20 Chip Starting Stack AM I MAD!? (1 Viewer)

[PokerPlayHouse]

Opinions please

I'm hosting a small home tournament, about 12 players and I'm thinking of introducing the following 25k breakdown:

5x 100

5x 500

7x 1000

3x 5000

There's no BB ante until the colour up and I feel there's still enough small chips to make change early. Granted this will happen nearly every hand but my players are either not complete dummy's or experienced players.

I like the fact I can make a starting stack from 20 chips. I can easily rack them and make the table less messy in a self deal game.

Thoughts?

 

[Eriks]

Have this handy:

Serious answer: not a fan. If your set allows for bigger starting stacks, I don’t really see the upside. But if it’s all you’ve got to work with, it is what it is.

 

[mipevi]

Doesn’t make any sense to me. Keeping starting stacks at exactly 20 chips is more important than a good playing experience?

 

[Marius L]

If you have the chips to do bigger (proper) stacks, this is indeed a horrible idea

 

[LeLe]

Nope

I think 8-10 chips per denomination per person is already the bare minimum

Anything lower is just “not fun”

 

[BGinGA]

8 chips each of the lowest denominations in play is the bare minimum (with 8-to-20 each being the acceptable norm limits), while 10-to-16 each is the sweet spot. And ante tournaments need more chips than non-ante events.

Only 5 is awful. Don't do it. You will also run into issues with players trying to break down 5000 value chips.

 

[allforcharity]

Yes, you are MAD

 

[upNdown]

I think it’s a dumb idea. But I’m a huge fan of dumb ideas. I hope you give it a try and give us an honest account of how it goes.

 

[PokerPlayHouse]

Hahah... cheers all I love a bit of controversy.

Sorry to have triggered you all

 

[PokerPlayHouse]

8 chips each of the lowest denominations in play is the bare minimum (with 8-to-20 each being the acceptable norm limits), while 10-to-16 each is the sweet spot. And ante tournaments need more chips than non-ante events.

Only 5 is awful. Don't do it. You will also run into issues with players trying to break down 5000 value chips.

My structure doesn't have antes until the small chips are coloured up. Was part of the 20 chip idea, I don't think there's much merit to antes in a small home game personally.

Anyway... I won't do it haha.. back to a 10/8 breakdown.

 

[JustinInMN]

You will run into some tough situations.

For example, someone raises to 600 and someone without any T100 chips wants to call. How do they do this? They can throw a single T1000 chip in and hope the pot ends up with at least 4 T100 chips in it. The only way that would happen is if both blinds fold and put in exact change (assuming 100-200), or if there are 4 other callers that each put in exact change. Failing that they have to find a player that has at least 5 T100 chips which could be a challenge if every player started with exactly that number. And that player will suddenly have fewer than 5 T100 chips, thus perpetuating the cycle when that player is in the situation.. This situation is likely to come up on way more hands than not and could prevent situations where change-making may not just be difficult, but impossible.

You should at a minimum have enough low chips to make at least two of each next denomination.

So following the make two chips rule you would want at least 500 * 2 in T100 chips or 10 * T100. Your T100s and T500s should total 2 * T1000, or 10 * T100 + 2*T500 and so on.

The common T25 recommendations (8/8/4/7 or 12/12/5/6) illustrate this "two chip rule" very well.

There's no breakdown that's 100% change-proof, but if you can cut starting stacks to a point they can't at all function either. For T20K with a T100 base which seems to be the intent of the post, I think the minimum breakdown is 10/4/7/2. 23 chips per player instead of 20, but you will find yourself in far fewer bad change situations for 3 chips per player.

Hahah... cheers all I love a bit of controversy.

Sorry to have triggered you all

You haven't triggered anyone, you asked for advice, this site is full of hosts, and we are trying to save you from an error we pretty universally recognize.

 

[LeLe]

Hahah... cheers all I love a bit of controversy.

Sorry to have triggered you all

I am not triggered with people/chipper asking for minimum amount of chips need but I do find myself often triggered by people who just have too many denomination or starting Chips and their reason are always more chips is better

 

[Ben8257]

I am not triggered with people/chipper asking for minimum amount of chips need but I do find myself often triggered by people who just have too many denomination or starting Chips and their reason are always more chips is better

16/16/12/12 yup 56 chips in a 20k starting stack at a 4 table event...

And not a single complaint... but many compliments on the structure, also many PCF members in attendance!

As @BGinGA mentioned there is a "sweet spot" 20 honestly would be too many but we run 16/16 in our home games and never have change issues. If you can instill it into your players to keep chips.in stacks of 20s it also doesn't take very long to count all in bets either. Most of our regular games are 12/12 and to be honest if I know a game is running 8/8 starting stacks I will often opt not to attend the game. I hate feeling short stacked off the break and everytime the "change game" happens by the 3 - 4th hand. Folks are free to run what they like. Especially for large once a year games that often have the capacities of your sets stretched to the max... but if you have an option to run 12/12 I highly recommend it.

 

[JustinInMN]

we run 16/16 in our home games and never have change issues. If you can instill it into your players to keep chips.in stacks of 20s it also doesn't take very long to count all in bets either. Most of our regular games are 12/12 and to be honest if I know a game is running 8/8 starting stacks I will often opt not to attend the game. I hate feeling short stacked off the break and everytime the "change game" happens by the 3 - 4th hand. Folks are free to run what they like. Especially for large once a year games that often have the capacities of your sets stretched to the max... but if you have an option to run 12/12 I highly recommend it.

I've been doing base T500 wtih T100K starting stacks. I think 6/12/12/1 of T500/1000/5000/25000 is the sweet spot for me. I did like doing 8/16/16 one time, but no setup is change proof. 4/8/8/x is tight, but I would only have to do that if I have to stretch my set past two tables.

 

[Darson]

12/17/4/6 is 39 chips. Add in a bounty (or seating chip) and you have exactly two barrels per player.

I too like that I can set out the starting stacks in whole barrels but 20 doesn’t make for a good game. 40 is perfect.

 

[Ben8257]

I've been doing base T500 wtih T100K starting stacks. I think 6/12/12/1 of T500/1000/5000/25000 is the sweet spot for me. I did like doing 8/16/16 one time, but no setup is change proof. 4/8/8/x is tight, but I would only have to do that if I have to stretch my set past two tables.

Well that one is unique with the 500 starting spot (same as t5 based honestly other than we have to go up on the 5s because our next denom is not x2) so yes if starting there at the 2x spot, you don't need very many 500s to make it work. I see no problem with that starting stack.

I don't mean "change proof" I just mean there is tons of change on the table so people are not saying "no way man get it from xxx he has one more than me!" Because the table is already short and the other players don't want to also fight for change. When there is a bunch... people are much more willing to give it up and the game just seems to flow much better IMO.

I'm not saying people need to change their set ups because some dude on the internet said so. Again 12/12 works great when playing with seasoned players that know how the game flows... but even some of those guys love having stacks of low denoms and want a barrel minimum when they are running well. Just the nature of the beast, it's all what works for your game... but if you CAN build a 16/16 set and have a bunch of new players... it really flows well,and for the seasoned guys they can build those towers they love so much!

 

[Ben8257]

12/17/4/6 is 39 chips. Add in a bounty (or seating chip) and you have exactly two barrels per player.

I too like that I can set out the starting stacks in whole barrels but 20 doesn’t make for a good game. 40 is perfect.

I like those #s too brother! Lots of T100 work horse chips in play early! Never ran that one but absolutely sounds great!

 

[MeridianFC]

 

[upNdown]

I remember watching that when it aired.
I was younger then.

 

[JustinInMN]

Well that one is unique with the 500 starting spot (same as t5 based honestly other than we have to go up on the 5s because our next denom is not x2) so yes if starting there at the 2x spot, you don't need very many 500s to make it work. I see no problem with that starting stack.

The 2x spot at the start is key to why I like T500 starting the best, and that important difference is why I find it way superior to T5. This means the first color up removes the fewest chips from the table which also would be the color up that involves the most players. (Especially because my structures usually allow re-entry through the first break.)

I was trying to illustrate that 8/8/4/x in base T25 is about the same as 4/8/8/x in my base T500, and 12/12/5/x has a 6/12/12/x equivalent in base T500, and that I even did like doing 8/16/16 in mine.

I have this idea for an "n-chip rule" to facilitate starting stack discussions to identify equivalencies across bases. I would presently state the rule as "For each denomination in a starting stack, there should be enough chips of that denomination, and one denomination smaller as applicable, equivalent in value to at least n chips of the next highest denomination in use."

The three-chip rule would be the same rule but making three chips of each denomination with smaller chips.

Base (Chips in use)	Two-chip rule stack	Three-chip rule stack	Four-chip rule stack
Base T25 (25/100/500/1k)	8/8/4/x	12/12/5/x	16/16/6/x
Base T100 (100/500/1k/5k)	10/2/12/x	15/3/17/x	20/4/21/x
Base T500 (500/1k/5k/25k)	4/8/8/x	6/12/12/x	8/16/16/x

Sorry this got long @Ben8257 , point is, I think we agree on liking four-chip rule stacks to put it in this terminology I am trying to invent .

I don't mean "change proof" I just mean there is tons of change on the table so people are not saying "no way man get it from xxx he has one more than me!" Because the table is already short and the other players don't want to also fight for change. When there is a bunch... people are much more willing to give it up and the game just seems to flow much better IMO.

Agreed, figuring out starting stacks is about balancing change-making inconvenience with how many chips need to be ported to set up a tournament. We think in similar terms on this, I think.

 

[BGinGA]

You should at a minimum have enough low chips to make at least two of each next denomination.

This is a great rule-of-thumb for both of the lowest two starting denominations in a tourney set.

lt's also in alignment as to why 8x T100s aren't enough in a T25-base set, and why 4x T500 is adequate in a T500-base set (provided it uses T1000 and not T2000 chips).