home pai gow poker

I'm thinking you could play pai gow poker at a home poker game with several players. Some thoughts:

*no need to designate one player as the player to beat, but have a pot you ante into.

*dealing this game, you'd need to be aware that newbies would be fouling their hand by making the 2 card hand higher than the 5 card hand - you'd probably want to announce this will be fixable and help them.

*you could just have the 5 card hand split the pot with the 2 card hand, winning both being possible. That could go pretty quick, so I like the idea of having to win both ways. If no one wins both ways, you ante again and deal again, leaving the pot alone otherwise

*If applying the above must win both rule, *mwbr*, I think you would want to limit the times you would bet on your hand. Maybe "show 2 card hand, bet, show 5 card hand, bet, then showdown"

*Is it possible the mwbr could make the game go on too long? I might want to start out testing it with the rule that if someone gets a pair of aces for the 2 card hand, it's an automatic split if not winning both ways, and the game is over

Any other thoughts? In particular, what would the effect be on basic strategy. In other words , is the normal way of splitting we do for the casino game not the best idea?

PS: the idea with dealer's choice is to pick a game you are good at but others may not be. Would this be a good game for that?

You could deal it like Omaha hilo where there's one pot to split between winners of the two hands. Or, if winning both is required, deal it like 7 stud and put some cards faceup. I lead the bidding with my exposed joker, push you off the pot, and have nothing, etc.

I don't think you'd use a standard set in as many cases as in a 1v1 game. If I had a flush with 2 small pairs, I'm pretty sure keeping the flush would be better than two pair. Pair/pair won't win a multi-player pot, but flush would keep an opponent from winning it most of the time.

I could see this going like a golf skins game where you're just begging for someone to win the 12th hole and break a string of ties to clear the carryovers.

this is basically chinese poker and is widely played in high limit rooms

If you have 5 or more players in the game it will have a significant effect on strategy.

- Against the dealer, there is a big incentive to have a K-high in your 2-card hand rather than a Q-high, and an Ace-high is much better than a king high. With 4 or more opponents, a Q-high is almost worthless, a King high is not very good, and the odds that someone will have a pair on top are significant.

- Hands where you would normally break up a straight or flush to improve your top hand might not be played that way. Breaking up AAA to put an ace in the 2-card hand might not be played that way.

Basically, the mediocre hands against the dealer - like QQ pair on the bottom - will become much less important.

thanks all for the input

Quote: sodawater

this is basically chinese poker and is widely played in high limit rooms

You inspired me to look this up. The rules are quite a bit different from pai gow poker if what I found is what you are talking about; for example 13 cards are dealt to each player [obviously a max of 4]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chinese_poker

Quote: gordonm888

If you have 5 or more players in the game it will have a significant effect on strategy.

- Against the dealer, there is a big incentive to have a K-high in your 2-card hand rather than a Q-high, and an Ace-high is much better than a king high. With 4 or more opponents, a Q-high is almost worthless, a King high is not very good, and the odds that someone will have a pair on top are significant.

- Hands where you would normally break up a straight or flush to improve your top hand might not be played that way. Breaking up AAA to put an ace in the 2-card hand might not be played that way.

Basically, the mediocre hands against the dealer - like QQ pair on the bottom - will become much less important.

I'm thinking your points would especially apply if there was a split each round. I am leaning heavily towards the must-win-both-ways way of playing, but I think your points apply largely there too?