I've looked around elsewhere here on 2+2 and some other places without a whole lot of good info.

I often hear that straddling is -EV, but in the same sentence many players like that it makes the game play 'bigger'.

Just using an UTG straddle of 2BB*,**:

1. Yes, there is now $10 of dead money vs. $4 initial posted blinds.
2. Yes, this halves the 'effectiveness' of starting stacks.

Question:
1. What considerations should I be giving to my stack depth (effective) vs. all other opponents dealt in?, e.g. prior to deciding to straddle, my stack is 150BB - 1/2 of remaining opponents have 80-100BB, 1/4 are about equal, and 1/4 cover. Is it advisable?
2. Does any knowledge of players left to act IP affect decision? Does the combination of their stack size bear any additional consideration?
3. Does current reduced (less than full ring) configurations have any affect?

I realize the glaringly obvious answer is probably just to decline the option in the sense of why take on a -EV proposition at the outset. (Keno anyone? )

But at tables where others are agreeing to rounds of straddles as well as $10 bomb pots every dealer change, opting out results in being labeled 'party pooper' (where I paly declination by any one player negates bomb pot as player rightfully must be dealt a hand) - but the reality of my (future) expectations don't really change as I'll still get plenty of action at 1/3 as any number of opponents are still going to 'play their hands' regardless as to whether I'm viewed as a nit.

* I'll exclude button straddles, especially as rules vary so much more with regard to straddling this position.

** In 1/3 games where people are straddling UTG >$10, I would assume (-)EV is just furthered magnified (linear? exponential?) and all other factors such as opponents & their tendencies, positions, and stack depths should be even more carefully weighed?

If the table wants to do a round of straddles or whatever, agree or leave the table - don't be the one person killing the vibe for everyone else. It's longterm -EV to be hurting the game like that, and NLH plays better as a 3 blind game, plus you're getting to play at double the stakes against players of the same skill level.

If it isn't a round of straddles, probably don't just randomly straddle, except as part of trying to create a specific image (don't do this)

We just had a ~similar discussion regarding this in the chat thread. Opinions were divided regarding this.

One camp was definitely don't be the one person being the guy killing the vibe.

The other camp was against straddle bullying.

For public casino games (i.e. this might not apply to single home game situations, especially if you want an invite back), I'm clearly in the camp against straddle bullying. In a casino environment you're allowed to choose the stakes and maximum BI from the ones that the casino has listed and sit and play at the public game. If the table is wanting to do stuff that you're not necessarily wanting to do, you could think of switching to another same staked game if you have that option. But otherwise you should feel free to sit in that public game and play it within the rules as you wish. But also don't be a jerk about things, and hopefully you have enough social skillz to politely / pleasantly / jovially decline without butthurting anyone / killing the vibe.

GcluelessstraddlenoobG

Now I'll have to peruse the chat thread.

At tables where straddles for a round and/or bomb pots are unanimously agreed upon (and upheld, short of bust-outs), I have no problem going with the flow.

I might not have made it so clear from my OP, but I was more focused on straddles as a whole, especially just a random straddle as I often see other players do, i.e. they will always/often straddle UTG when they can.

Often PF pots get bloated quite quickly, which is why I was wondering if stack sizes, positions, tendencies, and other factors have any additional weight beyond what they would when the straddle is off?

I'm just trying to see if someone can show me it has any +EV or if I can be moved from the position that willingly taking on a -EV proposition at the outset is a recipe for disaster.

Even if someone can show me how it's nearly negligible -EV, my response is supposed to be that of casino owners who say they only need the smallest of edges (even <1%) to grind players into dust...over time.

(or should I focus my energies on plugging other leaks in my game which I am sure are vastly greater -EV than wondering about straddling?)

If one person is trying to get the straddle on, and no one else really cares / is interested, then that is one thing.
But if the whole table wants to put it on, and you're the only one turning it down? Then I'd bow to the majority and straddle or stand.

And if the 'fun' player wants to straddle, then we're straddling. Cause the game doesn't exist without the fun players.

Straddling is lighting money on fire. The blinds are the only losing positions so why would you want to pay a 3rd, bigger blind?

When you agree to a round of straddles everyone else is at the exact same disadvantage so it balances out. Doubling the stakes will benefit the better players. You'll lose less in the straddle and win more from other positions than they do.

What if straddle is on the button?

You can probably make money if you're an otherwise winning player but you're making that money *despite* the straddle because you have the BU. You're making less than you would be with no straddle. The only reason it gets debated is because we don't have live databases.

Every time you have to fold you're losing 2BB, which is massive, and you still have to fold most of the time someone raises. You'll also end up playing a lot of hands you would have folded without a straddle due to the pot odds you're getting. These aren't profitable hands overall, though, they're just "getting back" some of the -EV of the straddle instead of losing the full 2BB.

I'd bet almost nobody who thinks BU straddle is a good play has played a significant number of hands online because when you have you understand just how bad it is to be in the blinds.

If you were UTG and did a min raise, would you say it was a good play? That's why its no good. I don't even find it to drive action.

Isn't it pretty well accepted that btn straddles aren't -ev or less ev than not straddling? If you can btn straddle and you are a good laggish you should.

Never straddle utg unless everyone is. If everyone does it then it's no longer -ev.

As far as straddle bullying goes I'm all for it. Screw the nits. If it makes you uncomfortable then change tables or deal with the **** youre getting, which won't be much after a minute or two. If someone starts berating you disrespectfully then that's where I would draw the line. Calling you out for being a party pooper or a nit goes with the nitty territory.

It's been discussed 350 times in the forum and there's no consensus, but there is so much downside and so little upside that it's inconceivable that BU straddling could be good. There never will be a consensus either because even if you solved the entire game of NLHE, which will inevitably show that it's a poor play in theory, the pro-straddlers will say it's good in practice because of live conditions.

Yes. Getting a table change isn't that hard and should make everybody happier. Although I guess many nits want the privilege of playing at the splashy table without having to gamble with everybody else.

The owner of this website has discussed many times that a key to a good poker game is getting the blend of gambling and skill right. Straddling pushes the game towards gambling. The main reason is the effective stack size is cut in half. The shorter the stacks, the easier the game is to play correctly.

If you are playing at the table and you feel that you're the best player at it, this is a negative if your goal is to win money. If you're not the best player and/or your goal isn't to win the most money, then getting the table to agree to straddling can be +EV.

Some relevant thoughts/guidelines on straddles:

-100bb or less you never need to straddle

-200bb or more in a fun game, you should mostly express a friendly attitude to straddles and willingness to participate

-the presence of good pros, shortstackers and bad relative position are valid reasons not to participate and/or change seats

-even if you aren't willing to straddle as much as other players, sometimes a nominal or modest effort will go a long way - be creative - maybe you offer to straddle every other round or maybe you only do 1 - action players will sometimes sour if they feel they are being taken advantage of, so find a way to show your appreciation without breaking the bank

-you should almost never straddle for more than the minimum.. so $10 in a 1/3 game utg is a bit high

- not participating in bomb pots is not a big deal in most places.. i wouldn't worry too much about it, but you can always get up for a quick break to be less overt

I never straddle unless everyone else is doing it. Seems reasonable to me.

Of course your negative EV in the straddle. It’s a larger BB. It only makes sense to do to preserve a good atmosphere in a good game. It’s not really too negative EV if you straddle once and 75%+ of the table does it as well.

Unless the table is often getting over half their stack in in most hands with the smaller blind size, this isn't true. Yes, shorter stacks decrease skill edge; but doubling the size of the game increases win rates for winning players, since the game is driven by the dead blind money.

This pretty much. This kind of discussions always gets me steamed up, because it so much BS and nonsens from x amount of posters regarding straddling.

In a nutshell: yes its moneywise -EV or -chipev to straddle. But overall it becomes +EV in nearly all live games for good winning players due to the many side-effects of getting straddles on in a game. It is in every winning players interest to get the gambling vibe in a game going. It makes people play more hands. It makes the average pot size bigger= mistakes gets compounded.

Holdem games with 3 blinds (2 blinds and 1 straddle) or even 4 or 5 blinds, is a much less solved game and thus players is prone to make alot more mistakes compared to a normal 2 blind game. Stacks comes easier into play, making people go on tilt easier because they have to chase their losses. As a winning player with good solid mental game i am much more built into handling the added swings and i can play behind without tilting, wich many other players simply cant.

Its just so so many good side-effects that come into play when you get the straddle going in a game. Yeah, sure you can do what the nits and OMC does and ride the rules to fully, talking about getting bullied into straddling. I have just one thing to say, these guys havent understand shyt. They have missed the goal by a freaking landslide.

Someone did solve it and because the blinds have to play so insanely tight (even more than they already do) that the dead money makes up for most of the ev loss and the positional advantage pre makes up for the rest and then some. I don't remember where I read it but it was concrete enough that I haven't questioned it since.

I can't btn straddle at the casino I mostly play at so its a moot point for me

+1

OP if you think you get the same action after being the buzzkill then you are not paying attention.

If straddling makes a game too big for you, leave. If everyone is straddling, don’t be that guy


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

See my addendum (third or fourth post after original submission):

"At tables where straddles for a round and/or bomb pots are unanimously agreed upon (and upheld, short of bust-outs), I have *no problem* going with the flow."

Also included in aforementioned addendum:

"Often PF pots get bloated quite quickly, which is why I was wondering if stack sizes, positions, tendencies, and other factors have any *additional* weight beyond what they would when the straddle is off?"

I only straddle every 1 in 221 hands.

If that’s true it would be shocking and cool but I’m not about to go against all my intuition without solid evidence. I’m very interested though. If you can even guess where you found that I’ll spend a bit of time searching and report back if I find anything.

Just noticed bomb pots were included in the discussion. Who doesn’t think bomb pots are fun? You get to play new and interesting situations.

Personally much prefer antes over straddles to make the game bigger/more action but not declining mandatory straddles, yeah.

What I don’t get is why regs seem to feel the need to defend their UTG straddle more than they do their blinds. I see them routinely out of position having called a raise with their random hand. And I’m talking raises from lots of positions, not fold to the button raises. And I haven’t observed winning enough big pots out of the straddle that make up for all the times they get one or two streets deep and fold.

Yeah, antes are so much better than straddles. Preflop gets considerably looser with antes in play. It’s unfortunate that ante games are so hard to find where I live.

UTG straddles are still very good if the rest of the table is participating. I always try to encourage straddling to the point that I’ll be the first to throw it on when I get the chance. It makes the game play twice as big. If you have a skill edge on the table, it’s to your benefit to raise the stakes. A winner’s hourly should increase with the mandatory straddle in play.