• PCF is an eBay Partner. If you make a purchase through one of our links, we may earn a commission at no extra cost to you. Thank you for your support!

Transfered my house rules to Google Sites, who knew it was this easy? (3 Viewers)

TheYeti

TheYeti

3 of a Kind
Joined
Mar 31, 2021
Messages
702
Reaction score
1,165
Rewards
193
Location
Rapid City, SD
Okay, I'm usually not this slow on the uptake when it comes to tech, but I am admittedly on the older side. ;)

How did I not know about Google Sites before two days ago?! It's completely free and super easy to set up your own website. Not a ton of flexibility when it comes to layout, but good enough to host my House Rules. My players already love it since it's much easier to read than the PDF I had before, and they can pull it up on their phones right at the table! I plan on having a QR code somewhere in the room or on the table, too.

You can check out the site I built (with a little help from ChatGPT) in just a couple hours here, and if you have any questions or critiques, fire away!
 
TheYeti said:
To pacify the degens who wanted "match the stack". 😏
Click to expand...
Not trying to give you a hard time, just always curious to learn how others run the game to find inspo for mine.

So someone buys in for $50. First hand is HU with them against a player who bought in for $100. The short stack loses $10 in the hand. They’re now at $40 and the biggest stack has $110. But the short stack can top up to $150? Like 136% of matching stack?

Am I getting that right?
 
FestiveKnight said:
Not trying to give you a hard time, just always curious to learn how others run the game to find inspo for mine.

So someone buys in for $50. First hand is HU with them against a player who bought in for $100. The short stack loses $10 in the hand. They’re now at $40 and the biggest stack has $110. But the short stack can top up to $150? Like 136% of matching stack?

Am I getting that right?
Click to expand...

Sure, but I have never seen that exact situation ever come up. Typically, players who buy in for $50 aren't gonna splurge for $150, they might do another $50 then bail. In the last 5 years or so I've only had 2 players who would buy in for less than max.

EDIT: thinking about this more, I may change that rule to "after the first hour". 😉
 
FestiveKnight said:
Not trying to give you a hard time, just always curious to learn how others run the game to find inspo for mine.

So someone buys in for $50. First hand is HU with them against a player who bought in for $100. The short stack loses $10 in the hand. They’re now at $40 and the biggest stack has $110. But the short stack can top up to $150? Like 136% of matching stack?

Am I getting that right?
Click to expand...

TheYeti said:
Sure, but I have never seen that exact situation ever come up. Typically, players who buy in for $50 aren't gonna splurge for $150, they might do another $50 then bail. In the last 5 years or so I've only had 2 players who would buy in for less than max.

EDIT: thinking about this more, I may change that rule to "after the first hour". 😉
Click to expand...

Thought about this last night and ended up changing it to:
  • If a player buys in for the maximum and their stack is at or below $50, they may add chips up to $150.
Thanks for getting me to clarify that rule! Wouldn't want someone taking advantage. ;)

EDIT: Cleaned it up a bit more after running it through AI. lol
  • Players who buy in for less than the maximum may only top up to their original buy-in amount.
 
Last edited:
Am I the odd man out with the "players can top up to 1.5x max if below $50"? Mulling it over I'm thinking maybe it would be better to have a hard cap at $100. What do you guys think?

Keep in mind, I used to allow "match half the big stack" up until about a year ago. Some players were miffed that I reduced it to $150, some were happy that there weren't quite as big stacks.
 
TheYeti said:
Am I the odd man out with the "players can top up to 1.5x max if below $50"? Mulling it over I'm thinking maybe it would be better to have a hard cap at $100. What do you guys think?

Keep in mind, I used to allow "match half the big stack" up until about a year ago. Some players were miffed that I reduced it to $150, some were happy that there weren't quite as big stacks.
Click to expand...
I think it's a good comprimise between a hard cap at max buy-in and half the big stack match. Can be a $150 rebuy if stacked (no time constraint) and up to $150 if less than $50 after the 1st hour.
 
TheYeti said:
Players who buy in for less than the maximum may only top up to their original buy-in amount.
Click to expand...

so if you buy in initially for $75, you can't top up to more than $75 for the rest of the night? can you rebuy up to the max if you go broke? :unsure:
 
raynmanas said:
so if you buy in initially for $75, you can't top up to more than $75 for the rest of the night? can you rebuy up to the max if you go broke? :unsure:
Click to expand...

Yeah, that is weird. I need to re-word it somehow. I'm just trying to prevent players from taking advantage of the "below $50" rule by buying in short, losing a few bucks and topping up to $150.

Maybe players who buy in short must go broke to rebuy max or 1.5x...?
 
How about this;
  • Players who buy in short can only top up for more than their original buy-in amount if they bust.
 
TheYeti said:
How about this;
  • Players who buy in short can only top up for more than their original buy-in amount if they bust.
Click to expand...

there you go, I think that fixes it

you wanna be a cheapskate? fine, but you gotta keep being a cheapskate, until you're not!
 
TheYeti said:
How about this;
  • Players who buy in short can only top up for more than their original buy-in amount if they bust.
Click to expand...
Would suggest making the initial buy-in deeper to respond to this, but keep half the big stack from there. Otherwise your bigger pocketed gamblers (if you have them) can just start walletting people to death.
 
MrCatPants said:
Would suggest making the initial buy-in deeper to respond to this, but keep half the big stack from there. Otherwise your bigger pocketed gamblers (if you have them) can just start walletting people to death.
Click to expand...

No, no, no. That's exactly why I limited it to $150 in the first place! When we had half the big stack unlimited rebuys the deeper pockets would just buy a bigger stack and bully the smaller stacks. The $150 limit keeps that kind of thing mostly in check. Now you have to earn a big stack. ;)
 
TheYeti said:
No, no, no. That's exactly why I limited it to $150 in the first place! When we had half the big stack unlimited rebuys the deeper pockets would just buy a bigger stack and bully the smaller stacks. The $150 limit keeps that kind of thing mostly in check. Now you have to earn a big stack. ;)
Click to expand...
I may not understand exactly what your issue is. I have a range in my game, and this is what we've settled on that I think we all think works really well, regardless of economics and player style.

Initial standardized buy-in that differs by game - between 80 (intro NHLE cash) and 240 big blinds (circus). People down or busted can top back up to the initial buy, or half the big stack. I don't mess with top offs less than $20, but do mess with the $20+ ones (we play stakes from .25/.25 to $1/$1.
 
TheYeti said:
Am I the odd man out with the "players can top up to 1.5x max if below $50"? Mulling it over I'm thinking maybe it would be better to have a hard cap at $100. What do you guys think?

Keep in mind, I used to allow "match half the big stack" up until about a year ago. Some players were miffed that I reduced it to $150, some were happy that there weren't quite as big stacks.
Click to expand...
Not just you, I have a similar rule (when below 50BB, players can add up to 100BB). I like it, but everyone at my game buys in for 100BB.

If I were concerned about people gaming the rule, I'd raise the minimum buy-in above the rebuy threshold. I'd rather not track individual buy-ins to know who's allowed to rebuy how much.
 
nynit said:
Not just you, I have a similar rule (when below 50BB, players can add up to 100BB). I like it, but everyone at my game buys in for 100BB.

If I were concerned about people gaming the rule, I'd raise the minimum buy-in above the rebuy threshold. I'd rather not track individual buy-ins to know who's allowed to rebuy how much.
Click to expand...

Yeah, maybe I'm overthinking this. I only have one player who ever buys in short, and she would never rebuy up to $150. She brings two or three bullets of $50-$60 and then she's usually out.
 
MrCatPants said:
I may not understand exactly what your issue is. I have a range in my game, and this is what we've settled on that I think we all think works really well, regardless of economics and player style.

Initial standardized buy-in that differs by game - between 80 (intro NHLE cash) and 240 big blinds (circus). People down or busted can top back up to the initial buy, or half the big stack. I don't mess with top offs less than $20, but do mess with the $20+ ones (we play stakes from .25/.25 to $1/$1.
Click to expand...

Letting players re-buy up to half the big stack introduced some issues in my game. I had players with deep pockets re-buying for 3, 4, $500 which just got ridiculous for those with less deep pockets. I actually lost players from it.
 
This is great! Im going to look into this. Any tips for setting up a similar lay out as yours?
 

Create an account or login to comment

You must be a member in order to leave a comment

Create account

Create an account and join our community. It's easy!

Register

Log in

Already have an account? Log in here.

Similar threads

MSB256
What are your House Rules?
Replies
14
Views
529
nicepokerguy
N
S
Communicating House Rules
Replies
20
Views
3K
inca911
inca911
dazoki
Thanks to PCF - successfully ran my first 2 table tourney
2
Replies
35
Views
1K
dazoki
dazoki
dennis63
Roulette winning number display
Replies
0
Views
251
dennis63
dennis63
Timportant19
My new custom chips and table put to use
Replies
9
Views
1K
Timportant19
Timportant19
Back
Top Bottom