Online Poker Forum at Full Tilt Poker

deadmoney314 · Posted: Mon Aug 28, 2006 11:48 am Post subject: Nebraska Hold'em

Here's an experiment I thought of on another post. Change the game of hold'em so that you have to use your two hole cards instead of any 5 of the 7 with the board. This is similar to omaha in that you have to use exactly 3 board cards and 2 in your hole.
There is a lot of luck involved in hold'em and short term variance allows you to take losses even if you have an edge on your opponents. My question is whether this would reduce variance or increase it. It seems to me that this would increase the skill factor, but by how much?
Introduce it at your next home game and see if it has any popularity (although this will be difficult in most cases since people are resistant to change).
Has anyone thought of this before and does it have a name? Because of the negative connotations I rejected the name "Homaha" and so far I have Nebraska Hold'em. Any suggestions on the name?

jbrennen · Straight Flush Joined: 16 Aug 2005 Posts: 422

Well, if you have to play both hole cards, it would seem to increase the value of suited connectors and suited gappers -- hands which could conceivably make either a straight or a flush.

Pocket pairs would seem to be less valuable because you can't ever make a straight or a flush. Obviously, a high pocket pair is still a strong hand, but if the flop shows obvious flush/straight draws, you're locked out... T-T is probably worthless with a K-Q-J flop, while in standard Hold'em you've got a decent draw.

Ace-rag unsuited is even less attractive than hold'em, because you're going to have to play your rag kicker and you can't hope to make a longshot nut flush. (And any straight you might make would be the "idiot" end of the straight.)

I'm not convinced it would have more or less variance. In the short term, probably more as people took time to figure out how to win, but it would probably even out once folks figured it out.

deadmoney314 · Posted: Mon Aug 28, 2006 12:34 pm Post subject:

got me thinking about the pocket pairs, one thing that would be interesting is that you would not be counterfeited playing something like 44. If someone had AK and the board played 99Q 2 Q, the 4's would still win. A board of QQ999 would still work as well.

jbrennen · Straight Flush Joined: 16 Aug 2005 Posts: 422

I ran a quick computer simulation... Against 8 random hands, the "advantage" or "disadvantage" that a particular hand has, compared to a random hand. So 0% means that a hand wins exactly as often as a random hand.

First score is for this "nebraska hold'em", second score in parentheses is for standard hold'em:

72o : -60% (-52%)
76o : -2% (-11%)
87o : +3% (-8%)
J2o : -48% (-36%)
A6o : -9% (-3%)
AQo : +60% (+53%)

72s : -19% (-19%)
76s : +36% (+20%)
87s : +41% (+25%)
J2s : -2% (0%)
A6s : +40% (+33%)
AQs : +107% (+91%)

55 : +31% (+20%)
TT : +79% (+72%)
AA : +221% (+209%)

Looks like I was wrong about the pocket pairs. All of the pocket pairs become more likely to win at showdown. Most of the suited hands become better, and those which become worse (like J2s) don't lose much value.

Unsuited connectors gain value, while unsuited non-connecting cards seem to fare the worst.

deadmoney314 · Posted: Mon Aug 28, 2006 1:58 pm Post subject:

Thanks for the thoughtful analysis. I think someone should propose this game to pros like Phil Helmuth who complain so much about luck. It sounds like it would be a lot easier to destroy opponents who play any two.

WhatASurprise · Posted: Fri Jul 25, 2008 5:57 pm Post subject:

Actually, this game has a name: Greek Hold`em. I think they play it at the Bellagio.

	Full Tilt Poker is licensed by the Kahnawake Gaming Commission. © Copyright 2004 - 2005 FullTiltPoker.com., All Rights Reserved