Tourney T5: 10/10/7/2 vs 10/10/7/3 (1 Viewer)

[sbeckett]

I am considering hosting a home T5 NLH tourney of 1 table of up to 10 people. Targeted duration would be 3-4 hours.

From what I've read, 10/10/7/2 starting stacks of T2000 are "tried and true" and seem more preferred overall. At the same time, some people prefer 10/10/7/3 distribution of T2500 resulting in 30 chips total. These two groups never confronted each other, it seems.

What starting stack option would you prefer and why? I have a basic understanding of T2000 game being shorter overall, but other than that I lack insight.

Another question I have is regarding rebuys/topups. With the chip distribution I am considering, I have the following options for rebuys in front of me (please don't ask me how I ended up with these ):

• For 10/10/7/2
  • 6 rebuys of T500 x 4
  • 7 rebuys of T500 x 2 + T1000 x 1
  • 12 rebuys of T1000 x 2
• For 10/10/7/3
  • 3 rebuys of T500 x 5
  • 5 rebuys of T500 x 1 + T1000 x 2

Would the number of available rebuys affect your preference? Would you prefer rebuys in T500, T500 + T1000, or T1000 (applicable for 10/10/7/2 only)?

Thanks a ton, and apologies if this has been discussed already.

 

[GreekRedEye]

Don't overthink it.

Either starting stack is fine. I'd go with 10/10/7/2 for a couple reasons: 200 x the big blind is pretty standard; add on is easy at half the buy in and exactly 100 x big blind. Ease and consistency of buy-ins and add-ons matters more than whether the number of chips is an even 30 vs. 29 (only a really OCD player would notice the number of chips in the starting stack and it lasts for one orbit anyway).

Starting stack size does matter for length of play, but so does blind schedule, # players, and # of add-ons and rebuys.

Use your T500s for add-ons and rebuys, then move to T1000 once you exhausted those. The re-buy and add-on players will trade for lower denoms and thus distribute them around the table. If by the first color-up there are no T1000s on the table yet, I like to do conspicuously (with a little fanfare) bring one in then. It's a nice touch (one denom leaving the table but a new one joins) and marks who's the big stack).

 

[JustinInMN]

Poll might be fun .

That said, I don't think debate between 10/10/7/2 vs 10/10/7/3 is about stack construction so much as it's about how a tournament changes if the starting stacks are 25% bigger (T2500 vs T2000.)

I am considering hosting a home T5 NLH tourney of 1 table of up to 10 people. Targeted duration would be 3-4 hours.

For a 10 handed tournament, I would recommend 20 minute levels. This means the deck should go around at least once per level with a reasonable average of 2 minutes per hand Slower than that will start to feel like the levels are short. Lets say you are looking at 4 hours. Then you can plan to play about 12 levels at 20 minutes a piece. (not counting breaks.)

These 11 levels below would put you at 4 hours with two breaks right here:

5-10, 5-15, 10-20, 15-30 (Break 10m)
20-40, 30-60, 40-80 (Break 10m, color up T5)
50-100, 75-150, 100-200, 150-300 (Design the end here)

Now a PCF rule of thumb is that tournaments will end during the level when there are 20 BB in play. (and in my experience often in the level or two before this point.)

(LATE EDIT: MATH WENT BERY WRONG BELOW, ACKNOWLEDGED IN POST #24

https://www.pokerchipforum.com/threads/t5-10-10-7-2-vs-10-10-7-3.139161/post-2831899)


So if we are designing an end on the 150-300 level, we want to target T300 * 20 chip in play, or T60,000. THen we would divide that among the starting stacks. Usually estimating re-entries of about 50% of the field is on the high side, so that would be 15 stacks. (10 players with 50% re-entry rate.) So meaning your starting stacks could be as high as T4K (T60K/15) and still fit your time target. So in this case no problem doing T2500 starting stacks. If you did T2000 starting stacks, expecting 15 total entries, that would give you an expectation of T30K in play, divided by 20, that would put your likely tournament end two levels sooner at 75-150.

So to the original question, the difference between the two starting stacks is probably the difference between a tournament running about 3h20m and 4h00m.

• For 10/10/7/2
  • 6 rebuys of T500 x 4
  • 7 rebuys of T500 x 2 + T1000 x 1
  • 12 rebuys of T1000 x 2
• For 10/10/7/3
  • 3 rebuys of T500 x 5
  • 5 rebuys of T500 x 1 + T1000 x 2

I think these approaches are just fine. I would just get as many T500s in play as you can before using any T1000, personally. The T1000 chip just isn't super helpful in base T5 tournaments anyway, the same way it works in higher bases. You probably won't need any more than 5 rebuys in either case in a 10 player tournament. The biggest thing with rebuy stacks is don't introduce any more small chips that are just going to be colored up anyway. You won't even be close to coloring up T500 chips in this tournament, you will probably only do one color up of the T5s in all likelihood.

 

[Sap]

I made this spreadsheet for my T5 1-table tournament set, hoopefully it lets you view it.

https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/13uADDhE9tn-QOAi8k326cmTliF-HLO0VEKwJo4X-_KI/edit?usp=sharing

You can make a copy and make edits to it. You should only have to fill in Cells A3 through A6. You can mess with starting stacks and rebuys or whatever too.

 

[sbeckett]

I made this spreadsheet for my T5 1-table tournament set, hoopefully it lets you view it.

https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/13uADDhE9tn-QOAi8k326cmTliF-HLO0VEKwJo4X-_KI/edit?usp=sharing

You can make a copy and make edits to it. You should only have to fill in Cells A3 through A6. You can mess with starting stacks and rebuys or whatever too.

This is beautiful, thank you so much, you just saved me hours!

Two nitpicking questions:

1. Why not color up T5s with 5 x T100? Matter of preference or chip availability?
2. Chart says T500 x 7 is required to color up. But T5 x 100 + T25 x 100 = T3000 (which is T500 x 6). Am I missing anything?

Thanks!

 

[Sap]

Glad to help!

1. Typically you want to use your largest (or second largest) denomination as a color up. You bring a T500 chip or 2 to the table, and make change for it there. No need to add more lower denominations like more T100, but it's always an option to use T100s to color up or rebuy.

@Chris Manzoni (a member here with some great set up videos) has a good video for simple coloring up here:

2. You are correct that 6 is required, but the 7th chip is for rounding purposes. When coloring up, you will give people a T25 chip for 1 to 4 T5 chips, and a T100 chip for 1-3 T25 chips. Since you are rounding up this way, you will need a little more than exactly $3000 to color up all the T5s and T25s.

 

[sbeckett]

@Chris Manzoni (a member here with some great set up videos) has a good video for simple coloring up here

I've watched his videos, they're awesome! Very clear and informative.

As a newbie I thought chip race was fun and added to the gambling atmosphere, if you will. Turns out it's considered a waste of time. I totally can understand why, though.

 

[JustinInMN]

As a newbie I thought chip race was fun and added to the gambling atmosphere, if you will. Turns out it's considered a waste of time. I totally can understand why, though.

I also very much consider myself a fan of @Chris Manzoni 's videos. But I still practice the chip race .

Here's the best video I found on this from West Coast Dealing School.

I also wrote this post a while back on how to manage a chip race.

 

[GreekRedEye]

I've employed both methods and I highly prefer to round up. Much faster and players are happier with it. The difference is negligible if your starting stacks are 200 x BB, so rounding does not affect gameplay but it def effects player mood.

Reality:
base of T5...round from 5 to 25...that is 20 / 2000 = 1%
base of T25...round from 25 to 100...that is 75 / 10000 = 0.75%

Player Perception:

 

[JustinInMN]

I've employed both methods and I highly prefer to round up. Much faster and players are happier with it. The difference is negligible if your starting stacks are 200 x BB, so rounding does not affect gameplay but it def effects player mood.

Reality:
base of T5...round from 5 to 25...that is 20 / 2000 = 1%
base of T25...round from 25 to 100...that is 75 / 10000 = 0.75%

Player Perception:

My reasons for prefering the race are admittedly minor, but they are as follows.

1) The round up method does introduce a small exploit where players are effectively freerolling adding extra chips to their bets so long as they retain at least one "odd" chip. This is admittedly minor, but I am aware of it, so I want to do disclose it.

2) The round up method does inflate the total chips in play. Now in most home events with 1-2 color ups at the most, you are 100% correct, this is negligible. But if you aggregate 3-4 color ups, you get to the point where you are potentially introducing entire starting stacks worth of chips into the tournament economy. This is too much for me to accept personally, but again YMMV.

Example, say the first color up is to remove T25 chips. You have 20 players and on average, you are going to introduce in rounding errors an average of T35 per player. (Approximate average of the possible rounding errors for each player between 0-75). That T700 being added to the game. If the starting stack was T10K, that's 7%, probably not a big deal.

On the second color up, say on average you have 10 players remaining at that point and you are introducing in rounding errors an average of T200 per player (averaging the possible rounding errors between 0-400), that's another T2000 introduced into the game, so in aggregate, we have added T2700 or over 25% of a starting stack.

So I think it's fine to be of the opinion this amount doesn't matter a ton at this point, and this is where the majority of home 4-5 hour events lie. But if you do color ups beyond this in longer events, the total added escalates to the point you will have introduce an entire starting stack worth of chips to the tournament economy. And when you consider casino-style all-day and multi-day events would mean adding even more chips, it's understandable while casinos still use the race method on these sorts of events. (Plus time isn't as big a consideration given they have longer breaks and do the color ups in that window.)

3) Education and amusement purposes.

Players do seem to enjoy watching this process, and I still enjoy doing it. As long as it's fair, that's a good enough reason to do anything . Also, players in my game that are interested in casino tournaments probably benefit from the education in my environment on how this works so they are aware when they play elsewhere.

All of that is to say that while I have my arguments on this, I am open to the belief they are not substantial enough to outweigh the benefits of rounding in the opinions of others. Just good to be aware of reasons on both sides.

But I do think if you do longer events with at least 3-4 color ups possible, it is better to use the race method instead of rounding.

 

[GreekRedEye]

Totally fair. And you are right, as blinds escalate in a long tournament the percentages rise and compound. I do small games with 2 color ups, normally, so not a concern for me.

 

[Jaxen]

I finally get to talk T5s in a "T25/100 or it's a waste" crowd ...

1. I go a little baller with the T2,000 structure: 15/13/6/2, or even 20/16/5/2. At color up, my keen players will sell red 5s to one another to get a full barrel to get a T100 black.
B. If you have 3 or 4 you get rounded up to a T25 green. Everyone with 1 or 2 is in a race-off for 1 green total. Keeps the raceoff, it goes faster and the amount on the table stays the same or adds 1 whole green chip. Rounding everyone up usually adds a bunch more, and yes guys would manipulate stacks and keep one red. The green->black raceoff is as normal. I'll let you know when we ever get to a black->purple color up.
III. Rebuys/re-entries are a mix of green/black/purple T500. Add-ons/top-offs are all purples until we need T1000 yellows.

 

[Sap]

My reasons for prefering the race are admittedly minor, but they are as follows.

1) The round up method does introduce a small exploit where players are effectively freerolling adding extra chips to their bets so long as they retain at least one "odd" chip. This is admittedly minor, but I am aware of it, so I want to do disclose it.

2) The round up method does inflate the total chips in play. Now in most home events with 1-2 color ups at the most, you are 100% correct, this is negligible. But if you aggregate 3-4 color ups, you get to the point where you are potentially introducing entire starting stacks worth of chips into the tournament economy. This is too much for me to accept personally, but again YMMV.

Example, say the first color up is to remove T25 chips. You have 20 players and on average, you are going to introduce in rounding errors an average of T35 per player. (Approximate average of the possible rounding errors for each player between 0-75). That T700 being added to the game. If the starting stack was T10K, that's 7%, probably not a big deal.

On the second color up, say on average you have 10 players remaining at that point and you are introducing in rounding errors an average of T200 per player (averaging the possible rounding errors between 0-400), that's another T2000 introduced into the game, so in aggregate, we have added T2700 or over 25% of a starting stack.

So I think it's fine to be of the opinion this amount doesn't matter a ton at this point, and this is where the majority of home 4-5 hour events lie. But if you do color ups beyond this in longer events, the total added escalates to the point you will have introduce an entire starting stack worth of chips to the tournament economy. And when you consider casino-style all-day and multi-day events would mean adding even more chips, it's understandable while casinos still use the race method on these sorts of events. (Plus time isn't as big a consideration given they have longer breaks and do the color ups in that window.)

3) Education and amusement purposes.

Players do seem to enjoy watching this process, and I still enjoy doing it. As long as it's fair, that's a good enough reason to do anything . Also, players in my game that are interested in casino tournaments probably benefit from the education in my environment on how this works so they are aware when they play elsewhere.

All of that is to say that while I have my arguments on this, I am open to the belief they are not substantial enough to outweigh the benefits of rounding in the opinions of others. Just good to be aware of reasons on both sides.

But I do think if you do longer events with at least 3-4 color ups possible, it is better to use the race method instead of rounding.

I never even realized the race allows for no need of rounding! So the 100 T5s on the table can be colored up with exactly one T500 rather than a T500 and a few other chips. That's actually really enticing, especially when I enjoy making precise chip sets for 10 players max/20 players max.

Makes it so i may only need a barrel of a high denom rather than 21!

I am going to try racing off as I learned more about it last night, in my next touney.

Thanks for the insight!

 

[MC_CPA]

Is 2,000 really 200bbs if after 1 or 2 blind level it goes to 133bbs or 100 bbs?

 

[Sap]

Is 2,000 really 200bbs if after 1 or 2 blind level it goes to 133bbs or 100 bbs?

You can always do 5/5, 5/10/ 5/15, 10/20 if you really want. Or any combination of the 3 to slow down by a blind.

 

[sbeckett]

Don't overthink it.

Overthinking is my middle name!

only a really OCD player would notice the number of chips in the starting stack

Poll might be fun .

Didn't realize I could add a poll ex post facto. Just did it, although the overall sentiment seems pretty obvious.

Now a PCF rule of thumb is that tournaments will end during the level when there are 20 BB in play. (and in my experience often in the level or two before this point.)

So if we are designing an end on the 150-300 level, we want to target T300 * 20 chip in play, or T60,000. THen we would divide that among the starting stacks. Usually estimating re-entries of about 50% of the field is on the high side, so that would be 15 stacks. (10 players with 50% re-entry rate.) So meaning your starting stacks could be as high as T4K (T60K/15) and still fit your time target. So in this case no problem doing T2500 starting stacks. If you did T2000 starting stacks, expecting 15 total entries, that would give you an expectation of T30K in play, divided by 20, that would put your likely tournament end two levels sooner at 75-150.

So to the original question, the difference between the two starting stacks is probably the difference between a tournament running about 3h20m and 4h00m.

I love it when the math comes together! Certainly one of the causes for my beginner's excitement.

Here's the best video I found on this from West Coast Dealing School.

Saw their videos, too - great stuff!

1.

B.

III.

I never even realized the race allows for no need of rounding!

Makes it so i may only need a barrel of a high denom rather than 21!

I am going to try racing off

Yes! That's part of the appeal to me, actually, and that is why I asked why you needed 7 x T500 instead of 6. I only thought about racing off, not about rounding up. So glad this thread triggered new realizations!

 

[JustinInMN]

As a newbie I thought chip race was fun and added to the gambling atmosphere, if you will. Turns out it's considered a waste of time. I totally can understand why, though.

Makes it so i may only need a barrel of a high denom rather than 21!

I am going to try racing off as I learned more about it last night, in my next touney.

Thanks for the insight!

I appreciate the nice comments on this, given I very much did a thread jack away from the original topic.

Didn't realize I could add a poll ex post facto.

I voted, but as I said before, I think either starting stack fits your timeframe, with this decision, unlike with poker decisions, you can't lose .

But hey, now we are steering back towards the original topic .

 

[JustinInMN]

Is 2,000 really 200bbs if after 1 or 2 blind level it goes to 133bbs or 100 bbs?

The way I structure tournament blinds, usually the big blind doubles every two levels or so because I use multiples of 2-4, 3-6, 4-8, 6-12, and 8-16 repeated for each denomination in use.

So 4-8 is two levels after 2-4, 6-12 is two levels after 3-6, 8-16 is two levels after 4-8 and so forth.

So all of this to say a 200bb starting stack being worth 100 bb two levels later, doesn't strike me as that unusual.

But yes, starting stacks are always stated in terms of the first big blind, but it is important to observe how quick the increases are. Some hosts still structure a 1 chip-2 chip level to start and immediately follow it with a 2 chip-4 chip level, and that's very different than a structure that uses an intervening level.

(This is why most pcf recommendations come with an intervening 1 chip-3 chip level or a 2 chip-3 chip level before the 2 chip-4 chip level.)

So speaking of structure design, back on my suggestion above.

5-10, 5-15, 10-20, 15-30 (Break 10m)
20-40, 30-60, 40-80 (Break 10m, color up T5)
50-100, 75-150, 100-200, 150-300 (Design the end here)

I would add that if you should need more levels than this planned, you would break after 150-300 and color up the T25 chips. Then play these levels.

200-400, 300-600, 400-800, 600-1200, 800-1600.

Now this would add 2 more hours to your tournament, and you probably wouldn't need these levels unless you were hosting a field of 20+ players. But I mention this just to illustrate the pattern of multiplying the T100 chip by 2-4, 3-6, 4-8, 6-12, and 8-16. And notice the big blind doubles every two levels or so.

 

[MC_CPA]

200-400, 300-600, 400-800, 600-1200, 800-1600.

You can color up earlier and have just 500-1000 and 1000 1500. Makes BBA easier.

 

[JustinInMN]

You can color up earlier and have just 500-1000 and 1000 1500. Makes BBA easier.

In place of which levels?

 

[MC_CPA]

600-1200, 800-1600 in lieu of 600-1200 and 800-1600.

800 is 4 chips needed, 1600 is 4 chips needed. BBA would be 8 chips needed and that's just silly lol.

 

[JustinInMN]

600-1200, 800-1600 in lieu of 600-1200 and 800-1600.

800 is 4 chips needed, 1600 is 4 chips needed. BBA would be 8 chips needed and that's just silly lol.

Ah, yes you could do it that way. I typically don't use antes in tournaments I host so I wouldn't think about it this way I suppose..

 

[Sap]

So if we are designing an end on the 150-300 level, we want to target T300 * 20 chip in play, or T60,000. THen we would divide that among the starting stacks. Usually estimating re-entries of about 50% of the field is on the high side, so that would be 15 stacks. (10 players with 50% re-entry rate.) So meaning your starting stacks could be as high as T4K (T60K/15) and still fit your time target. So in this case no problem doing T2500 starting stacks. If you did T2000 starting stacks, expecting 15 total entries, that would give you an expectation of T30K in play, divided by 20, that would put your likely tournament end two levels sooner at 75-150.

I think the math is off here by a factor of 10. I think it would be T6,000 in play. What would be the best way to adjust if we want to maintain 20 minute levels, and a 4-5 hour tourney?

I think we would need to skip a few blinds and run something similar to:
5/10
5/15
10/20
(Break, 10m) - 1H 10M
15/30
20/40
30/60
(Break, 10m, Color up 5s) - 2H 20M
50/100
75/150 (cutoff rebuy)
100/200
150/300
(Break, 10m, Color up 25s) - 3H 40M
200/400
300/600
400/800
600/1200 (Ending Here) - 5H 0M

20BB * 1200 = T24,000

T24,000 / (10 Players + 5 Rebuys) = T1,600 Starting Stack

Alternatively, you could skip a blind, 5/15, which will add another blind at the end, 800/1600. This changes the math to:

20BB * 1600 = T32,000

T32,000 / (15) = ~T2,100 Starting Stack.

I like the T2000 starting stack, 20 minute levels, and skipping the 5/15 level to add on a level near the end.

 

[JustinInMN]

I think the math is off here by a factor of 10. I think it would be T6,000 in play. What would be the best way to adjust if we want to maintain 20 minute levels, and a 4-5 hour tourney?

I think you are correct, i multiplied by 200 instead of 20 effectively, thanks for catching that.

And yes this will change the math dramatically.

reak, 10m, Color up 25s) - 3H 40M
200/400
300/600
400/800
600/1200 (Ending Here) - 5H 0M

20BB * 1200 = T24,000

T24,000 / (10 Players + 5 Rebuys) = T1,600 Starting Stack

Yeah this would be right, so if you did T1600 that's 160BB to start. That's pretty good.

Alternatively, you could skip a blind, 5/15, which will add another blind at the end, 800/1600. This changes the math to:

20BB * 1600 = T32,000

T32,000 / (15) = ~T2,1000 Starting Stack.

The issue with skipping the intervening 5-15 level is that you effectively cut the stacks in half after 1 level. Depends on player tolerance for that big of a jump.

So if we are designing an end on the 150-300 level, we want to target T300 * 20 chip in play, or T60,000. THen we would divide that among the starting stacks. Usually estimating re-entries of about 50% of the field is on the high side, so that would be 15 stacks. (10 players with 50% re-entry rate.) So meaning your starting stacks could be as high as T4K (T60K/15) and still fit your time targe

So to correct this, we would actually do ide T6000 over 15 probable entries and we get starting stacks in more turbo range to finish in 11 levels.

6000 / 15 is T400 starting stack or just 40BB.

So yeah, sorry I got the math very wrong here.

 

[MC_CPA]

Simple fix.

10/10/7/2 + 1 bounty chip (could be a quarter, a dollar, ncv bragging rights).