Cash Game Limit Poker Breakdown (3 Viewers)

[moose]

Excuse me while I post some limit game pictures...I wouldn't want the post to be uhh too long so uhh I'll have to restrict to pictures from uhh like actual casinos...

\

 

[CraigT78]

@moose what stakes where you have the $5s also in play? $3/$6?

 

[moose]

But I would say this pic adequately sums up home limit games...

 

[moose]

@moose what stakes where you have the $5s also in play? $3/$6?

Generally any pic with $5s usually means there is a high hand bonus or something - $25-$100 which gets paid out with $5 chips. Some of the limit pics were up to $4/8 with a kill, all with white chips. The first pic I must have hit something big that paid in $25s. One of the pics is of @SeekTheGrail getting paid $50 in red for his quad Queens.

There are a couple pics from my home casino which has a $6/12 game with kill to $10/20, where usually I start with a rack of white and a stack or two of red.

There is also a pic of an $8/16 game with $2 chips.

 

[JustinInMN]

Those Jack chips look so good.

 

[Old State]

Yes, the internet is full of pics people have taken of their monster stacks at a casino.

For anyone reading this that is looking for advice on buying a new set or is relatively newer to poker in general, you absolutely do not need 200-300 chips per person. If you live close to a casino stop in and take a rough count of the average total chips in play at the limit tables (and NL tables for that matter). You will see that number will probably be well below 1000 and probably a few hundred in most cases. Sure, there will be a few guys with some massive stacks at the tables but you will rarely if ever see 2000-3000 chips in play at a single cash table.

I hosted a weekly $2/4 limit game for several years using less than 500 chips for a full table.

Now if you personally think it’s cool or fun to have 300 chips in front of each player...and can afford to buy all those chips...by all means do what makes you happy. But you certainly don’t need that many and can do with far less.

 

[toynoob]

This is what I’m afraid of. My players want to color up in tournaments to remove stacks of chips. I’m afraid huge stacks of $1’s would not be appealing.

Isn't that funny how some hate stacks, and some (me) love mountains regardless of the denomination.

 

[Darson]

But you certainly don’t need that many and can do with far less.

Are you on the right forum? Next you'll be telling us that you certainly don't need chips - matchsticks will do. And yes, this is friendly humour, not meant to be offensive or anything so I apologize in advance if you take it the wrong way

 

[Old State]

Are you on the right forum? Next you'll be telling us that you certainly don't need chips - matchsticks will do. And yes, this is friendly humour, not meant to be offensive or anything so I apologize in advance if you take it the wrong way

I like chips as much as anyone. My concern is more that someone new may look at a thread like this and get a false impression of reality. Outside of a forum full of pokerchip nerds (and I mean that as a term of endearment) or the final table of a televised tournament, poker is not usually played with a pyramid of chips in front of each player. It’s a bit silly but I understand “enthusiasts like to take everything to an extreme.

 

[joepro]

I played in a pink chip game once at Parx, the game was half holdem and half Omaha hi-lo. I was under rolled and under skilled at Omaha, but it was fun while it lasted. There are many aspects of that game in particular which encourage big pots and gambles, and that why it's so popular in those limit circles. I find no limit holdem cash games incredibly boring.

 

[viet rounder]

I realize this is a poker chip enthusiast forum but regular people don’t like massive amounts of chips in play. Two racks per person is ludicrous. My group was as loose as they come. The amount of chips in play doesn’t mean anything.
If you are trying to get encouragement to buy a ton of new chips you are in the right place though.

I have to agree with this for the most part. My crew and I are really NL players and never really understood why these limit games have mountains of chips in front of each player. Not saying it’s wrong, I just don’t understand it. My crew hates having lots of chips in play and always prefers to colour up. And I would agree that for my crew the smaller amount of chips in play won’t effect their aggression. In fact it might have the opposite effect because they are lazy to continually count out big stacks of small denomination chips. In a limit game (ex 10/20) I would consider a starting rack of reds worth $500 (25 big bets) should be sufficient. I would even consider colouring up two barrels for some $20s that can be used for the big bet on the 4th and 5th street.

 

[joepro]

In a limit game (ex 10/20) I would consider a starting rack of reds worth $500 (25 big bets) should be sufficient. I would even consider colouring up two barrels for some $20s that can be used for the big bet on the 4th and 5th street.

Limit games move much faster because they typically only use one color of a workhorse chip, so there is no time wasted counting out chips or stacks. Also there is very little "Hollywooding" or tanking which drive me nuts at an NL table. In limit, since the betting amount is fixed, it makes using one color the most efficient way to go. There can be color ups or chips bought at the table because of the limit nature of the game, but generally, only one color is used.

 

[viet rounder]

Limit games move much faster because they typically only use one color of a workhorse chip, so there is no time wasted counting out chips or stacks. Also there is very little "Hollywooding" or tanking which drive me nuts at an NL table. In limit, since the betting amount is fixed, it makes using one color the most efficient way to go. There can be color ups or chips bought at the table because of the limit nature of the game, but generally, only one color is used.

I agree that limit games move much quicker than NL but why would using two denominations make things less efficient if both chips match the betting limit. For example, in a 10/20 limit game I understand the $5 chip being critical because it can be used for the blinds, small and big bets. However the $20 chip wouldn’t make things less efficient because they can be used for the big bet on 4th and 5th street. Throwing in one $20 chip wouldn’t make things any slower than 4x $5 chips. I suppose if a $25 chip was in play it could get a little more complicated because the amount doesn’t work well with the betting structure.

 

[moose]

Wow I'm up to two people I'm ignoring on this forum now.

 

[viet rounder]

Wow I'm up to two people I'm ignoring on this forum now.

Oh come on! The topic in discussion is poker chips, not religion or politics. There is no reason for hard feelings. I think there is a lot of truth in what Old State is saying. He’s not against anyone buying lots chips. He is strictly stating what HE feels is a necessary amount. Nothing more nothing less. I also appreciate his concern that a novice person reading this would get the wrong impression that one NEEDS 2000+ chips on the table for a limit game to be efficient.

 

[moose]

I don't have any hard feelings. I feel his contributions aren't worth my time. I posted a bunch of pictures but he continues to deny deny deny that most limit games run with >1000 chips on the table.

His defense is that there of tons of pictures on 'the internet' (these are MY pictures) of people with huge stacks. The REASON is this is the way the game is played. You can't win your way to stacks of 300+ white chips unless those chips are on the table to win in the first place. Otherwise everyone's stack would be a mixture of 5s and 25s.

Then for some completely unrelated reason he tries to drag no limit games and even tournaments into it. Seriously WTF does that have to do with a limit game.

You can run a shitty limit game or you can run a good one. Take your pick.

 

[viet rounder]

While I agree that there is a minimum amount of chips required I don’t believe that, in the big picture, a shitty game verses a good one is determined by the amount of chips on the table. I’m pretty certain that having 800 chips may not be as convenient as 2000+ , it wouldn’t make the game shitty.

Anyways the reason I got involved with this topic is because I’m planning my next custom set which will be designed to accommodate limit games. So far, you, Old State, and many others, while perhaps having conflicting Ideas have shed some light on me, and for that, I thank you guys.

 

[Old State]

While I agree that there is a minimum amount of chips required I don’t believe that, in the big picture, a shitty game verses a good one is determined by the amount of chips on the table. I’m pretty certain that having 800 chips may not be as convenient as 2000+ , it wouldn’t make the game shitty.

Anyways the reason I got involved with this topic is because I’m planning my next custom set which will be designed to accommodate limit games. So far, you, Old State, and many others, while perhaps having conflicting Ideas have shed some light on me, and for that, I thank you guys.

I’d argue way 800 is MORE convenient.
I think you have to decide which is more important to you; whether you want enough chips to run an efficient game or want the dramatic effect 200 chip per person buy ins has. It certainly doesn’t make the game run any better. That is total and complete BS.

I played most of my limit poker at Borgata because it’s my favorite casino and AC is 1hr and 20min from my house. Haven’t played limit in a long time but when I did the buy ins were typically as follows-
$60 for a $2/4 game. Cashier or dealer would give you 10 whites and and 10 reds unless you specified...which few did.
$80-100 for $3/6. Cashier or dealer would give you 30 whites and 10 reds or 20 reds respectively....unless you specified ....
$200 for $4/8. Cashier or dealer would give 40 reds unless you.....

Change would be made when you entered a pot and you would eventually end up with enough whites. A typical $6 bet or raise would be made two chips, a red and a white. If you were doing well you might end up with a couple hundred chips in front of you...but you certainly didn’t cash in with that quantity. You might, at that point also take a picture and post it online for someone to find in a google search and misinterpret.

In my experience casinos always default to giving out the highest denominations aka fewest chips unless you ask .... and I think they understand how to run a good game. That’s AC. I can’t speak for random cards rooms in other places.

I played mostly $2/4 and $3/6 so I built my first custom set around that and what I was accustomed to in AC. I added another order to accommodate tourneys and higher limits games up to $5/10 (we never got there because NL cash games took over). Never need more than 1000 chips per set to cover all those bases.

If you think it’s cool to cash people in with 200 chips each and want to deal with two or three birdcages of chips for a table...have at it. It’s just not my cup of tea. As I’ve said in other threads, I love custom chips and that is why I joined this forum. I have zero interest in collecting or accumulating chips. I have run a pretty efficient game for almost 20 years and never once felt the need for 2000-3000 chips for a single table.

 

[moose]

What makes a limit game run smoothly is when everyone at the table can make a bet or raise without getting change. The amount of the bet doesn't matter so much as it does being able to count the number of bets.

So if a player has the ability to set out 2, 3, or 4 stacks of chips then everyone at the table can visually verify if the player has called or raised without having to count the amount of the bet or hear the players verbal announcement.

In addition, to speed up chopped pots, in O8 for example, if all the chips are of the same denomination, again it is faster and everyone can visually verify the chop is correct.

Just look at the picture from the Peppermill above. This is an O8 game. The dealer has already stacked the chips in preparation of a chop and there is even a side pot in play that he has formed into two stacks.

Finally huge piles of chips generates action. Spreading a game with a 1 chip/2 chip betting structure will generate less action because the pots visually look smaller than a 2/4 chip structure. Ie a $5/10 limit game has more action using pink $2.50 chips, than using $5 chips. A $2/4 limit game runs better with $1 chips than $2 chips and so on. In fact I prefer a 3/6 chip or even a 4/8 chip structure, though this requires significantly more chips to run well.

You don't need 2000 chips for limit games but I would certainly recommend a minimum of a rack per player. You can deal limit with any denomination/combo of chips but it isn't recommended for these reasons.

 

[Saoliver]

I have played a ton of limit over the last 20 years in a lot of different casinos, from 2/4 up to 20/40. I have never seen a player get chips from the cage or a runner in more than one denom unless they specifically asked for it. Sure, if you have a huge mountain of chips, it is convenient to color-up a few racks. But if you are winning over the course of a few hours, you will have a huge stack in one denom. Most players will. That just how it works. I have played all over the Seattle area and more than 10 poker rooms in Vegas. It is the same everywhere for limit. The only chip that is usually on the table is a single denom.

If you want to run a home game differently, then do what works for you. But you really can’t argue that huge chip stacks in one denom isn’t the standard for limit.

 

[Saoliver]

So convince me that I need $2's and $20's for a limit poker set.

Or, convince me to go with $1s and $20s ($25s?)

Here's the details. I have a solid group of cash happy players. Usually good for a couple of buyins a night. Anywhere from $100 - $500 a night. Would like to introduce limit - circus or NLHE.

Not sure what stakes would be right. I figure $2/$4 to start, $4/$8 once I shake out the right 7 or 8 guys.

BUT I can see $3/$6 being a solid game all the way around.

What stakes and associated chips would you go with? And what breakdown for a single table?

To the point of the OP, here you go @CraigT78 . Here is the $2 mountain I just picked up. Pretty convincing?

 

[JustinInMN]

Hey @CraigT78 ,

Before we got into a massive argument this thread was about you.

Did you ever get the chips?

I know you mentioned GOCC, but I thought I read they went incommunicado.

Looks like you could get in on the @ABC Gifts and Awards semi custom chipco blank deal this week

 

[Old State]

There seems to be an alternative poker unverse outside of AC. Either way I never realized my old limits games weren’t running smoothly until I read this thread.

 

[joepro]

Finally huge piles of chips generates action. Spreading a game with a 1 chip/2 chip betting structure will generate less action because the pots visually look smaller than a 2/4 chip structure. Ie a $5/10 limit game has more action using pink $2.50 chips, than using $5 chips. A $2/4 limit game runs better with $1 chips than $2 chips and so on. In fact I prefer a 3/6 chip or even a 4/8 chip structure, though this requires significantly more chips to run well.

Moose, I agree with pretty much everything you say. But I look at limit games as either a 1 chip 2 chip structure or a 2 chip 3 chip structure. Most games will be a 1 / 2 structure, which means that the small blind will need to post half of the big blind. A 2 / 3 structure such as $3/6 or $6/12 means that the small blind will post 2/3 of the big blind. So for a $3/6 game, the initial bet would be $3, and if you are the sb in an unraised pot, it only costs you one extra dollar to see a flop. This will encourage more action than a 1/2 chip structure. The pink chip games are $7.50/ 15, and use 2/3 structure.

 

[moose]

Moose, I agree with pretty much everything you say. But I look at limit games as either a 1 chip 2 chip structure or a 2 chip 3 chip structure. Most games will be a 1 / 2 structure, which means that the small blind will need to post half of the big blind. A 2 / 3 structure such as $3/6 or $6/12 means that the small blind will post 2/3 of the big blind. So for a $3/6 game, the initial bet would be $3, and if you are the sb in an unraised pot, it only costs you one extra dollar to see a flop. This will encourage more action than a 1/2 chip structure. The pink chip games are $7.50/ 15, and use 2/3 structure.

You've got that mixed up. It doesn't have anything to do with the blinds, SB small blind and BB big blind - rather in limit it refers to the SB small bet and BB big bet. Ie the number of chips per bet in the first two rounds of betting (preflop and flop) and the number of chips in the last two rounds (turn and river).

The blinds can be pretty much anything. The Sahara ran their $2/4 limit game with a single $2 blind. A ratio of 1:2, 1:3 or 2:3 of the small blind to big blind only affects the preflop decisions of the player in the small blind, whether they should play or fold. It has limited to no effect on any of the other players decisions.

 

[moose]

..

 

[joepro]

You've got that mixed up. It doesn't have anything to do with the blinds, SB small blind and BB big blind - rather in limit it refers to the SB small bet and BB big bet. Ie the number of chips per bet in the first two rounds of betting (preflop and flop) and the number of chips in the last two rounds (turn and river).

The blinds can be pretty much anything. The Sahara ran their $2/4 limit game with a single $2 blind. A ratio of 1:2, 1:3 or 2:3 of the small blind to big blind only affects the preflop decisions of the player in the small blind, whether they should play or fold. It has limited to no effect on any of the other players decisions.

Not to get into a pissing match, but I got the 2/3 chip structure from Jennifer Harmon's chapter on limit holdem in the book Super System 2.

I understand how the betting works but she's the one who said you'll see more action if the SB has 2/3 of a bet on the table. She prefers to play in games with that structure.

 

[moose]

Yes the small blind should call a wider range when the blinds are a 2/3 ratio but it still has nothing to do with what denominations are in play.

When you use $1 chips to play a $2/4 limit game, the blinds are $1/$2 but the limits are $2/$4. This results in a 2 chip/4 chip betting structure. If you use $2 chips then you have a 1 chip/2 chip betting structure.

If you use $1 chips in a $3/6 game the blinds can be $1/$3 or $2/3 but the limits are $3/$6 and using $1 chips means you have a 3 chip/6 chip BETTING structure. Again it has nothing to do with what BLIND structure you are using.

If you want to determine the chips you need to spread a limit game you need to discuss the betting structure and you keep referring to the blind structure.

In no limit the games are defined by the blinds, eg a $.25/.50 nl game or $1/$2 nl.

But in limit the game is defined but what the betting limits are, not the blinds. Eg. $2/4, $3/6, $4/8, $10/20 etc.

 

[Beakertwang]

Thought I’d share the thread I started as I first considered starting a limit game.
https://www.pokerchipforum.com/threads/im-not-buying-2500-ing-chips-for-a-limit-game.31402/

Ended up going with 900 non-denominated chips in the big 8v sale. Still haven’t played a limit game. Actually, haven’t hosted since before thanksgiving.

 

[MegaTon44]

I played a ton of LHE in the early 2000s, ranging from $2/$4 to $40/$80 (my normal game). My observation was a buy-in between 15 and 35 big bets. For $2/$4, that typically meant 60 chips, with a potential (overkill) max of 140 chips. As we got closer to $40/$80, I'd buy in for $2400, which came out to 120 chips. Depending on game and how long the player was playing, it wasn't uncommon to see 400+ chip stacks for certain folks.

Therefore, I'd recommend between 100-200 chips per person in a limit game to be safe, with the understanding that you could probably spread the game with under 100 chips per (if you needed to) depending on stakes.

NLHE is a different animal. I regularly host 30 players + 3 dealers and don't even get to 50 chips per person (on average). I also use 3 denoms to minimize chip usage.