Volatility ranking of games

Coyote

4 of a Kind
Supporting Member
Joined
Jan 28, 2018
Messages
5,642
Reaction score
8,245
Location
Athens, Greece
Experienced players, poker theorists and mathematicians are kindly asked to chime in.
So, for community-cards games (ie with a "board"), I guess (not sure, though) that the ranking in volatility is:
-TX Hold 'em
-(Plain) Pineapple (3 hole cards, one of them immediately discarded before even betting, just for better initial hand selection; game continues as TX Hold 'em)
-Cuckoo Hold 'em (3 hole cards, one discarded upon seeing the flop, the remaining two being obligatory to use, so only three of the board useable)
-Crazy Pineapple (3 hole cards, one discarded upon seeing the flop, game continues as TX Hold 'em after that)
-Three card Omaha (3 hole cards to be kept to the end, only two useable, so three board cards obligatory to use)
-Omaha (4 hole cards to be kept to the end, only two useable, so three board cards obligatory to use)

I might be making a mistake there; is really 3-card Omaha more volatile than Crazy Pineapple?
Do those two games deserve to be played PL pre-flop?

I 'm always in search of some variety, without resorting to outrageous games, and keeping it as simple as possible.
 

BGinGA

Royal Flush
Tourney Director
Supporting Member
Joined
Oct 29, 2014
Messages
25,692
Reaction score
39,798
Location
Atlanta
is really 3-card Omaha more volatile than Crazy Pineapple?
Do those two games deserve to be played PL pre-flop?

I 'm always in search of some variety, without resorting to outrageous games, and keeping it as simple as possible.
Yes. Three cards with option post-flop is more volatile than two cards with option. Either game can be played as fixed-limit, pot-limit, or no-limit.

Try adding Super-Hold'em or Big O to your rotation. Both add more volatility without extra complexity. Either game also plays well as Hi/Lo.

I'd also argue that regular Pineapple is more volatile than cuckoo, since it retains more options for hand construction.
 

Coyote

4 of a Kind
Supporting Member
Joined
Jan 28, 2018
Messages
5,642
Reaction score
8,245
Location
Athens, Greece
Thanks Dave! :)

Another, possibly interesting, idea of watering down Super Hold'em (three useable hole cards) would be minimum two hole cards to use; not one or none.
 

BGinGA

Royal Flush
Tourney Director
Supporting Member
Joined
Oct 29, 2014
Messages
25,692
Reaction score
39,798
Location
Atlanta
Thanks Dave! :)

Another, possibly interesting, idea of watering down Super Hold'em (three useable hole cards) would be minimum two hole cards to use; not one or none.
That won't change it very much. Being able to play three from your hand is what makes this game very dangerous -- hidden straights, flushes, full-houses, and quads.
 

Coyote

4 of a Kind
Supporting Member
Joined
Jan 28, 2018
Messages
5,642
Reaction score
8,245
Location
Athens, Greece
That's why I won't spread that shit anytime soon:ROFL: :ROFLMAO:
We used to do that as clueless Law (clearly NOT Math) students back in the '80s:D
 

BGinGA

Royal Flush
Tourney Director
Supporting Member
Joined
Oct 29, 2014
Messages
25,692
Reaction score
39,798
Location
Atlanta
That's a fact, Jack.
lol

Quick question for somebody who's obviously played before: What's the absolute worst hand that could win heads-up? Show your work.... both hands and the board.

My fav Super-Hold'em story is the guy with quad aces King kicker who lost to not one but TWO royal flushes.... :D
 

upNdown

Royal Flush
Joined
Aug 8, 2016
Messages
12,312
Reaction score
15,584
Location
boston
lol

Quick question for somebody who's obviously played before: What's the absolute worst hand that could win heads-up? Show your work.... both hands and the board.

My fav Super-Hold'em story is the guy with quad aces King kicker who lost to not one but TWO royal flushes.... :D
I think I’ve only played it once, and it was just a few orbits, and as part of a SOHE type game. I saw how dangerous it could be, but I look forward to hearing stories.
 

Coyote

4 of a Kind
Supporting Member
Joined
Jan 28, 2018
Messages
5,642
Reaction score
8,245
Location
Athens, Greece
The version with [3] or [2 of 3] useable hole cards was very common here, before internationalization of TX Hold'em. Without blinds, antes only, and in 5 betting rounds:rolleyes:
Can't recall anything particular, other than it was not very surprising, however awful, to lose with big full houses against concealed quads (three in the hole).

I was on the winning end of such a hand once upon a New Year's eve (could have been '89), breaking a friend who had Aces' full, with my three 8s, plus an innocent-looking 8 on the board.

When, many years later, rather recently that is, I was trying to introduce to my crew American, internationally standard forms of poker, basically Hold'em, hands like that were my strong arguments. That particular friend always remembered that New Year's eve too, remarkably not by the name of the year, either:D
 

detroitdad

Royal Flush
Joined
Nov 6, 2014
Messages
27,531
Reaction score
40,711
Location
Michigan
Experienced players, poker theorists and mathematicians are kindly asked to chime in.
So, for community-cards games (ie with a "board"), I guess (not sure, though) that the ranking in volatility is:
-TX Hold 'em
-(Plain) Pineapple (3 hole cards, one of them immediately discarded before even betting, just for better initial hand selection; game continues as TX Hold 'em)
-Cuckoo Hold 'em (3 hole cards, one discarded upon seeing the flop, the remaining two being obligatory to use, so only three of the board useable)
-Crazy Pineapple (3 hole cards, one discarded upon seeing the flop, game continues as TX Hold 'em after that)
-Three card Omaha (3 hole cards to be kept to the end, only two useable, so three board cards obligatory to use)
-Omaha (4 hole cards to be kept to the end, only two useable, so three board cards obligatory to use)

I might be making a mistake there; is really 3-card Omaha more volatile than Crazy Pineapple?
Do those two games deserve to be played PL pre-flop?

I 'm always in search of some variety, without resorting to outrageous games, and keeping it as simple as possible.

I personally wouldn't classify any of these games as "volatile". If you want crazy volatile attend my game, or a meet up. Then we can have a discussion lol.
 

BGinGA

Royal Flush
Tourney Director
Supporting Member
Joined
Oct 29, 2014
Messages
25,692
Reaction score
39,798
Location
Atlanta
I personally wouldn't classify any of these games as "volatile". If you want crazy volatile attend my game, or a meet up. Then we can have a discussion lol.
You've clearly never played No-Limit Super-Hold'em Hi/Lo Double-board. Makes ANY Omaha-based game look tame.
 

Coyote

4 of a Kind
Supporting Member
Joined
Jan 28, 2018
Messages
5,642
Reaction score
8,245
Location
Athens, Greece
I personally wouldn't classify any of these games as "volatile". If you want crazy volatile attend my game, or a meet up. Then we can have a discussion lol.
I 'm not in search of volatility. Just a little variety over TX Hold'em without too much volatility. Just fathoming the volatility of games in the area between Hold'em and PLO (even PLO is too much for my liking);)
:)
 
Top Bottom