Hey all--I invented a new form of poker last night. Tell me if u think this has any merit or not...

Everyone starts with four cards that are seperated into two holdem hands. The cards are dealt the way they are dealt.  In other words, u can't switch ur cards around at all.  The betting goes just like holdem, and each player is betting on the strengh of both hands. The best overall hand and the second best hand split the pot upon showdown, but there is a major twist i added to actually make this interesting

Before the cards are turned over, the last aggressor in the hand has the option of receiving a fifth card that can be added to either one of his two holdem hands. If he decides he doesn't want a fifth card, then action immediately ends and the showdown proceeds as normal. If he does decide he wants a fifth card, he can put any amount of money up to the size of the pot as an additional bet. However, after the fifth card is added to one of his two holdem hands, all three cards must be played for that hand! Also, the aggressor has now opened the option up for other players to receive a fifth card.

The next player with the option is the player who had the best overall hand during the previous deal. For him to recieve a fifth card, he must either call the bet that was made by the aggressor or raise up to the size of the pot. If the aggressor did not make a bet but still elected to recieve a fifth card, then this player (here on out designated as player #2) can also "check" or place up to a pot sized bet. The last player with the option to receive a fifth card is the player with the second best overall hand during the previous deal. If he wants to recieve a fifth card, again he must call, but he DOES NOT have the option ro raise!

During the "fifth hole card" round of betting (or sixth street, if u like) a player still has the option to fold if they don't want to continue with the transaction of getting a fifth card, but if the want to continue playing their hand, they must choose to get a fifth card. Normally there will be one player at the table who will not have the option of receiving a fifth card, but he may still participate in the hand by calling the bet and/or raise that occurred during the sixth street of play.

To keep everyone honest, I have given power to player #1, or the player who had the best overall hand during the previous deal, to call out the actions of the last aggressor (or player LA) if he feels that LA should have received a fifth card BUT IS LYING to keep the pot small and avoid additional confrontations with the other players, or to avoid any other player from improving by getting a fifth card. If player #1 suspects this, he can order player LA to turn his cards over, and bet 1.5 times the pot that LA can receive a fifth card and have his hand improve to either the overall best hand or the second best hand. Obviously everyone will now have to turn their hands over so that this can be established. Player #1 can pick which hand he would like the fifth card to be added. If LA improves to the best hand, he must pay the size of the pot to player #1. If LA improves to the second best hand, he must pay half the pot to player #1.

However, there is more recourse that can occur. If player #2 decides that he has been jipped of a fifth card as well, then he can decided to take a similar action that player #1 has taken, BUT he must make the determination BEFORE LA RECEIVES HIS FIFTH CARD! For example, player #2 can claim that he can make the best or second best hand with a fifth card, but he only puts up 1.5 times the pot in stake for his claim. This is to protect the winings the LA receives from player #1. It would not be fair for him to lose the money he's won, but it would also not be fair for player #1 to have to pay out the bet either. I know this is getting confusing, but I explain the payouts below! He then gets his fifth card and adds it to one of his hands. Now, player #1 still has to continue with his bet, even if he sees player #2 improve to something big. Thus, I have created a system of checks and balances much like the US government in this game  The elements I have added make this game a good mix of omaha, holdem, draw, and home game kinda stuff.

Here is how final payments are made during this recourse round that I've described. This is a fair bit complicated and could use some revision if y'all want to comment. Let's say that player #2 does not get invovled in the recourse process. If LA does not make the best hand or the second best hand as the result of a fifth card, he receives the entire 1.5x bet from player #1. If LA makes the best hand, player #1 receives a bet that is the size of the pot. If LA makes the second best hand, player #1 receives a bet that is half the size of the pot.

If player #2 gets involved in recourse, his bets are wagered against the bets of player #1. The reason for this is that player #2 cannot get involved in recourse without player #1 doing it first, so it is of no consequence to LA's stack, except for the money that he may have already won from player #1. For example, if player #2 ends up getting the best overall hand, he would receive half of the money that LA has won from player #1, for a total of .75x the pot. If player #2 gets the second best hand, he would receive half of the half, for a total of .385 of the pot, or 1/4 of the original 1.5x bet.  To reduce the element of gambling a bit, I have restricted the payment on player #2's winning bet from coming out of player #1's stack, and instead taking it out of LA's winnings THAT ORIGINALLY CAME FROM player #1's stack during the first recourse round.

Here's how it would work if LA does make a hand--if LA makes the best overall hand, player #2 is obviously holding the second best hand if he's going to receive any payment. He would thus be getting half of the 1x amount that was paid to player #1 from LA. If LA makes the second best hand, player #2 is obviously holding the best overall hand. As reward for player #2--and as punishment for player #1 for starting this whole recourse mess--player #2 will received a total of 1.5x the pot--.5x of which is coming from LA's recourse payment to player #1 for making the second best hand, 1x additional coming from player #1. Thus, LA will have lost .5x, player #1 wil have lost 1x, and player #2 will have gained 1.5x. If we switch it to the first scenario of this paragraph, LA and player #2 will have won .5x while player #1 wil have lost 1x.

These are the payouts if player #2 WINS. Now let's see what happens when player #2 LOSES. Because player #1 has been harassed so much already, if player #2 loses, he must pay the entire 1.5x bet to player #1. Again, I'm trying to balance everything out as much as I can. Player #1 is the loser in both the scenarios above, and since player #2 is betting with player #1 and NOT LA, his original 1.5x wager will go entirely to player #1.

In the rare case that any player ends up getting both the best and second best hands in a deal, their win amounts are doubled. So, in a round of no recourse, they would simply be splitting the pot. In a round of recourse, they would win both of the recourse pots (both the payout for having the best hand and the payout for having the second best hand).

Okay, this is very complicated and convoluted...I'd add a payout chart if I knew how to do it. I'm anxious to know what you all think of this--if it's doable, it it's like real poker, etc. Please ask questions and we'll see if I can answer them and if I understand how my own game works.