What are your home game blinds & buyins (16 Viewers)

[Jaxen]

I get it, STTs with 7-8 players are like, "Meh, why not just play cash?" You need 12-14 at least for a bona fide tourney that gets people's attention to where there's only a couple who get antsy about it getting down to 1 table so cash can start.
Our tourney group is going to do a cash game series this summer to mix it up while families have different vacation plans. Trying for 4 over summer break, with tourney points given based on +/- ROI if you play at least two of them. Win the most money and you "won the tournament". I expect ~12 players at least one night so we'll seat them them shuffle up the seating after about 90 minutes or so.

 

[SwissChip]

Cash game only - we skipped the starter tourney many years ago.
50c/$1 blinds
$100-200 buy in

 

[SixSeven]

Looks like @Machine is right. Most of us do frac blinds cash games, with $1/$1 being the glass ceiling most of the time.

For tourneys, I think the issue is, the most you might win,for even 12 or 14 players, is $150 for 1st place, no chop, on a $20 buy in. That makes cash more appealing to most.

 

[Flopalopagus]

I get it, STTs with 7-8 players are like, "Meh, why not just play cash?" You need 12-14 at least for a bona fide tourney that gets people's attention to where there's only a couple who get antsy about it getting down to 1 table so cash can start.
Our tourney group is going to do a cash game series this summer to mix it up while families have different vacation plans. Trying for 4 over summer break, with tourney points given based on +/- ROI if you play at least two of them. Win the most money and you "won the tournament". I expect ~12 players at least one night so we'll seat them them shuffle up the seating after about 90 minutes or so.

Possibly. I’ve routinely got between 8 - 12 and the group tends to enjoy the tournament as well as cash (circus games)

It depends on the group I think.

 

[Poker Zombie]

For tourneys, I think the issue is, the most you might win,for even 12 or 14 players, is $150 for 1st place, no chop, on a $20 buy in. That makes cash more appealing to most.

$20 in, $150 out is 7.5x ROI. Even for a cash game, that's a pretty good grab.

There are other factors in play. Cash games for trivial stakes can be more splashy, because even 4-5 rebuys are less than dinner and a movie when the stakes are low relative to the expendable income of your players. If $20 doesn't mean much, it becomes easier to jam on a draw with the next reload a blink away. In that case the big winner may very well nab more than $150.

What .25/.50 means to college students and what it means to a group of partnered lawyers are 2 completely different games. However the inability to keep reloading in a tournament puts the poor and the wealthy on a more balanced playing field.

 

[Booshme]

Full circle.

In the beginning, at both of my long-running games, it always started out with the requisite $10 rebuy tourneys with .10/.10 $20 buyin cash games. From there tournies usually take a backseat and the .25/.25 $40 add to the big stack became the thing.

After years of the aforementioned cash game running, thoughtful contemplation sets in.

ATM it’s the $10 Turbo Freeze Out follower by the .05/.05 $10 in, add up to $10 when down to $5.

Our .25/.25 game got too big according to over half our regular runners and after a break to cleanse the pallet, the Cheapskate Game was born.

Who knows, maybe we’ll pop it up to .05/.10.

lol

How many players do you usually get per game?? I love your threads btw

 

[merkong]

How many players do you usually get per game?? I love your threads btw

Historically, we played full tables (10 seats). Because players leave the game during each session in sort of a single file, here and there fashion, I saw the importance of a full table being that we were 6-8 players strong after 5-6 hours into the game.

Weirdly, I’ve always favored shorter tables, the sweet spot being 5-8 players. This has also inspired me to build a “Mega-Octagon” (mega v. the classic 48” across variety).

Until I build the new table we play 6-8 on my 10 seat Goliath and very comfortably at that.

We have a core group of 6 that prefer the micro-universe and a few more that will also play at these lower stakes. I’m more inclined though in my semi-retirement from over the top intensive hosting style to just roll with the six.

 

[Defarse]

Looks like @Machine is right. Most of us do frac blinds cash games, with $1/$1 being the glass ceiling most of the time.

For tourneys, I think the issue is, the most you might win,for even 12 or 14 players, is $150 for 1st place, no chop, on a $20 buy in. That makes cash more appealing to most.

Comparing upwards of $1/$1 to a $20 tournament isn't really apples to apples.

 

[Coyote]

IMHO, .50/.50 with a $50 max buy-in is the absolute maximum you can play with friends.

Above that, you are playing with hopefully vetted friends of friends and acquaintances, eventually poker buddies if they prove to be nice and honest.
You only have to do that and engage in an endless recruitment and testing process if you want to play really regularly.
Usually, true childhood friends may have lives or even other hobbies.

So, with poker buddies, .5/1E, min 50 max 100E or half the big stack.

Necessary limit, 'cause my game has now attracted people familiar with casinos and 1/3E, and financially capable of bringing 1300E in their pocket. I try not to allow them to table that kind of money and to ask 20E for a flop.
That still happens at my doctor friend's home.

 

[Preditor]

I'm new to hosting and my crew has recently switched from two $25 tournaments a night to 25¢/50¢ blinds with a $25 to $50 buyin. I'm wondering what other low rollers like myself are doing and how they arrived at a happy medium.

TOURNEY: $50 buy-in with one optional $30 rebuy. Of the initial $50, $5.00 goes to a bad beat, and $5.00 gets set aside for an EOY Freeroll. I pay out the top number of players that doesn't exceed 30% (usually 25% or so), and I host two freeze outs each year that are around an $80 buy-in.

CASH: $0.25/$0.50 blind. Initial buy-in is $25-50, but we increase that to $100 after either the first person gets felted or after two hours of play. And I have what I call the "Degenerate Gambler Cap": no single individual can put down more than $250 for the night (no one has gotten close).

 

[Preditor]

I get it, STTs with 7-8 players are like, "Meh, why not just play cash?" You need 12-14 at least for a bona fide tourney that gets people's attention to where there's only a couple who get antsy about it getting down to 1 table so cash can start.

For my group, it is less about the winnings and more about the pride of being able to say you won against people you constantly play against. There are year's long friendly grudges at this point. That keeps them vested even for an STT.

 

[Preditor]

Sorry to post 3 comments in a row, but you asked how I came to a happy medium!

It's simple for me: Cheeseburger Stakes.

What does that mean? It means the buy-in for your poker game should be the equivalent of what your group of players would spend on a night out if they weren't playing poker. So ask yourself: what is the cost of dinner and a show for you and your guests?

What that number is will depend on your age and demographics. College student? That may be $20. Mid-30s professional like myself? I think $50-100 is the sweet spot for us. In Los Angeles, a movie ticket is about $20-30, and dinner and a drink is about $30-50 these days. So for tournaments, the initial buy-in is $50 with an optional $30 rebuy, and I provide dinner out of my own pocket (hot dogs usually). Cash is $25-50 buy-in, and it increases to $100 at a certain point in the evening.

I want my people to feel it worth their while and approach my home game as if this is their entertainment for that night. It provides good stakes, but no one to walks away feeling angry; they would have likely gone out that night anyway and spent just as much money.

 

[Flopalopagus]

Sorry to post 3 comments in a row, but you asked how I came to a happy medium!

It's simple for me: Cheeseburger Stakes.

What does that mean? It means the buy-in for your poker tournament should be the equivalent of what your group of players would spend on a night out if they weren't playing poker. So ask yourself: what is the cost of dinner and a show for you and your guests?

What that number is will depend on your age and demographics. College student? That may be $20. Mid-30s professional like myself? I think $50-100 is the sweet spot for us. In Los Angeles, a movie ticket is about $20-30, and dinner and a drink is about $30-50 these days. So I made initial buy-in is $50 with an optional $30 rebuy, and I provide dinner out of my own pocket (hot dogs usually).

I want my people to feel it worth their while and approach my home game as if this is their entertainment for that night. It provides good stakes, but no one to walks away feeling angry; they would have likely gone out that night anyway and spent just as much money.

Generally, I look at things the same. Great post!

 

[Booshme]

Historically, we played full tables (10 seats). Because players leave the game during each session in sort of a single file, here and there fashion, I saw the importance of a full table being that we were 6-8 players strong after 5-6 hours into the game.

Weirdly, I’ve always favored shorter tables, the sweet spot being 5-8 players. This has also inspired me to build a “Mega-Octagon” (mega v. the classic 48” across variety).

Until I build the new table we play 6-8 on my 10 seat Goliath and very comfortably at that.

We have a core group of 6 that prefer the micro-universe and a few more that will also play at these lower stakes. I’m more inclined though in my semi-retirement from over the top intensive hosting style to just roll with the six.

Gracias Merkong! I hope I get to post such good stories and recaps, and to have a faithful and long running game like you’ve been able to accomplish! And thank you for sharing what blonds you play, I sometimes worry .10/.10 would be too small to get traction, but it might actually get us more players!
My sweet spot is 6 players personally, more hands, more loose. 10 is too much for me, but I actually liked fitting 9 on my triton octagon, was very social.

I really want to play a .25/.50 game, but not yet because I feel like the skill gap is too big to ever have it be regular with this player pool. I’m happy with the .10/.10 to .25/.25

 

[Old State]

I’m actually surprised to see so many micro stakes games. I would have imagined micro stakes games would have tremendous turnover as the types only interested in playing micro stakes tend to be people not that interested in poker ….and therefore nervous to play for any meaningful money.

 

[Booshme]

I’m actually surprised to see so many micro stakes games. I would have imagined micro stakes games would have tremendous turnover as the types only interested in playing micro stakes tend to be people not that interested in poker ….and therefore nervous to play for any meaningful money.

Maybe it works because it keeps it more focused on the social aspect then a bigger higher tension game

 

[SixSeven]

Comparing upwards of $1/$1 to a $20 tournament isn't really apples to apples.

I must have been unclear. What I meant was that it seems that $1/$1 is the most people are saying they play for, in this thread and most are playing for less, like $50 buy ins or less. Some for $100 buy ins.
So it's a lot easier to make $50 or $100 profit with a cash game like that, then play in a STT with $20 buy in or even $40. Plus there is a lot more social aspect to the cash game for most.

I like tournaments for the challenge and competition intensity, but cash with friends has the most social component and someone can go home even money, or up $10 and still play for 4 hours. This isn't a comparison to cash vs tourney, That has been done before a lot in other threads. It's just that with the stakes being mentioned, it makes sense for most to do cash for social reasons.

i'm actually surprised to see so many micro stakes games. I would have imagined micro stakes games would have tremendous turnover as the types only interested in playing micro stakes tend to be people not that interested in poker ….and therefore nervous to play for any meaningful money.

I think it's the social aspect. If someone wants to make money, they play at a casino. Or maybe some run private higher stakes games or underground games they don't want to post about here.

 

[RadicusScout]

Our game was 10c / 25c when we realized we were really playing 25c / 25c so we kept that ever since. Buy in at $40. As @Chris Manzoni said, it's all about fellowship and fries friendship. We're all friends so we keep it loose, fun, and don't aim to 'beat up on each other'.

 

[MikesDad]

Maybe it works because it keeps it more focused on the social aspect then a bigger higher tension game

I think the social aspect is part of it. In our neck of the woods, these micro-stakes (0.25/0.50) are usually mixed
games (e.g NLH and PLO) that you can't find at a casino. Our games also play bigger than the blinds would lead you
to believe and those who want "real" games have multiple casinos to choose from.

 

[Flopalopagus]

I think the social aspect is part of it. In our neck of the woods, these micro-stakes (0.25/0.50) are usually mixed
games (e.g NLH and PLO) that you can't find at a casino. Our games also play bigger than the blinds would lead you
to believe and those who want "real" games have multiple casinos to choose from.

Same! We play .25/.5 circus and it plays more like a .5/1. Max buyin is $100 and then up to half the big stack. We end up with a great balance between playing correctly, and really good social experience.

Like everyone has stated… it comes down to what the group is looking for, comfortable spending, and personality types that make the experience.

Ultimately, you’ve got to find balance. You don’t want to scare folks away on any end of it. The stakes can’t be too low or high that people don’t want to play. The personalities can’t be too extreme that people don’t want to come. The games can’t be uncomfortable enough for some that people don’t want to stay.

 

[Old State]

I think the social aspect is part of it. In our neck of the woods, these micro-stakes (0.25/0.50) are usually mixed
games (e.g NLH and PLO) that you can't find at a casino. Our games also play bigger than the blinds would lead you
to believe and those who want "real" games have multiple casinos to choose from.

Yes I can see it for mixed or carnival games. I tried a .25/.25 game $30- 40 max with some of the neighbor friends as they seemed to be interested in a poker night but unsure of the game and didn’t want to risk much.

That game went maybe twice. Everyone plays too loose then wants to leave or stop when they burn through their buyin. They rather drink and talk

The most reliable player types I’ve found (those who will show up regularly) are those who love poker but may feel the lowest casino limits are too much. Not enough money where a loss feels too bad but also enough where a win feels good. That’s why I feel the $80-120 max buyin for cash is the sweet spot.

 

[nynit]

Yes I can see it for mixed or carnival games. I tried a .25/.25 game $30- 40 max with some of the neighbor friends as then seems to be interested in a poker night but unsure of the game didn’t want to risk much.

That game went maybe twice. Everyone plays too loose then wants to leave or stop when they burn through their buyin. They rather drink and talk

The most reliable player types I’ve found (those who will show up regularly) are those who love poker but may not even the lowest casino limits are too much. Not enough money where a loss feels too bad but also enough where a win feels good. That’s I feel the $80-120 max buyin for cash is the sweet spot.

If people stopped after one buyin, could that mean the stakes were still too high? I had a few players who wouldn't rebuy, so we lowered the stakes and increased max buyin from 100BB to 150BB. They're now buying in for less money that lasts longer, and they've started topping up 50BB here and there. I'm hoping as they improve (and they've been improving) they'll feel comfortable enough to reload multiple times.

 

[Vinyard]

1/1 min-max $200-$400
Twice a year 2/5 $500-1K

Tournament: $100 buy-in
We use WSOP blind 30min

 

[Old State]

If people stopped after one buyin, could that mean the stakes were still too high? I had a few players who wouldn't rebuy, so we lowered the stakes and increased max buyin from 100BB to 150BB. They're now buying in for less money that lasts longer, and they've started topping up 50BB here and there. I'm hoping as they improve (and they've been improving) they'll feel comfortable enough to reload multiple times.

Stake are too high or the people that aren’t really into poker? These are the same people that would leave my house and drop $120 on a bar tab no issue.

In my experience, to maintain a regular game with a full table you need people who really love to play poker. In my personal experience anyone who loves the game enough to show up all the time will want to play at stakes that are somewhat meaningful.

I originally tried to maintain a regular game at casino stakes . It’s very hard as there aren’t enough players. I tried micro stakes… and that’s also very hard because there’s enough players. That’s why I called $1/1 $120 max the “Goldilocks” stakes. Not too low, not too high, and a full table with a waitlist almost every month. There is a lot of those players out there…you just need to find them…which is all that hard.

 

[Old State]

1/1 min-max $200-$400
Twice a year 2/5 $500-1K

Tournament: $100 buy-in
We use WSOP blind 30min

This is the strategy I may end up doing. Half of my current game likes to play higher and I always push back because it’ll mess up the game and people won’t play every month.

What I’ve decided to do is announce a completely separate game at $1/3 and/or $2/5 a few times a year. I will make it clear to all my regulars that these our special events and additional games to my normally scheduled ones.

I want to get back into the hosting tournaments and just ordered a brand new T500 set. Most of my guys will likely only play if there’s three tables, so it might only be once or twice a year unless I find another place to host

 

[nynit]

Stake are too high or the people that aren’t really into poker? These are the same people that would leave my house and drop $120 on a bar tab no issue.

In my experience, to maintain a regular game with a full table you need people who really love to play poker. In my personal experience anyone who loves the game enough to show up all the time will want to play at stakes that are somewhat meaningful.

I originally tried to maintain a regular game at casino stakes . It’s very hard as there aren’t enough players. I tried micro stakes… and that’s also very hard because there’s enough players. That’s why I called $1/1 $120 max the “Goldilocks” stakes. Not too low, not too high, and a full table with a waitlist almost every month. There is a lot of those players out there…you just need to find them…which is all that hard.

You said they seemed interested in poker but didn't want to risk much, then didn't want to rebuy after losing their first buyins. You know your players better than I do, but to me that sounds like it's possible the stakes were too high.

Obviously it's easier to run a game with people who already love playing poker. There are also people who would love poker if knew how to play, and they might want lower stakes to give them time to learn. Those same people might even be happy to move up in stakes once they feel like they're not completely dead money.

 

[Old State]

There are also people who would love poker if knew how to play, and they might want lower stakes to give them time to learn. Those same people might even be happy to move up in stakes once they feel like they're not completely dead money.

Agreed. I’ve used this with a few people to get them off low buyin (I think $30 or 40) single table tournaments and into cash. I hosted a few .25/.50 $60 with guys I invited from a friends single table tourney game. He had liked cash but his players seemed weary of it. Several of them all end up preferring cash structure. Once they felt comfortable they wanted to move up. 4-5 are now regulars or semi regulars in my $1/1 $120 game.

I recently got a guy from a $20 single table tourney game directly over to $1/1. He had never played poker higher than the $20 tournament game. He has been at seven straight games in a row. He isn’t a good player but won big a few nights with some lucky hands. Enough to hook him

As for the neighbors…definitely not too high stakes. Most of them were upper middle class guys. $40 isn’t a lot. One guy brought me a $80 bottle of bourbon! At least two of them bet more than that on football games every Sunday. The only guy I got from that experiment was a cop friend.

 

[cpac54]

Our game used to be primarily 0.25/0.50 NLH with 200bb max. Buy-in, but we seem to have transitioned to mostly 0.50/1.00 over the past year.

We do 1/2 a couple times a year, but in my experience the 0.50/1.00 game is splashier/plays bigger and is generally more fun for everyone.

 

[rum3002576]

we do small games. $20 buy in and 25 and 50 cent blinds

 

[nicepokerguy]

I use to always do .25/.50, $50 buyin which was great. Then I joined a new group that bumped it to up to $1/$1 100-300 buyin. It was definitely a little scary at first but I think the higher stakes has improved my game. Worth a shot!