kind of bonus for winning 3 pots in a row, etc. etc.

i don't think any of these ideas would have a prayer of catching on and resurrecting the games (maybe FL preflop/NL postflop could gain some acceptance but it doesn't make the gametree more complex), but i'm posting in hope that you'll share your ideas.

Your point makes sense to me - but for a "solved" game, playstyles seem to be constantly evolving (at least when I played more seriously) and the metagame shifts all the time. I know there are bots that can win at HULHE, and there have been for years, but I doubt you could ever write one for NL. If you can, I'd love to read some theory posts about it. I don't even know where to look anymore.

jmakin, this might interest you:

http://www.pokersnowie.com/

Re: playstyles, one thing is that nobody is close to playing optimally yet (so there's room for evolution), it's just that the closer they get the less you can **** around with reads and/or unconventional playstyles. The second is that currently this only applies to the best at high stakes - you can't play ike and 3bet above a certain % because he knows the math enough to crush you regardless of how sick your reads are, whereas ike could probably crush a ssnl player while 3betting that much.

And yeah technically a bot could beat any human at HUNL, by playing a non-adjusting nash equilibrium strategy. It doesn't exist yet, but there were (are?) a group of bots on ipoker that beat $5/10 6max for >$1m and that was a few years ago. Links:

HSNL discussion about bots/gto: http://forumserver.twoplustwo.com/19...l#post29115472

General article, gets interesting around 'What is a Nash Equilibrium?': http://blog.gtorangebuilder.com/2014...a-and-gto.html

6max bots: http://forumserver.twoplustwo.com/56...ipoker-766070/

Cliffs: heads-up poker has a 'solution' where the best you can do is break-even against that strategy, and if you make any mistakes you lose. We're not there yet. 6max probably has a solution too but I'm not too sure about that

edit: if you're on 100 posts per page the hsnl discussion starts getting into it on the page after the one I linked, but it's worth reading from there just to warm up. It's a cool convo with a lot of the big online names

Interesting, thanks. There's a big diff between unexploitable and profitable, though, as i'm sure you know. I'll look at those later.

How about a limit game where everyone bets or checks only once per street and that action does not go in order but is revealed simultaneously? The next round is dealt if all in the pot check or two or more bet.

Nice read, in

No one ever thought that Dallas could ever top its claim to infamy, the JFK assassination. Now they just might.

Ebola in the grassy knoll!
Oswald was a carrier!
Ruby worked for the CDC?

I think such a game would have to be as similar as possible to the most popular variant (NLHE) to catch on. How about ante-only?

This latest school shooting at first seemed different because the shooter was not a loner. But it really wasn't because it was apparently caused by the rejection by a girl. And even though only a few of these incidents have been explicitly for that reason, I'm pretty sure that this is usually the underlying reason. Rejection by a specific girl or girls in general.

If more people realized this there would be a better chance to develop counter strategies.

have dating be on the school curriculum?

How do we choose the people who do the appointing?

Eliminate sex?

Trolls... Obviously girls have to report all the boys they reject such that they can be monitored, e.g. with a bracelet.

Have sex-ed taught to boys and girls in the same room.

I'm a vote for higher rake...that should swallow up the non "old school poker" playing dorks.

OR...aggressive intimidation and tilt inducing tactics could be allowed.

OR EVEN BETTER...design a rake structure that exploits non-exploitable play and in turn rewards the gamblers (make it right for the gambler). take it a step further and program a system that would be available at the tables to verify what dealers have done should they be questioned.

THEN...games are better. house makes more. and the job of a dealer becomes more appealilng to people with math skills. so basically all the math bum pathetic non poker playing forever dorks could become dealers when they go bust.

do it. sell it. throw me a bone with some meat attached when you get paid.

your welcome

WHAT THE HELL HAVE CASINO'S DONE TO EVOLVE! every town i've been to, it's either the fattest or douchiest chump running the poker room trying to think up the next freeroll promotion. THEY ARE ABSOLUTELY ******ED!!! I AM FIRED UP RIGHT NOW THAT I HAVE TO EXIST ON SUCH A PLANET IN WHICH I COME INTO CONTACT WITH THESE MORONS!!!!

WHY IN THE HELL DO POKER DEALERS EARN ANYMORE THAN MIN WAGE FOR DOING NOTHING MORE THAN WAS DONE SINCE THE BEGINNING!!!

SOMEBODY GET TO WORK ON THE RAKE STRUCTURE/SYSTEM!