Quote:
Originally Posted by RedOak
Button straddles are horrible if the sb is forced to act 1st. (Mississippi straddle). Now the sb and bb have to play super tight, just the opposite of what a straddle is suppose to do- create more action. If utg acts 1st on a button straddle, then if no raise, skip the button, goto the blinds, then back to the button is not nearly as bad as having the sb act 1st. But many room managers say "that is too complicated". LOL. I guess they don't think their dealers have any brains.
Hi Everyone:
Since there seems to be some interest in straddles, here's the "Straddles" chapter from the book.
Best wishes,
Mason
.........................................
Straddles
One rule that almost all poker rooms have, and which I’ve always disliked, is that straddles are allowed. But not all straddles are equal. Some are worse than others.
For those who don’t know, a straddle is an additional blind that a player is allowed to voluntarily put into the pot. Generally, a straddle is twice the size of the big blind, but some rooms allow for a convenient amount, such as a $5 straddle in a $1-$2 game. And straddles can be used whether the game is limit or no-limit.
Another aspect of straddles is that they can only be applied in certain positions. Virtually all rooms allow the straddle to be to the left of the big blind. But some rooms will also allow what is known as a “Mississippi Straddle” which is a straddle placed on the button.
Obviously, the straddle to the left of the big blind is a poor play, but it’s my opinion that the straddle on the button can at times be strategically correct. Let’s address this some more.
First, in all forms of poker, being in position is advantageous since you get to see what your opponent(s) does. But this advantage in no-limit hold ‘em is stronger than virtually any other form of poker. In addition, excellent players will know how to better use this positional advantage than the weak players.
Another aspect of no-limit hold ’em is that having lots of chips is also an additional advantage for the excellent player. This is especially true if you’re against a weak player who also has a lot of chips. That’s because a weak player is much easier to trap for all his chips than a strong one.
So, suppose the following situation has developed. An excellent player is on the button with a lot of chips and one or more bad players also have a lot of chips. In this spot, I believe the play with the highest expectation for the excellent player is to take the straddle on the button. That is, taking the straddle has become correct and it’s not always the “sucker play” that many players think it is.
But there is something even more subtle going on here. It’s the fact that the proper balance of luck and skill is now being tilted towards skill, and when this happens, it can have long-term negative effects not only on the poker games but on the cardroom itself. And in no-limit hold ‘em, a game that may already be out of balance towards too much skill, this should not be a good outcome.
There are two other problems with having straddles. The first is that they make the games bigger, and some players will be uncomfortable playing the larger stakes. This can also cause some players to go broke quicker which can’t be good for the poker room. Yes, it can also help a player losing in the game to get even quicker since the stakes are now higher, if he happens to get lucky. But if this player is a long term loser, his theoretical loss rate will have also gone up meaning that his average playing time will often go down which can’t be good for the poker room. (The better players might like the fact that this player is now theoretically losing at a higher rate. But if it means that the amount of time he spends in the poker room is now greatly reduced because of some higher losses, it won’t be long-term good for the better players either.)
Second, some rooms have a weird rule relative to the Mississippi Straddle. What happens in these rooms when the button straddle is placed is that before the flop the player in the small blind is now first to act, the player in the big blind is second to act, and the player on the button (who has put up the straddle) goes last.
This does two things. The first is that the skill element in the game is shifted even more towards the button since he now acts last before the flop. This means the balance of luck and skill can again be thrown off, but now by an even higher amount. In addition, the players in the standard blinds, who normally get compensated for putting up their blinds by getting to act last before the flop, lose this compensation. And this means that players in the standard blinds, as our poster sevencard2003 pointed out, will now sometimes play much tighter. That’s because instead of being last to act before the flop, they become first to act with many players still to act behind them. The result of this is that the poker room is now creating games with reduced action, which most players view as less attractive than games with lots of action. And since one of the themes of this book is the creation of attractive poker games, allowing a button straddle where the straddle acts last before the flop, is accomplishing the opposite.
The bottom line is that, except for cardrooms where straddling has become a common, accepted and popular practice, management should consider not allowing them at all. And in those cardrooms where having straddles is common, management should consider scaling back this practice.