In criticism of the straddle rule

TBC, who many of you may be familiar with, was asking about my opinions on the live straddle in the comment section from a prior post.  As I was writing my response, I realized that I've always disliked the straddle rule, but never truly laid out my thoughts as to why I dislike the rule.  Therefore, I figured I capture my thoughts in a post.

There are 2 types of straddles that I'm familiar with: the UTG straddle and the Mississippi straddle.  It serves that I should explain the differences between the two, and how, in fact, a straddle in poker terms, is defined.

• A straddle is an optional blind bet, where the player, acting as a an additional blind (next to the small blind & big blind), places a bet double or greater than the big blind amount.  It is in effect a blind raise, but action begins with the player immediately to the left of the straddler and closes with the straddler who may check (facing limps around the board), raise, or fold (given a prior raise).
• The standard straddle rule allows fro the straddler to place a straddle from the UTG position, forcing UTG+1 to act first.  Action will close with the UTG position - the small & big blinds can call the straddle bet or fold prior to action closing with the straddler.
• The Mississippi straddle allows the straddler to place a straddle from any position, save for the small & big blinds.  Therefore, one could straddle from the UTG position as above, or straddle from the BTN which forces the first action on the small blind.

All things being equal, there is no inherent advantage to a straddle since all positions / players have the same equal opportunity based on the straddle rules - i.e. straddle is open to all players who opt to do it.  The inherent purpose of a straddle is to add action to the game; i.e. it forces any callers to call for >=2x BB, adding money to the pot, in turn making the pot worth more to fight over.

--- Opinion ---

Generally, I believe that the standard straddle is a waste - you're buying closing action for 2xBB (or more, which is a greater waste) for the PF round.  Thereafter, you're going to have to work from presumably terrible position as the UTG - save for the exception of if all positions fold and the blinds are the only callers.  That said, since the pots are double where they would normally be sized, I think the person employing the straddle should be raising with increased regularity (greater range) over the non-straddled hands - and in my myopic data points, the straddlers usually do.  There are a few thoughts that I have with regard to increasing the raising frequency from the straddle's position:

• The raise should be sized much larger than a normal raise; after all the pots are double as larger, perhaps a double-sized raise is in order.  For example, in a 1/2 game with a $4 straddle, if there are 4 limpers, the pot is ~$16-20, where it would normally be $8-10 without the straddle.  Therefore, a straddler's raise should be in the range of $25-30, whereby the non-straddle's raise sizing should be in the range of $12-15.  That's a healthy difference, as most players know that set mining becomes less and less profitable the more north of 10% full stacks they go (i.e. given a full $200 stack, $25-30 is about 15% effective stacks).
• Again, given my myopic data points, I've seen a ton of raising out of the straddle positions, and given a large enough raise, the straddler usually folds out the action and scoops a decent pot.  In other words, players at low stakes live poker tend to overestimate the value of limping a straddle pot, and tend to fold to the "unexpected" resistance / raise.  A 2BB mistake for each player adds up to a lot of money for the straddler to use to his advantage when he scoops.
• Following on the point above, if a known straddler regularly raises, then the non-straddling players should consider limping their big hands with the expectation to limp / raise.  They could do this with bluffs as well, since the straddler is unlikely to be strong given his past history.

That said, I believe standard straddles have their time & place to wield as a tool to your advantage. For example, if you find yourself at a table full of tight / passive players, a straddle could serve to open up the game.  Players get frustrated throwing in a straddle limp only to get raised off their limped hands.  Frustration generally leads to poor play.

Personally, I tend to approach straddle hands with a sharper eye.  I tighten my range, realizing that the limping range should be smaller and be able to withstand a healthy raise.  I should have a purpose for calling with the expectation that not only the straddler may raise, but also any other position may raise.  Therefore, I tend to drop the "dominated hands" out of my range (KT, QT, etc.) for fear of the pending raise.

FWIW, only once have I tried the limp / re-raise move - it did indeed work - but it definitely got my heart rate up (I had KQ if I recall correctly, and I'm not sure whether it wound up with me shoving a blank flop as a bluff).  It's definitely outside of my comfort zone, but I would try it again when an opportunity presents itself, i.e. a habitual straddler always raising on the closing action.

Another point about straddles, it doubles the stakes of the table. Essentially, it makes the BB 2x or more. Therefore, if there's a straddle, each player must "limp" the new BB size (or raise in increments of the new BB size) - reducing full stacks (originally 100 BB) to 50 BB. Realizing that fact, you're not playing nearly as deep as you were prior to the straddle - and it makes the table a lot more costly to play. I believe a professional's advantage lies the deeper the stacks are - the straddle shifts the advantage more in favor of the worse players. Look, it comes down to this: I sit down at a 1/2 or 1/3 table and want to play those stakes. If it's going up to a 1 / 3 / 6 table, then I may as well switch over to 2/5.

Most of the above applies to the standard straddle, but can be applied to the Mississippi straddle.  However, it should be pointed out that for the Mississippi straddle, the clear advantage is straddling the BTN and other late positions.  As a smart player, you need to do the same to even the advantage out.  In other words, a BTN straddle takes away the PF advantage of blinds acting last, forcing them to put dead money in the pot and act immediately to complete the dead money or fold with terrible position from that point forward.  If you're losing your BB ability to act last, then you need to gain that ability back by straddling the BTN yourself.

FWIW, when the Mississippi straddle is allowed where I'm playing, unless others are opting for it, I generally try to avoid the topic altogether.  I feel like if I start doing it (something I'd like to do - straddle the BTN & CO), then I'm encouraging others to do it.  All of a sudden, the price of poker just went up and I'm playing a 1 / 3 / 6 or 1 / 2 / 4 game with 50BB stacks when I should just play 2/5.  I don't think I've ever standard straddled - I don't think I've ever played in a game that tight where I feel it warranted - and if I were in that kind of game, I'd get up & change tables!