Bomb Pots - Good or Bad? (2 Viewers)

[monkeydog]

I played at Cowboys Casino in Calgary the last two nights. Stakes were $1/$3 with $10 bomb pots at dealer change. $500 max buy-in.

Bomb pots were not mandatory and only went if six or more people agreed. Both nights there was one person who didn't play and no one seemed to care if someone sat out.

At first I liked the idea and enjoyed the dynamic/gamble that it added to the game.

Then I noticed that most players did not seem to have fun once the flop came out - it would almost always check around, then someone would make a half pot bet, then a lot of folding and grumbling.

When someone called, or raised, it often lead to an all in by the river, with someone busting and leaving. Usually it was one of the "fish".

It got me thinking about how bomb pots might actually be bad for the game. It makes it easier for the "fish" bust out fast, feel unlucky and not rebuy.

Just wondering what others think about bomb pots and what they do to a game.

 

[NotRealNameNoSir]

https://www.pokerchipforum.com/threads/bomb-pots-good-or-bad.124944/

 

[merkong]

Not a fan.

 

[detroitdad]

Make the bomb pots "Gods Game" and you will avoid the folding on a flop bet.

 

[jxfan]

Then I noticed that most players did not seem to have fun once the flop came out - it would almost always check around, then someone would make a half pot bet, then a lot of folding and grumbling.

I think if you did bomb pots with PLO, or double board PLO (which is God's Game) then there would be less checking, less folding, and more action! Also I'm surprised people don't play for the split pot; unless if I'm misunderstanding, bomb pots are also double board. Rarely does someone scoop both sides, though I guess if the table doesn't like to gamble, then they'll fold one pair.

 

[MrBoosh]

You can win or lose a lot of money in a bomb pot. You are right that inexperienced players can easily go bust if they are not careful. I almost prefer to keep them to a minimum until closer to the end of the night. They can definitely wreck some players stacks and send them home early if they weren't planning to buy back in.

 

[ekricket]

I think by design they are to induce stacks vs stacks. The preflop money makes strategic bets on the turn and river basically all in.

Nobodies ever rolled deep enough to bet them right after the flop so usually no one tries to.

 

[gopherblue]

I like them, if played cautiously:

$10 double board PLO bomb pot at a deep and splashy 5/5 game (yes, I was surprised it wasn’t a $20 bomb pot too):

Hero in mid/late position: Ah5h4s5s

Flopped straight on bottom, gutshot hearts straight flush draw on top

Bet, raise, call, hero raised to 150. Four callers

Turn blank on bottom, steel wheel hits on top

Checked to me, bet 350, two callers

River paired 2 on bottom, blank on top

Hero shoved 180, two callers

Did not have nuts on bottom, but scooped anyway.

 

[DoubleEagle]

I play in three different local groups that use bomb pots. All three do it the same way. When a pot is $10 or over $1 is raked and held for a future bomb pot. $5 is raked and held for $100 and over. Once the bomb pot rake reaches $50, we have a bomb pot hand. Every player draws a card in order to call the game since we are always dealer's choice. Everyone gets to see the flop for free with the $50 in the middle. It can generate some very nice pots. Works for us.

 

[surfik]

"Bomb pots" are fun with PLO, even better with two boards....With NLH they are pointless

 

[DoubleEagle]

"Bomb pots" are fun with PLO, even better with two boards....With NLH they are pointless

We never play holdem.

 

[AutoDonk5000]

I played at Cowboys Casino in Calgary the last two nights. Stakes were $1/$3 with $10 bomb pots at dealer change. $500 max buy-in.

Bomb pots were not mandatory and only went if six or more people agreed. Both nights there was one person who didn't play and no one seemed to care if someone sat out.

At first I liked the idea and enjoyed the dynamic/gamble that it added to the game.

Then I noticed that most players did not seem to have fun once the flop came out - it would almost always check around, then someone would make a half pot bet, then a lot of folding and grumbling.

When someone called, or raised, it often lead to an all in by the river, with someone busting and leaving. Usually it was one of the "fish".

It got me thinking about how bomb pots might actually be bad for the game. It makes it easier for the "fish" bust out fast, feel unlucky and not rebuy.

Just wondering what others think about bomb pots and what they do to a game.

I guess some portion of the time a fish also ends up with a massive stack. So iunno!

 

[Meowerdoom]

At my homegame we occasionally do some double board PLO bomb pots, and if you are at least halfway competent at PLO these can be huge money makers.

Most players are inexperienced at PLO in general so playing a bomb pot like this every once in a while is good way have an advantage over Hold'em players when they otherwise wouldn't have agreed to playing PLO.

 

[TheWhat]

We do them hourly. For the most part the "action" is welcomed, some nights the action isn't needed, other nights it absolutely is.

We effectively have 1 player who hates it, and it's because of his edge he gives up, due to the variable nature of them.

I'd say Good overall, but absolutely understand the sentiment against them.

 

[codehdn]

I've only played a couple bombpots so far (been playing poker for like a month lol) but I'm a huge fan, the only issue I've seen was at a home game it completely killed the game for the night because 4 people got all in, in a PLO Bomb Pot and people didn't buy back in. However at the card rooms I play at people seem to play them tighter so its less likely to break the game, there is also a constant flow of people coming in which helps. Maybe I just need more friends so I can call people if spots open up lol.

 

[Dbxela]

Overall I think they are bad but popular. Next game I'm going to try an hour of all bomb pots for lower buyins at the start of the game. Basically a bunch of flips to start the game with various stacks. Then I'll switch to pot-or-fold after suited flops to keep a bit of sanity when it gets deeper.

 

[merkong]

Overall I think they are bad but popular. Next game I'm going to try an hour of all bomb pots for lower buyins at the start of the game. Basically a bunch of flips to start the game with various stacks. Then I'll switch to pot-or-fold after suited flops to keep a bit of sanity when it gets deeper.

No offense but I’ll be a no for that game…

 

[Dbxela]

No offense but I’ll be a no for that game…

Why's that? What are you looking for from your bomb pots?

If it helps, you could be dealt out from the bomb pots, or turn up a little late.

 

[merkong]

I’ve just always been of the persuasion that bomb pots serve no real purpose. I wouldn’t ship $5 pre on J2 so why would I want to have to do it?

I get it a lot of folks seem to dig them.

And Pot or fold under different circumstances? I’m not sure under what discipline of poker I’d even begin to consider boning up on to play those hands effectively.

We don’t do 7-2 or the stand up game. We just play boring old NLHE unless it’s a mixed session.

The only prop we do is each player selects a card at the beginning of the session and if it pairs the flop everyone ships a blind. Across the whole flop 5 blinds from everyone.

I know, boring right?

 

[merkong]

Then I'll switch to pot-or-fold after suited flops to keep a bit of sanity when it gets deeper.

You guys do use basically the same dictionary on your side of the pond as we do here right?

To me, and maybe only me, that sounds horrible and not sane.

Again, I’m not a thread crapper I’m just getting paid ATM to do nothing and am hitting the forums rather hard.

I’ve always said, and it’ll be in my anthology on hosting, chapter 5 I believe… Play what they want. Change games or change players. It’s the hosts choice and it’s a lot easier to change games than players.

All the best.

 

[Jeevansluck]

I absolutely dislike it. Actually, I hate it.

That said, as I’m getting back into live poker, it seems all games want to feature this circus crap. I’m not a fan, but I’m trying to learn and accept it. Either accept it, and try to win a pot here and there, or give away money every orbit and fold, which I was doing without even looking at my cards sometimes, but that’s how much I dislike PLO and various other games. Double board HE pots are growing on me, however.

I did finally find a nice heavy cash game that runs strictly NLHE. There are still some NLHE purists out there.

 

[Dbxela]

IMO:

• NLHE played well is actually fundamentally quite boring for everyone involved
• Players need to play somewhat badly to make it interesting
• People play badly when they use intuition, system 1 thinking - it can't do bayesian stuff.
• Bomb pots and side games cause wins and losses and experiences that nudge everyone away from even stacks and even thinking, so the game gets more interesting.
• Alcohol can help with that too.
• BUT this needs balancing with keeping the game running, avoiding too much action that breaks the recs.

That's the puzzle to solve. Hence I'm trying lots of small stakes all-in flips at the start, and then capped novelty pots less frequently later on.

 

[PlaidDragon]

IMO:

• NLHE played well is actually fundamentally quite boring for everyone involved

This is true.... right up to the point where I bluff someone off the best hand.

Regarding the OP: I'll still play bomb pots but in general I don't like not having pre-flop to act and collect information about the hand.

 

[TheRealTeddyKGB]

NLHE played well is actually fundamentally quite boring for everyone involved

I agree NLHE can be boring with 8 or 9 players at a Cash table. 6? I have a lot of fun with 6!

"Bomb pots" are fun with PLO, even better with two boards....With NLH they are pointless

Dunno about pointless unless you mean with a single board. (Who does that?!?) I think PLO is a GREAT game but it shouldn't be mixed in with NLHE as they are very different games with completely different variances. Unless you're just trying to exploit players with little to no experience with PLO. Then I see your point.

 

[Taghkanic]

Good or bad for the game I think depends on how well-rolled your players are, and how much tolerance they have for big swings.

In the games I host or play in, the bomb pots are usually double-board PLO, with an ante between 3-5 BB. Players can opt out if they want.

These hands are sometimes quick and unexciting, with someone potting it on the flop and taking it down. Or everyone missing anything close to the nuts, playing it safe and checking it down.

But much more often the pots get very big, usually with at least one player felted.

GOOD: These break up the potential monotony of hold ’em, allow for some more gambly fun, and ***if*** the losing player(s) rebuy, get a bunch more money on the table. They may also help weaker players occasionally make a score, letting them last longer in a tough game, since these hands have a lot more variance than hold ’em.

BAD: May lead to players getting frustrated by coolers/ bad beats, giving away hard won wins in one or two giant hands, with some cutting their night short because they are irritated or don’t feel like peeling repeatedly.

If you have players who enjoy swings and have multiple buyins in their pocket, it works. If they are playing short / too high for their bankroll, it can hurt the game.

 

[GeeOhVee]

I had almost the complete opposite experience as the OP, at the Golden Nugget in Lake Tahoe recently. Was gonna kill time while the wife played slots, and there was a list for a single 2/3 NLHE table (no other tables open). I jumped on the list and they filled it fairly quickly. $50 to $500, I bought in for $200, almost everyone else at $500. They were all regulars who knew each other, and they did a $10 bomb pot every dealer change. Multiple players were shoving in after the flop with non-premium hands... it was wild!