I mean it's not 2004, but sure. Lots of low-stakes home games and cardroom 1-2 games still play like this.
Hot Take: Small Blinds are Unnecessary in Cash Games (3 Viewers)
- Thread starter MrCatPants
- Start date
My local game is very passive preflop for the most part. Some bingo playing but I'm talking about situations in which it's literally folded to me in the small blind and only the big blind left to act. I'm not raising 8/3 offsuit with two limped behind and BB left to act.Respectfully disagree.
Many games are super loose-passive pre, and always raising limpers from SB is dramatically increasing variance at best, and lighting money on fire at worst.
Do you really want to see a flop five ways from worst possible position with 84o? If so, please DM me an invite to your game.
So this may be a minor distinction or even semantics, but I think the reason for the blinds isn't to force the two guys in worst position to put money in the pot, it's to give all the other players a reason to want to come into the pot. Which is why antes work. And I wonder why nobody is discussing antes.
OP
OP
MrCatPants
Full House
I really shouldn't be feeding the resident PCF attention whore.
Yet.... You do.... Lolz
OP
OP
MrCatPants
Full House
I think it's both, and I don't believe it's just a semantic difference.
Hold'em would be a ridiculously boring game without blinds, because there would be no incentive to play anything other than strong hands. Blinds give you that incentive in two ways: they guarantee that money is in the pot every hand (which motivates all players to enter the pot and win it), and they give players in EP a reason to play at a positional disadvantage (because they already have money in the pot).
Table antes accomplish the goal of getting money in the pot to play for, but not the goal of incentivizing early position players to enter more pots - everybody is paying an ante every hand. A button antes also gets money in the pot, but the guy with the best position at the table is already going to play more hands than anybody else, so it doesn't drive action like blinds do.
Last edited:
OP
OP
MrCatPants
Full House
We all agree this is cash game specific though, yes? Tournaments are a different beast and I think the small blind is important there, given how short stacked things tend to get mid to late in tournaments.
So you are essentially saying that a SB-posted table ante is preferable to a BB-posted table ante, and that both are preferable to either individually-posted antes or a button-posted table ante.
For sure, because so much of a tournament is spent short-stacked.
If you're short-stacked in a cash game, that's by choice.
OP
OP
MrCatPants
Full House
Antes pre-date blinds I assume? I wonder what the history is of what structures matched up to what games and why? Tried some googling but couldn't find anything solid.
To be clear, I wasn't arguing better or worse so much as which option would drive more action. Whether more action is better or worse is a matter of opinion.
And yeah, I think I was heavily implying that, but I don't really believe it. Unlike blinds, antes are dead money, so it doesn't really matter where they come from, and that second incentive (playing out of position to defend your blind bet) doesn't apply.
So I see where you're going, and you're right. It doesn't really matter where antes come from - they juice the pot, but they can't really be defended and thus don't drive action via defense.
outside of 2/5 games, I'm not sure this would have a substantial impact on the game due to typical effective stacks.
I want to say, I'm not a fan of equal blinds, but I don't think I have a valid objection;
Often when I see blind structure like this there is a higher bring in, and I dislike this as well
In NLH I would think most would prefer a lower SB so I can save the 1/2 blind per orbit, whereas in PLO it doesn't really matter because the SB is rounded up (for betting) anyway.
Can you defend. articulate or sell why y / y is better than x / y for blinds? I'm open minded!
7 card stud without a button predates communal card games, antes and bring ins, not blinds - I would prefer citation but I think not many would argue with 'common knowledge'
OP
OP
MrCatPants
Full House
Another positive for equal blinds - in pot limit games it makes pot calculations preflop easier.
You think to much...
I always round the SB up anyway when doing preflop pot calculations.
Keeping in mind that the O.P. was addressing .25/.50 games, my position is the SB carries next to no value in how a flop game plays. It eliminates a useless denomination, unless of course you are the type of player that opens for $2.25 or $3.75, in that case, carry on with your bad self.
Tough to argue. But as a guy who’s always had quarters, that 2x transition from a 50 cent frac to a dollar chip doesn’t feel right.
Ditto
This is why I advocate straddling to $1 in .25/.50 PLO. Speeds game up so much.
DO YOU KNOW HOW MUCH I SPENT ON THOSE QUARTERS????
ninedeuce
Two Pair
There's a noticeable difference in how our $0.50/$1 game plays the few times we've made it $1/1.
Which is, the number of BvB checked pots increased dramatically, and these hands often continued to involve little or no action to showdown. I.e., the game had a higher proportion of lame hands that went all three streets, diminishing the fun/excitement of the game for pretty much everyone.
Even though it was only $0.50, when the SB had a decision to make that didn't include checking, there's just a lot more folding (getting folks on to the next hand faster) and raising and heading to the flop with a bigger pot, more aggression/bluffing, etc. (leading to more exciting post flop action).
That said, this is a relatively friendly, passive game, and it's online, with the app doing the math (so betting $2.25 isn't a biggie). Could imagine that making that making the SB and BB in a more aggressive game, esp if it removes fracs, could speed up the game and create bigger pots.
OP
OP
MrCatPants
Full House
So your position is, it speeds up the game (BB/BB)? - I like it
OP
OP
MrCatPants
Full House
yup. Speed, eliminates a useless denomination, makes pot calculations easier and pot splitting, heavily reduces buying/selling of the lowest denomination and making change, and unless you have a highly nitty game where pots get back to the blinds unopened regularly, it really doesn't affect play other than committing an additional .5 BB per orbit.
Speed - Okay
eliminates a useless denomination - Not necessary (.25 / .5 game or now .5/.5 the .25 is still in play)
makes pot calculations easier - Not necessary (I find it easy as the standard casino rule is to round the SB up to the BB)
pot splitting - Not really, in proper split pots the extra should go to out of position, in split games like big O it goes to the high hand, when quartered extra should goto the quartered side and then out of position, okay that last one is complex but its going to come up either way
heavily reduces buying/selling of the lowest denomination - Not necessary (.25 / .5 game or now .5/.5 the .25 is still in play)
making change - Not necessary (.25 / .5 game or now .5/.5 the .25 is still in play)
I think you still have a win on my vote though! Meaning I agree with you
I dunno. People are always mentioning this. I've just never thought it was a big deal. Like, I'm aware that it happens at my game, but I have no idea how often it happens or if my players are just strangely good at it or what, because I barely notice it because it just isn't a big deal.
OP
OP
MrCatPants
Full House
Many of these assume you're still using fracs,Speed - Okay
eliminates a useless denomination - Not necessary (.25 / .5 game or now .5/.5 the .25 is still in play)
makes pot calculations easier - Not necessary (I find it easy as the standard casino rule is to round the SB up to the BB)
pot splitting - Not really, in proper split pots the extra should go to out of position, in split games like big O it goes to the high hand, when quartered extra should goto the quartered side and then out of position, okay that last one is complex but its going to come up either way
heavily reduces buying/selling of the lowest denomination - Not necessary (.25 / .5 game or now .5/.5 the .25 is still in play)
making change - Not necessary (.25 / .5 game or now .5/.5 the .25 is still in play)
I think you still have a win on my vote though! Meaning I agree with you
transitioning from .25/.50 -> .50/.50 you're at least able to use .50 fracs and it's just single chips versus multiple to meet the blinds and so should limit their appearance
transitioning from .50/1 ->1/1 you can get rid of fracs all together
OP
OP
MrCatPants
Full House
It's not a big deal, but it doesn't speed the game up either. Usually every 45-60 mins in my game someone is having to sell a big stack of fracs down to the other end of the table to distribute.
Create an account or login to comment
You must be a member in order to leave a comment
Create account
Create an account and join our community. It's easy!
Log in
Already have an account? Log in here.
Similar threads
