Potential Anti-Nit Hold Em' Variant - Thoughts?

I've been noticing in my local meta in 1/3 and 2/5 that its incredibly tight generally, and at least 60% of players will just wait for good hole cards and / or good flops, and try to cooler each other. Whenever a TAG or LAG shows up, these players tighten up even more. Every once in awhile, I'll end up at a table where things like a mono flop with people playing back at each other both end up at showdown, with neither having cards from the flushed suit on the board, but thats the exception, not the rule.

Personally I find this as boring as it is hard to profit, and if theres one common factor among nearly all poker players Ive ever met or spoken to, its that they all prefer to sit at an action table, as opposed to with 2+ nits just taking up seats.

That got me thinking about how the game has evolved and changed over the years, and possibilities on a variant of it that could potentially add built in incentive to balance ranges, and play more hands/discourage nitty behavior, without forcing people out of their natural play styles. Here's what I came up with:

(Also, for context, this is specifically for cash games. I dont think this idea would work for or be relevant to a tournament setting at all.)

  • Similar to how tournaments have time bank chips, in this cash game variant, players would have fold chips. These are given to each player, (by the dealer) every time they fold pre flop, (or alternatively, you could have the player give them to the dealer; it would accomplish the same thing either way) without any VPIP. Regardless of how you do it, the point of the fold chips is to disincentivize large numbers of consecutive folds.

  • Continuing the point above: after receiving one fold chip, each player's fold chip count would only get worse if they folded a 2nd, 3rd, 4th, consecutive time.

  • Prior to starting the game, there would be a set "stake" for consecutive fold chips (personally, I think 4 or 5 is a good number, as it would naturallt encourage people to play about 20-25% of their hands.)

  • Once a player reaches a set number of fold chips, in the next hand, (regardless of if they were a blind or not) they would also have to post a blind - preferably, I think it should be at least 2.5x the big blind, but probably not more than 4x. (This part I think would require some tweaking, to get it just right. Again, this is an untested idea.) In the same hand they had to post their "consecutive folder blibd,", their fold chip count would reset to 0, and they'd only start accumulating fold chips again if they started folding consecutive hands.

Thinking behind this: - it encourages people to bet / call pre flop more, with more suited connectors, one gappers, small pairs, middling range cards, etc.

  • if someone has folded 3x in a row pre flop with no bet, and knows ahead of time they'd be penalized next hand, for folding with no bet, and they have ANY playable cards, they are likely to want to at least see a flop with them, since even if they limp and fold to a bet, they still wont have to involuntarily post a blind next hand, (which would probably still be more economical than just folding like a nit and taking the every 4th or 5th round penalty for doing so.)

TL;DR - a variant where basically super nitty players are forced to do something akin to straddling, every couple of hands, if they are folding too much and thus contributing to a dead / no action vibe at a table. End result is intended to be, more dead money in a hand (on average) to fight over, and more balanced ranges from all players, and thus, more action.

Curious to see what people think. I explained this in person to a few of the regs (who also hate nits) at my local card rooms, and they also liked it, at least in theory.

I tried to think of a name for it, and since my idea was "every 4th hand, if you folded 4 times in a row previously, you post 4 BB ante direct into pot this round," to call it "4 Tempo Hold Em," but I dont love the name and am trying to think of a better one.