Cash Game How many workhorse chips do you prefer in a single table cash game set? (1 Viewer)

[Eloe2000]

I am defining the “workhorse” here as the chip denom above the blind denom. I am adding onto my cash CPC set and just curious how much is too much of a good thing. I was surprised to not have found this question asked already.

For my purposes we usually play .25/.25(or usually .50 now) so I am trying to target an idea number of $1s. I already have 300x$5s for the less frequent times we play 1/1-1/2.

 

[justincarothers]

700+ MOAR is better!!!

 

[RichMahogany]

For $1/$1 400-600 $5 works great

Wouldn’t mind 800 either haha

Edit: for your listed stakes, never more than 200 $1s total

 

[davislane]

whats your breakdown now?

Min 400.

 

[upNdown]

I’m surprised you say the $1 is the workhorse chip. For my 25/.50 game, the workhorse duties seem pretty evenly divided between the $1 and the $5. Maybe it’s a little different if you’re playing .25/.25?

Anyway, I’m pretty comfortable with two racks of each and honestly if I could only have a third rack of one of them, it would be the $5s without hesitation.

If we’re going with a $1/1 or $1/2 game, I’d want 400-600 $5s. So I’m at a loss for how to answer.

I guess I’ll just split the baby and say 5 racks? But I’d never want 5 racks of $1s on the table for a quarters game.

 

[Rhodeman77]

Even at 25/25c after the flop you will be betting with $5 chips more than $1 chips. 300 is $1’s is more than enough. Unless you plan to play limit with them as well or just want them because you want them, more $1 won’t make the set more playable.

 

[LeLe]

If I buying a set I will go for 200 and stick with my principle of only getting 600 chip total for a set

However, since it a custom CPC I will order more and assemble a much bigger set for 2 table.

I will think 400 $1 and 400 $5 will be the right amount

 

[Eloe2000]

I’m surprised you say the $1 is the workhorse chip. For my 25/.50 game, the workhorse duties seem pretty evenly divided between the $1 and the $5. Maybe it’s a little different if you’re playing .25/.25?

Anyway, I’m pretty comfortable with two racks of each and honestly if I could only have a third rack of one of them, it would be the $5s without hesitation.

If we’re going with a $1/1 or $1/2 game, I’d want 400-600 $5s. So I’m at a loss for how to answer.

I guess I’ll just split the baby and say 5 racks? But I’d never want 5 racks of $1s on the table for a quarters game.

I have 300x $5s as my secondary workhorse. 300x$1s is plenty “enough” but not really enough if you know what I mean.

 

[RichMahogany]

I have 300x $5s as my secondary workhorse. 300x$1s is plenty “enough” but not really enough if you know what I mean.

300 $1s is too many for $1/$1 and up however. That being said, if I had 300 $1s in a set, I’d want at least 600 $5s for 2 tables of $1/$1 and 800 $5s would be better(for 2 tables)

 

[Eloe2000]

For $1/$1 400-600 $5 works great

Wouldn’t mind 800 either haha

Edit: for your listed stakes, never more than 200 $1s total

This seems to be the common thinking but honestly I don’t understand it. I am quoting you but similar sentiment is being expressed by others here and historically that I am well aware of. I think there seems to be some kind of bias at play because mathematically it doesn’t make sense to me.

The common sentiment is:

.25/.25: no more than 200x$1s and the $5 is the workhorse

1/1-1/2: 600-800 $5s and $5 is the workhorse

This just doesn’t jive in my brain and the only reason I can think that this sentiment is so commonly held is that people just usually play 1/2 and they occasionally have played .25/.25 and tend to play it more like 1/2.

Why do people call the 2.5xBB $5 chip in 1/2 the workhorse but don’t consider the 4xBB $1 chip in .25/.25 the workhorse but often consider the 20xBB $5 chip the workhorse!

FWIW I play .25/.25 weekly and have done so for many years and $1 is definitely the workhorse in our game for whatever specific circumstances there may be that make it so. Plenty of $5s get into play though.

 

[Eloe2000]

300 $1s is too many for $1/$1 and up however. That being said, if I had 300 $1s in a set, I’d want at least 600 $5s for 2 tables of $1/$1 and 800 $5s would be better(for 2 tables)

We play .25/.25-1/2 although usually the former. 300x$1s is for .25/.25, although not enough for my preference. The only question is how high.

 

[RichMahogany]

This seems to be the common thinking but honestly I don’t understand it. I am quoting you but similar sentiment is being expressed by others here. I think there seems to be some kind of bias at play because mathematically it doesn’t make sense to me.

The common sentiment is:

.25/.25: no more than 200x$1s and the $5 is the workhorse

1/1-1/2: 600-800 $5s and $5 is the workhorse

This just doesn’t jive in my brain and the only reason I can think that this sentiment is so commonly held is that people just usually play 1/2 and they occasionally have played .25/.25 and tend to play it more like 1/2.

FWIW I play .25/.25 weekly and have done so for many years and $1 is definitely my workhorse regardless of what people think of that.

Everyone’s game play differently of course. For our local game(s), the $5 was always the workhorse, even at .25/.50.

I can see 300 $1s working better for .25/.25 but more than that leads to inefficiencies in the rest of the set.

Are you going to play $1/$1 with 400 $1s and 300 $5s? Probably not I’d wager.

Edit: then you’ll have some racks of unused $1s, therefore inefficient

 

[Eloe2000]

I can see 300 $1s working better for .25/.25 but more than that leads to inefficiencies in the rest of the set.

I am not talking about being efficient though. I am talking about what’s fun.

Do you think more than 300x $5s in 1/2 leads to inefficiencies? And if not, why? This is where I get lost on everyone’s opinion. Because you are saying 600-800 is your preference.

Are you going to play $1/$1 with 400 $1s and 300 $5s? Probably not I’d wager.

No. I am not sure of your point, but I don’t use 400x fracs in .25/.25.

 

[RichMahogany]

Not sure if you missed my edit. 400 $1s leads to inconsistency for your 1 table set when you play $1/$1.

If you have that many ones and wouldn’t use them all for $1/$1, then having wasted, unused racks is not efficient OR fun IMO.

300 $5 for $1/$1 is small, but workable

 

[Rhodeman77]

If the 25/25c game has a lot of limping and passive play then a lot of $1’s make sense, and by a lot 300-400. But if there is a lot of staddles, 3 bets preflop, etc then less $1’s (200-300) and more $5’s would be used.

What is the max buy in for the game?

 

[Eloe2000]

Ah gotchya. I did miss your edit. Definitely. I like one barrel per person of $1s for 1/1. We don’t need that many but it’s a bit less change and easy to count out. Certainly not more than that.

 

[Eloe2000]

If the 25/25c game has a lot of limping and passive play then a lot of $1’s make sense, and by a lot 300-400. But if there is a lot of staddles, 3 bets preflop, etc then less $1’s (200-300) and more $5’s would be used.

What is the max buy in for the game?

I probably should not have mentioned my own stakes. $1 is definitely the workhorse in my game and 300 is not enough for my preference although it plays fine and we get $20s in play. We play weekly for many years so I already have a solid sense of the game play. Limited to single 2xBB straddle, not really limpets, but generally just bet and raise preflop (3-bet not super common), and for whatever reason players don’t like round bets ($12 much more common than $10 bet etc).

What chip do you call the workhorse in $1/$2?

 

[swana]

I really don't understand why folks are opposed to 400 $1 in a .25/.25 game but want 600 plus $5s in a 1/2. The logic does not seem consistent (unless your ,25/.25 game plays like a 1/2).

I get MOAR but don't players want different chips is play?!?! I just finished putting a set together with only 200 $5s to ensure the $20 and $100 have a chance to get in play more often.

 

[Eloe2000]

I really don't understand why folks are opposed to 400 $1 in a .25/.25 game but want 600 plus $5s in a 1/2. The logic does not seem consistent (unless your ,25/.25 game plays like a 1/2).

I get MOAR but don't players want different chips is play?!?! I just finished putting a set together with only 200 $5s to ensure the $20 and $100 have a chance to get in play more often.

It is commonly held and I do think it must be because those people typically play 1/2 and just kind of gravitate back to 1/2 play when occasionally playing the smaller stakes.

I don’t think I have once ever heard someone refer to the $25 as the workhorse in a 1/2 game in my life where that is 12xBB where as people routinely refer to the $5 as the workhorse in .25/.25 (20xBB) or .25/.50 (10xBB).

 

[swana]

I feel like a bit of a minority in that I don't want more than 200 $1s or 300 $5s for any stakes! But at least my reasoning is consistent... Too many chips are inefficient and I would like the see different denoms make an appearance.

 

[Rhodeman77]

I like 500 $5 is my $1/2, $1/3 games.

Most home games in general play bigger than the equal sized game in a casino. No rake, players plan on playing for the night so rebuy more if needed, alcohol may be consumed, etc, etc…

I would compare 25/25c more to a $2/5 game then as to what is the workhouse chip where it is split between 2 chips.

In a $2/5 game the $25 chip is used about as much as the $5 and having equal racks of them in a set would make sense for most games.

 

[Eloe2000]

I feel like a bit of a minority in that I don't want more than 200 $1s or 300 $5s for any stakes! But at least my reasoning is consistent... Too many chips are inefficient and I would like the see different denoms make an appearance.

I can respect that. And I did ask my guys how many additional $1s they felt would be most fun (300x) now, and they said they liked it how it is because they like to see the $20s and sometimes $100 or two in play.

 

[Eloe2000]

I like 500 $5 is my $1/2, $1/3 games.

Most home games in general play bigger than the equal sized game in a casino. No rake, players plan on playing for the night so rebuy more if needed, alcohol may be consumed, etc, etc…

I would compare 25/25c more to a $2/5 game then as to what is the workhouse chip where it is split between 2 chips.

In a $2/5 game the $25 chip is used about as much as the $5 and having equal racks of them in a set would make sense for most games.

Fair enough. And one additional aspect of my game that would be relevant here is that we play weekly on a weeknight, but for less time than probably some other less frequent home games. We generally earmark 8pm-2am. Sometimes we play until 3am but sometimes we even wrap at 12am or 1am and we always have some guys peel off early after a couple bad beats. So the game ends up not being as deep as others. Although that wouldn’t impact the betting size. Also the game started before I joined 10 years ago as a .10/.10 game so people have slowly moved up in this game (although most of us do play 1/2, 2/4, etc) in casinos and other home games.

 

[doublebooyah85]

Too many chips being inefficient isn’t something we run into even using tons of workhorse chips. When someone’s stack gets huge it’s easy to sell a rack to chip up.

I am assuming the home game @Eloe2000 includes a dealer.

If you are passing the deal, then less chips would make the game more efficient. I could def understand that.

But I think the question @Eloe2000 is asking really depends on stakes like most mentioned…my fav home game stake is the $1/$2 or $2/5 with tons of $5s. I can understand the .25 and .50 blind games kinda get muddy with what chips to use.

When you play $1-2 or even $2-$5 in the casino…stacks seem to be 80% of the $5 workhorse chips. However $5-$10 NL there really isn’t a workhorse chip. @ the Wynn is evenly $10s, $25s and $100s with a few $5s. When the game starts usually most get a rack of $10s plus high demons, but as the game progresses it’s all $25s and $100s.

Sooo I don’t have an answer! Just some rambling lol

 

[Eloe2000]

If you are passing the deal, then less chips would make the game more efficient. I could def understand that.

I am curious about this part. I haven’t thought about it much but I would think with a self dealt game the more chips and the less the change making required the faster it would move since professional dealers are better at keeping an eye on and change making.

 

[JeepologyOffroad]

I usually put 300x $1s into play for my 50¢/50¢ game and I think it's just about perfect. I don't think I'd ever want more. Plenty to make stacks large in small stakes and never really need to bother with change making. I also usually put 140-160x fracs in play to give a little extra oomf as well.

I'd say this depends on your game and also the amount of players.

 

[SteveEH]

I feel like a bit of a minority in that I don't want more than 200 $1s or 300 $5s for any stakes! But at least my reasoning is consistent... Too many chips are inefficient and I would like the see different denoms make an appearance.

When I first started playing 1/2, and eventually 2/5, in casinos I was surprised that $5 chips were the workhorse. From an efficiency perspective it doesn't make sense to me but given the casinos want to keep things moving quickly for the rake maybe I'm wrong here.

I also like the idea of MoAr chip but agree you need a balance to ensure your higher denoms hit the felt.

My casino Nacional set was designed for .10/.25. Comparing this to a casino 2/5 game, the .25 would be the workhorse, but because I wanted 3 denoms in play I got equal amounts of .25 and $1 chips.

My Club 72 set is designed for .25/.25 or .25/.50. My game normally plays small, so to ensure I would get the $5 denoms in play I originally planned for 1 barrel of $1 chips per player, and all re-buys would be $5s. From a mOAr chip/fun perspective, I bumped this up to 1.5 barrels/30 of $1s per player.

I think you already have the sweet spot with 300 $1s for 10 players. If you want MOaR chip/fun perspective, keeping efficiency in mind I wouldn't add more than another rack/2 barrels per player and 400 total.

 

[detroitdad]

I host .25/.50 $100 max buy in. I have two work horse chips with the ones and fives. I like 200 of each on the table for my 7-8 player games

 

[upNdown]

It is commonly held and I do think it must be because those people typically play 1/2 and just kind of gravitate back to 1/2 play when occasionally playing the smaller stakes.

I think there’s something too that, but personally, I think it’s more about the value of the chip than the actual stakes.
$5 chips are substantial, compared to $1s. $1 chips are tipping chips. I don’t want stacks and stacks of $1s. But $5s - $5s are worth something! A single stack is worth $100! And they’re RED!

 

[JeepologyOffroad]

I think there’s something too that, but personally, I think it’s more about the value of the chip than the actual stakes.
$5 chips are substantial, compared to $1s. $1 chips are tipping chips. I don’t want stacks and stacks of $1s. But $5s - $5s are worth something! A single stack is worth $100! And they’re YELLOW!

+1

Also FYP