Cash Game 1000 chip Breakdown - 4 denoms (1 Viewer)

[bentax1978]

True, but I was assuming most players don't rebuy quite as frequently.

I actually try not to rebuy too often, but I always like to be prepared just in case. I think that's why I brought over 4k to your meetup to play $0.25/0.50 poker.

 

[Psypher1000]

I actually try not to rebuy too often, but I always like to be prepared just in case. I think that's why I brought over 4k to your meetup to play $0.25/0.50 poker.

Now I know who to knock off....err, hit up for cash if I’m running low at a meet up.

 

[abby99]

I am in the camp of full barrels of quarters and $1’s for all starting stacks, then fill/rebuys with $5’s and $25’s.

Beyond easy to sort/divvy/dispense full barrrels. A barrel of quarters is $5. Barrel of $1’s is $20. If you have partial barrels, it takes longer to cut out chips, and then your amounts aren’t nice and OCD approved. For a .25/.50 game with a $60 stack, you have 20 quarters, 20 x $1 (totals $25), and fill with 7 x $5’s.

Sure, you could get by with less quarters... but why? A full barrel each will greatly reduce the constant change making that happens. A full barrel is not excessive. I think this adds more to the playability of your set than a second rack of $25’s.

I used to give out starting stacks that included 16 quarters and 21 ones. However, as @Trihonda and others have pointed out, it's much easier and more efficient to give them out in full barrels. If I'm going to put 100 quarters on the table, the first five players get full barrels and the remaining players can get change at the table. For my game, an average of 14 quarters per player is the sweet spot (ymmv). I don't give out additional quarters in rebuy stacks.

 

[Mojo1312]

I am baffled by the idea that you need a full barrel of quarters and ones per player to stem the constant change making that is bound to occur in .25.50 games. Srsly -- chips are fluid. They move around the table. Maybe there are .25/.50 games where a player bets $1.25 and another raises to $2.75 and everyone calls. I haven't played in one, but that doesn't mean they, like unicorns, don't exist.

I hosted a weekly .25/.50 full ring game for 15 months. In the beginning, we had 16/16/x starting stacks and not once did someone need to make change. After 6 to 8 months I cut the starting stacks to 12/12/x. Rarely, did anyone need to break down a chip for smaller denominations. I would have the re-buys ready in advance. 12/12/x for the first re-buy, and 0/10/x for the following re-buys until all 160 $1 were in play. $5 and $25 were used for the rest of the evenings re-buys. And yes (Gasp) players made change at the table.

I am a slow learner, it took me close to a year to realize that no one was ever folding their SB in a pot where everyone else limped in, anymore then they would fold to a raise over the extra .25 they would have to pay to call. I nixed the SB in favor of Mark Twain .50 fracs. Smartest change I ever made.

Starting stacks 10/10 for a $60 buy-in. Simple.

100 x .50
200 x $1
600 x $5
100 x $25 -- Why have $5000 in $25 and $2500 in $5? Invest in $100 chips or plaques.
x # of $100 plaques.

 

[Jambine]

Maybe there are .25/.50 games where a player bets $1.25 and another raises to $2.75 and everyone calls. I haven't played in one, but that doesn't mean they, like unicorns, don't exist.

That actually is my game. A bunch of number crunchers. .25/.50 with two limpers = 1.75, next guy wants to bet 2x pot for 3.50 straight :

 

[Mojo1312]

That actually is my game. A bunch of number crunchers. .25/.50 with two limpers = 1.75, next guy wants to bet 2x pot for 3.50 straight :

Oops, my bad!

Do any of them arrive at the game riding a Unicorn?

 

[Jambine]

Oops, my bad!

Do any of them arrive at the game riding a Unicorn?

My game is powered by unicorn farts

 

[Psypher1000]

Maybe there are .25/.50 games where a player bets $1.25 and another raises to $2.75 and everyone calls. I haven't played in one, but that doesn't mean they, like unicorns, don't exist.

I'm in an area where the cost of living is lower, and a good number of my friends are folk of simple means, so micro-stakes tend to rule the day. That also brings with it quite a number of 20c and 15c bets rather than 25c. I have to be aware of this because dropping an actual 25c chip in front of me is like a signal to the rest of the table to fold. I can do four 5c chips (or even five!) and induce some calls, but heaven forbid I use that actual 25c chip pre-flop.

 

[Mental Nomad]

I am baffled by the idea that you need a full barrel of quarters and ones per player to stem the constant change making that is bound to occur in .25.50 games. Srsly -- chips are fluid. They move around the table.

I'm in that same boat with you, but for different reasons. In my 25/50 game, if I give everyone 16 quarters, the winners end up with the quarters and the losers need change.

If I give everyone 30 quarters, the winners end up with the quarters and the losers need change.

Either way, change out of the pot is dead easy; put up a dollar, say "call," when the pot is right, quarters are flipped out.

Occasionally, I make change into the pot with 4 quarters on the flop because we need to pull one for the jackpot, but, often as not, we can throw a dollar in the jackpot and pull out three quarters for the pot!

If people go all-in now and then, all the quarters still end up in the same hands soon enough, no matter how many there are.

 

[gopherblue]

One rack of fracs is MORE than enough. No one needs 120 or 160 or any other silliness when it comes to fracs at a single table. More than 100 is wasting chips and making your set inefficient.

I subscribe to the @abby99 school of thought, which is the ONLY correct one:

The first five players get a barrel of quarters, and everyone else buys some off those players. There is no need for even starting stacks—the fracs will be unevenly distributed around the table anyway after an orbit or two.

You MUST maximize your bank if this is to be a .25/.50 & 1/2 set and it is limited to 1000 chips. You may not need all of the workhorse or high denomination chips on any given night, but you’ll damn well miss them when you need them.

And besides, as inflation catches up with us, 1/2 will be the new .25/.50. So be prepared and future-proof it.

This gets my vote as the best, most logical breakdown for your stakes, now, and as your game grows:

100 x 25¢
200 x $1
500 x $5
160 x $25
40 x $100

If you must limit yourself to only four denominations, definitely have 200 x $25, or maybe even 300 x $25 and one rack fewer $5s.

 

[Psypher1000]

I have to say, I'm curious @jbriod ....what't the reason behind the 4-denom limit on the chips?

 

[jbriod]

I have to say, I'm curious @jbriod ....what't the reason behind the 4-denom limit on the chips?[/QUOTE

The person I’m ordering chips from and I decided on only 4 denoms to keep setup and chip cost down. I can relabel some plaques I have into hundos.

 

[JustinInMN]

Why is everyone suggesting so many fives, 1s are the workhorse at .25/.50.

I agree one rack of quarters per table is plenty.

For single table do 100x.25, 400x1, 400x5, 100x25. Swap a rack of singles for quarters if two tabling. Get 25s for 1/2.

 

[bentax1978]

Why is everyone suggesting so many fives, 1s are the workhorse at .25/.50.

I’ve never played a 0.25/0.50 where the $1 was the sole workhorse chip. I think it’s more commonly a co-workhorse with the $5. Since this set is also for 1/2, where the $5 is the sole workhorse, I think maximizing the fives is appropriate.

 

[JustinInMN]

I guess I buy the co workhorse theory to a point. I issue both in my home game. But I am heavy on ones, and .25-.50 is the biggest game I've spread.

 

[bentax1978]

I guess I buy the co workhorse theory to a point. I issue both in my home game. But I am heavy on ones, and .25-.50 is the biggest game I've spread.

Perhaps I’m also assuming that if there’s overlap in his player pool, the 0.25/0.50 probably plays on the large side. Given the $60 buy-in and 2-4 rebuts per person, it likely does play on the larger side.

 

[BGinGA]

Doesn't a 25c/50c game typically use $5 as the workhorse chip on nearly all bets post-flop? Unless there's a whole lot of limping going on, even a NLHE game will be using $5 chips on the flop. Most pot-limit circus games play even larger, of course.

 

[JustinInMN]

I must have tight friends .

But I also think in terms of 8 handed games, and we do 40 max. So 500 reds would take 62 buy ins to exhaust. I can see that doing a 60 buyin is different.

But 500 chips still covers 41 buy in of 60, 400 would still cover 33, plus 400 singles and 100 quarters cover another 7. That's still 40 buy ins before touching the 25s.

For 1/2, assuming 200 buys and using one rack of singles, it's 23 buy ins in this format.

So I guess that's really the snswer, count the buy ins you figure to need and buy accordingly.

I'd feel okay about 100-400-400-100 in these cases. Plus I guess some hondo plaques are coming too.

 

[MaxB]

I’ve never played a 0.25/0.50 where the $1 was the sole workhorse chip. I think it’s more commonly a co-workhorse with the $5. Since this set is also for 1/2, where the $5 is the sole workhorse, I think maximizing the fives is appropriate.

I loaded my cash set with $1 chips and found out they were not the workhorse chip. I had a poker game (25c/50c blinds) with a bunch of PCF players and we had all of my $5s out on the table and had to tap into the $20's ...... I'm now slowly turning some 1s into 5s so it doesn't happen again

 

[bentax1978]

I loaded my cash set with $1 chips and found out they were not the workhorse chip. I had a poker game (25c/50c blinds) with a bunch of PCF players and we had all of my $5s out on the table and had to tap into the $20's ...... I'm now slowly turning some 1s into 5s so it doesn't happen again

I think the only time a $1 chip would be a workhorse is in a very shallow $0.25/0.50 game, with a low cap on the buy-in, and a limited number of rebuys. And very tight players.

I've also found that the $5 is the main workhorse for all of the 0.25/0.50 and 1/2 games I've hosted.

 

[jbriod]

I think I’m going

100 - .25
200 - 1
500 - 5
200 - 25
Plus 25 ($100) plaques

This way I def cover small stakes
And should have enough for 1/2 games.
(y) :thumbsup: Or (n) :thumbsdown:

 

[Mojo1312]

100 .25 chips may be too tight, since two are need to complete the BB. I like the idea of full racks as much as the next non-OCD person, but you may be better off ordering an extra barrel.

500 chips still covers 41 buy in of 60, 400 would still cover 33, plus 400 singles and 100 quarters cover another 7. That's still 40 buy ins before touching the 25s.

For 1/2, assuming 200 buys and using one rack of singles, it's 23 buy ins in this format.

I think you met to type 13 buy-ins, not 23.

 

[upNdown]

One rack of quarters!
I give out 12 per player in my .25/.50 game and it’s fine. And 1.75 is a pretty popular bet at my table. Yes there is some change making, but it sure as hell doesn’t slow anything down. And there will always be some change making. Always.
As far as the workhorse chip goes, yeah, I’d say the $1 and the $5 are co-workhorse chips in my game, but of course I want a lot more $5’s. Because when somebody rebuys for $60, I’m handing him twelve $5’s, not 60 ones.

 

[Darthhoodie]

I'm in an area where the cost of living is lower, and a good number of my friends are folk of simple means, so micro-stakes tend to rule the day. That also brings with it quite a number of 20c and 15c bets rather than 25c. I have to be aware of this because dropping an actual 25c chip in front of me is like a signal to the rest of the table to fold. I can do four 5c chips (or even five!) and induce some calls, but heaven forbid I use that actual 25c chip pre-flop.

This makes me laugh because I have a long running family game that works like this. Drop a quarter preflop and your a bully, throw 4 nickels out there and its fine.
For an 8 player 5c/10c game I need two racks of nickels at a minimum.
Its kinda silly but the game has been around longer than I have so there is only so much your gonna get your 94 year old grandma to change.
At least they are not using actual nickles and quarters anymore.

Its also funny when the value of the chips your using is over 2k and they are used to represent $160 cash.

 

[Mojo1312]

I agree that you only need 12 quarters per player for a .25/.50 cash game, which is why I suggested investing in an extra barrel for those occasions when he ten players.

 

[upNdown]

I agree that you only need 12 quarters per player for a .25/.50 cash game, which is why I suggested investing in an extra barrel for those occasions when he ten players.

Tough to argue with that, when I own an extra barrel myself.

 

[JustinInMN]

100 .25 chips may be too tight, since two are need to complete the BB. I like the idea of full racks as much as the next non-OCD person, but you may be better off ordering an extra barrel.



I think you met to type 13 buy-ins, not 23.

100 * 1 = 100
400* 5 - 2000
100 * 25 = 2500
TOTAL: 4600
200 per buy in, 23 buy ins, plus one buy in for every two hundo-plaques he adds.

 

[Mojo1312]

Your math is right. I was calculating the number of buy-ins the O.P. would have using his $5's and 1's.

 

[Mojo1312]

Woke up this morning and realized you can't get to 23 $200 buy-ins with the O.P.'s chip breakdown.

His chosen breakdown will allow for 38 $200 buy-ins if you include the two racks of quarters.

No big deal.

I need to stop skimming through these threads when my mind is preoccupied.