Jump to content

An Open Face Chinese Poker Variant That Is Also A Poker Game


Recommended Posts

Was just thinking about this idea for an Open Face Chinese Poker variant that would also include betting, bluffing, hand reading, and tell reading. I would support an event like this at the WSOP for a bracelet, and I think it’s an interesting twist on the game that’s played today.

 

4 handed game, everyone antes and are dealt 5 cards face down. They place their 5 down cards, but leave them face down throughout the duration of the hand. Then, the player left of the button can check or bet. If he bets, his opponents must either call, raise or fold on fifth street.

 

On streets 6-9 players place their cards face up in order, with the player left of the button always going first, just like in traditional Open Face. Once all players remaining in the hand have 9 cards, there is another betting round.

 

On streets 10-13 players place their cards face up in order, with the player left of the button always going first. Once all action is complete, the hands are turned over and the pot is split into three thirds. One third for the bottom, one third for the middle, and one third for the top hand. Whichever player still alive in the hand, provided it is not a fouled hand, has the best bottom wins that portion of the pot. The next third goes to the best middle hand, and finally, the best top hand gets the last third of the pot.

 

For this variant, there are no bonuses, no royalties, and no fantasy land. The game plays straight with anteing, betting, and folding. This variant could be played either structured limit, pot limit, or no limit. My instincts tell me that the best structure would be pot limit, but an argument can be made that limit is better. I don’t think a no limit variant would work all that well, but it could. Thoughts?

Link to post
Share on other sites

What happens to the pot if everyone (or everyone who makes it to the end) fouls?

 

Daniel Negreanu ‏@RealKidPoker 46m

@CasinoCity_AT a player could still bet the river with a fouled hand and scoop the whole pot! Otherwise, chop it up.

Link to post
Share on other sites

First of all, thank you for taking this topic seriously and not dismissing OFC as a bracelet contender. I appreciate your taking time to try to find a solution. I run the website Open Face Odds and I am very interested in seeing the game thrive and a betting variant (or several) come to light.

 

I think you are going to see two trains of thought developing: Pot-Limit a la PLO (Pineapple OFC), and Limit a la Stud (Standard OFC, most likely, but possibly Pineapple as well). My friends and I have been experimenting with a Pot-Limit Pineapple variant and I have to say the initial results are encouraging. Only one person wins the pot, no chopping (unless everyone fouls or there are ties). Blinds are set at 1-2, OOP has the option to call, fold, or raise. Betting is done before setting each time: deal, pull 1, pull 2. pull 3, pull 4. Folding requires a 6 pt penalty (and subsequently another 6 points if anyone reaches Fantasyland). Fantasyland hands are played with the same betting rounds, just with the FL player(s) knowing their cards. A fold to someone else's FL requires a 10 pt surrender fee (14-card FL) or 12 pt fee (15-card FL). We have been playing all cards face up (which I find perfectly reasonable since my math is decent and I like a good gamble), but I think there will be varying ranges of comfort with the amount of hidden information. We are also going to experiment with a 3-down, 2-up first five set, and then two more face down of the eight remaining.

 

I favor Pineapple as it's a manageable number of betting rounds. The exciting part now is you can bet, bluff, and you can fold. All of these bring the game firmly into the 'poker' arena. Understanding pot odds is now more important than ever. River bluffing or multiple street barreling is now completely relevant. IMO one of the most important aspects is the fold. Why should you be forced to play a terrible hand to the river? Or one whose plan looked good at first, but went poorly? You're not forced to play 27-off every time you get it in Holdem, nor are you forced to pay out a turn or river bet if it is your best interest to get away from the hand. Adding a fold into OFC will also make it more like real poker.

 

All of this is beta, nothing is set in stone, and I expect a lot of experimentation and adjustments among the poker community to settle on some standard rules, much the same as when Fantasyland was introduced into the standard OFC game.

 

I have posted this idea on the 2+2 Forum to get some feedback and multiple players plan to try it out in their home games. I have also mentioned it at a few minor online sites and there is definite interest among the players and management.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Dedicated to Phil Ivey:

 

This post is dedicated to Phil because he'd probably be the best at it for a very long time. Players overall poker strategies and philosophies can be categorized by different words. One player might be "creative", one might be "exploitive", one might play "balanced". Phil is the best I've ever seen at playing "exploitive." Players who play "exploitive" are most-often just going to find a way to win given enough time.

 

I'll refer to the OFC variant as "Negreanu's Chinese." Of all games, Negreanu's Chinese favors the exploitive players. It's no wonder that Negreanu would probably be the second best player in the world at it in my estimation. Seriously, no one else would be in the same class as Ivey and Negreanu for a very long time.

 

I think FCP's own "fluffdog" is a world-class exploiter but I can't even think of any other person I've ever seen play who deserves the 4th seat at that table.

 

That being said, if you could find a 4th for that table the play would be so masterful it would be like music. (I agree that Pot-Limit would play best)

 

On to the game itself:

 

Regular OFC is not that great of a game in my opinion. Once you get it, you get it. You generally set your hands the same overall style each time, building from the back. Negreanu's Chinese plays nothing like it. OFC is like most Hearts, Negreanu's Chinese is most like poker.

 

Because the play is SOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO exploitive, it does little good to talk about the way I would play, but I was thinking about it at dinner, and I remember having the inclination that it was more important to build your hand front to back, as opposed to regular OFC.

 

Think about if you were playing Stud Hi-Low and there was a 3rd hand for 4-J to qualify. Drawing that way sucks. The same thing happens in Negreanu's Chinese when you have a high hand in the middle. You asked for my thoughts, and my thoughts are that game play could be cleaner with regards to this. Get creative if you choose.

 

Well done sir.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 2 weeks later...

Dedicated to Phil Galfond:

 

This post is dedicated to Phil Galfond because he is the best conceptualizer of playing balanced in big bet games.

 

The reason Galfond looses to Ivey in every single hand is because Galfond has to balance 3 hands with one bet size which is like a needle in a haystack.

 

Tonight I think that high hand in the middle may be better.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I guess that if Ivey and Galfond were to never quit playing one another their plays would converge until they were both playing the solution to the largest poker game yet created.

 

I am humbled.

 

To Daniel.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 3 weeks later...

This catching on anywhere? I thought my group came up with the perfect name for this - Two Face Chinese Poker

 

I know everyone's trying out different variants, here's our most popular version so far -

 

5 cards face down, then 3 up, 3 up, 2 up. If you win 2/3 hands, you scoop the pot. If 3 people each win 1 hand, split it 3 ways. We added this to discourage pots from constantly inflating too much, which they were.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

This catching on anywhere? I thought my group came up with the perfect name for this - Two Face Chinese Poker

 

I know everyone's trying out different variants, here's our most popular version so far -

 

5 cards face down, then 3 up, 3 up, 2 up. If you win 2/3 hands, you scoop the pot. If 3 people each win 1 hand, split it 3 ways. We added this to discourage pots from constantly inflating too much, which they were.

 

WOW WOW WOW WOW WOW

Link to post
Share on other sites

Was just thinking about this idea for an Open Face Chinese Poker variant that would also include betting, bluffing, hand reading, and tell reading. I would support an event like this at the WSOP for a bracelet, and I think it’s an interesting twist on the game that’s played today.

 

4 handed game, everyone antes and are dealt 5 cards face down. They place their 5 down cards, but leave them face down throughout the duration of the hand. Then, the player left of the button can check or bet. If he bets, his opponents must either call, raise or fold on fifth street.

 

On streets 6-9 players place their cards face up in order, with the player left of the button always going first, just like in traditional Open Face. Once all players remaining in the hand have 9 cards, there is another betting round.

 

On streets 10-13 players place their cards face up in order, with the player left of the button always going first. Once all action is complete, the hands are turned over and the pot is split into three thirds. One third for the bottom, one third for the middle, and one third for the top hand. Whichever player still alive in the hand, provided it is not a fouled hand, has the best bottom wins that portion of the pot. The next third goes to the best middle hand, and finally, the best top hand gets the last third of the pot.

 

For this variant, there are no bonuses, no royalties, and no fantasy land. The game plays straight with anteing, betting, and folding. This variant could be played either structured limit, pot limit, or no limit. My instincts tell me that the best structure would be pot limit, but an argument can be made that limit is better. I don’t think a no limit variant would work all that well, but it could. Thoughts?

 

BOOM!

Link to post
Share on other sites

5 cards face down, then 3 up, 3 up, 2 up. If you win 2/3 hands, you scoop the pot. If 3 people each win 1 hand, split it 3 ways. We added this to discourage pots from constantly inflating too much, which they were.

 

Daniel, may we discuss this variant first?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Daniel, may we discuss this variant first?

To add on, 5/3/3/2 feels really right, because the betting rounds feel extremely similar to hold em. The level of information currently available, the opportunity for hands to improve, etc. is really similar to preflop, flop, turn, and river (in fact, we started calling each round flop, turn, and river cause it makes so much sense).

 

The only downside is that the 2/3 rule means going for a flush or straight in the back is rarely worth it. Pair/pair/pair is what you usually go for. We tried balancing this out by guarenteeing the player with a non-fouled flush or better in the back 1/3 of the pot, but this is still being explored. However I really think 2/3 is necessary to prevent every hand from going crazy.

 

Edit: more important than keeping pots under control is the 2/3 rule makes bluffing viable. Forgot to mention this. Without the 2/3 rule, you can't get players to fold. Multiple opponents thinking along the lines of "I know I got the back, I might have the middle, correct to call".

Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...