Cash Game $20 vs $25 chip for cash games (2 Viewers)

[Mr. Cheese]

I don't think this is going to make the choice any easier LOL

View attachment 67467

View attachment 67468

View attachment 67469

Those look incredible!



As for myself I prefer $20's for the ease of rebuys but also because it's easier for our low stakes game to get one or maybe two into play.

 

[Mental Nomad]

And a rack of $20s is an OCD-approved stack of $100s....

But a rack of oversize $20s is a tilting $1600...

I'd feel differently if guys were peeling $50s or $100s off their cash rolls but $20 in with a $20 rebuy is a big night for most. That makes a $25 chip/plaque impractical.

To be honest, if $40 is a big night for most, that makes a $20 or $25 chip both unnecessary. Let's say someone came in for a crazy $60, instead... and let's say all ten players go crazy and put in $60. That's still just $600. With my micro-stakes cash set, I have 200 $1, so we'd need $400 in redbirds. That's still only 80 red chips. I'd never put all my reds in play, never mind reaching for the next denomination up! (And I didn't even consider the value of any fracs in play...)

All of the major Vegas casinos have $20 chips. Lease 'em for free, and redeem for cash when wanting something new for the home set.

I love this idea for a Paulson micro set... most micro games would never need more than $100 or $200 in $20s, if any, so just put $200 on deposit at your nearest casino and you've got ten chips. As long as you stay abreast about news of possible casino closure (to avoid redemption problems), you've actually spent zero dollars.

When you are running games big enough to require larger numbers of them in play, or you finally score a barrel of nice yellow chips, just redeem the casino chips.

 

[mummel]

But a rack of oversize $20s is a tilting $1600...



To be honest, if $40 is a big night for most, that makes a $20 or $25 chip both unnecessary. Let's say someone came in for a crazy $60, instead... and let's say all ten players go crazy and put in $60. That's still just $600. With my micro-stakes cash set, I have 200 $1, so we'd need $400 in redbirds. That's still only 80 red chips. I'd never put all my reds in play, never mind reaching for the next denomination up! (And I didn't even consider the value of any fracs in play...)



I love this idea for a Paulson micro set... most micro games would never need more than $100 or $200 in $20s, if any, so just put $200 on deposit at your nearest casino and you've got ten chips. As long as you stay abreast about news of possible casino closure (to avoid redemption problems), you've actually spent zero dollars.

When you are running games big enough to require larger numbers of them in play, or you finally score a barrel of nice yellow chips, just redeem the casino chips.

I'm the same. I bought 180 Redbirds and they have never made it into play. $5 plaques for "big" nights would have been a better idea IMO. But you know, MOAR & future proof lol.

 

[GoStumpy]

I also play $50 buyin, and on a great night I can get a full rack of $5's in play... never mind two racks of $5's before I start reaching for $25 chips

 

[Mental Nomad]

I also play $50 buyin, and on a great night I can get a full rack of $5's in play... never mind two racks of $5's before I start reaching for $25 chips

I used to run a good $.50/$1.00 game in Manhattan on a Paulson set with 160 $1s, 160 $5s. We'd often get a nice chunk of greens in play.

Now, my regular game has a 25-cent big blind, and my irregular game has a 50-cent blind, and I'm playing them on a set with 200 $1s and 200 $5s. I've never been pushed past the red.

But I've just ordered a set of Boardwalks with oversize $20 chips (loving the yellow) for my micro game, and I'm contriving how to run the buy-ins so that I can force the occasional $20 into play! But I want to do it without hurting the game. (I fear certain people will turtle up whenever they win a big chip, or will resist breaking it.)

I had eleven players (ten chairs and a stool) on Friday in my micro game, and I only got about 100 red in play. (It didn't help that I was doing well. I'm one of the people who rebuy very reliably when doing poorly.) The reds get played hard, but it wouldn't take much in the way of 20s to take a lot of chips off the table and tighten things up.

To me, all of this argues for a $20 instead of a $25; the $25 would be even more likely to screw with people in such a low-stakes game. In a $1/$2 game, however, I don't think the difference in chip counts between the $20 and the $25 would affect the play, so I'd feel free to use whichever denom or color I like.

 

[gopherblue]

I used to run a good $.50/$1.00 game in Manhattan on a Paulson set with 160 $1s, 160 $5s. We'd often get a nice chunk of greens in play.

Now, my regular game has a 25-cent big blind, and my irregular game has a 50-cent blind, and I'm playing them on a set with 200 $1s and 200 $5s. I've never been pushed past the red.

But I've just ordered a set of Boardwalks with oversize $20 chips (loving the yellow) for my micro game, and I'm contriving how to run the buy-ins so that I can force the occasional $20 into play! But I want to do it without hurting the game. (I fear certain people will turtle up whenever they win a big chip, or will resist breaking it.)

I had eleven players (ten chairs and a stool) on Friday in my micro game, and I only got about 100 red in play. (It didn't help that I was doing well. I'm one of the people who rebuy very reliably when doing poorly.) The reds get played hard, but it wouldn't take much in the way of 20s to take a lot of chips off the table and tighten things up.

To me, all of this argues for a $20 instead of a $25; the $25 would be even more likely to screw with people in such a low-stakes game. In a $1/$2 game, however, I don't think the difference in chip counts between the $20 and the $25 would affect the play, so I'd feel free to use whichever denom or color I like.

Still have the game in NYC?

 

[Mental Nomad]

Still have the game in NYC?

No, I moved out of Manhattan. That's why that game died.

 

[jbutler]

I like $20s in smaller games (.25/.50 and under) and $25s in bigger games (1/2 and higher). I can go either way with .50/.50 through 1/1.

Second post in the thread and still the best and most straightforward answer.

I think most people that complain about the $20 denomination do so because they're just used to using a $25 chip (from playing in casinos). If I woke up tomorrow and the $20 bill was replaced with a $25 bill, I would complain and be just as thrown off. For me, it's almost entirely about being used to having a $25 cash chips, not because there aren't good arguments to be made in favor of the $20 chip.

And for exactly this reason. The vast majority of people who want to play $1/2 and higher will have significant live casino experience and will usually be thrown off by $20s.

 

[Coyote]

So, 20 = more practical / modular for "home" stakes, while 25 = more useful in higher / casino stakes, where it provides more bank for the clay (or when home-playing with a X5 table magnifier, where a 25 would be $5 in the bank).

Would having a green 20 be just heresy (perfectly OK with me) or plain blasphemy? Would it tilt the right people, or just everybody?

 

[PKF655]

I think having a green 25 might be a little confusing if anything.

 

[Sparty]

These for cash games!

 

[ohio3302016]

So, 20 = more practical / modular for "home" stakes, while 25 = more useful in higher / casino stakes, where it provides more bank for the clay (or when home-playing with a X5 table magnifier, where a 25 would be $5 in the bank).

Would having a green 20 be just heresy (perfectly OK with me) or plain blasphemy? Would it tilt the right people, or just everybody?

Green 20s are fine, imo.

 

[JustinInMN]

I like $20s in smaller games (.25/.50 and under) and $25s in bigger games (1/2 and higher). I can go either way with .50/.50 through 1/1.

Second post in the thread and still the best and most straightforward answer.



And for exactly this reason. The vast majority of people who want to play $1/2 and higher will have significant live casino experience and will usually be thrown off by $20s.

I agree with this. In games where the buy-ins are less than 100 I think twenties are fine and I see the benefits. But I think twenty-fives are superior where the buy-ins are typically 100 or more. (So I think if the big blind is a dollar, use twenty-fives, if less, twenties may be better just for pulling quick rebuys.)

Of course that divides my hosting range right down the middle so when I make my crazy big purchase, I will have to get both.

Another mention for the twenty, it seems to me it would be a better color up chips in limit games to make swapping barrels easier.

Would having a green 20 be just heresy (perfectly OK with me) or plain blasphemy? Would it tilt the right people, or just everybody?

I would caution against this just because of how ubiquitous green twenty-fives are. It may cause a real problem if players are used to standard colors.

 

[churlbut18]

@dmalhi1

 

[asam2006]

I like the idea of using 20$ chips but all the cash games I've played the most used chip is $5 and the 25$ chips work fine so you don't have to handle so many red chips. I still love 20$ chips.

 

[74suited]

I have no issue with 20 vs 25, it's the 0.50, 10, 50 denoms that really irk me, they seem so unnecessary

 

[RichMahogany]

I have no issue with 20 vs 25, it's the 0.50, 10, 50 denoms that really irk me, they seem so unnecessary

Depends on your game whether the 0.50 is unnecessary or not

 

[74suited]

I guess I can see 0.50 over 0.25 in a 0.5/1 game

 

[Coyote]

it's the 0.50, 10, 50 denoms that really irk me, they seem so unnecessary

These, actually, together with a $2, would be the only correct ones for playing .50/$1

 

[Kidsthesedays]

If it's not PayPal then pretty soon, someone will come up with something very similar where you can do this for a small monthly fee. Endless possibilities.

Have tou guys migrated to venmo?

 

[SeanGecko]

$20 plaques for me.

 

[JustinInMN]

Have tou guys migrated to venmo?

Venmo is a subsidiary of PayPal. I mean some people use it. But I think poker needs to be a cash business.

 

[Kidsthesedays]

Venmo is a subsidiary of PayPal. I mean some people use it. But I think poker needs to be a cash business.

Why do you think cash is better(just for a home game) than electronic payments? I can see merits for both but just wanted to know what you think.

 

[saleen121212]

I like 20s because 25s are green (not as attractive to me as a yellow or black chip) also when playing 20, 40 or 60 dollar buy ins it's easier for rebuys. Like some others said, I also like T25 tourney sets so it keeps it seperate.

 

[JustinInMN]

Why do you think cash is better(just for a home game) than electronic payments? I can see merits for both but just wanted to know what you think.

From a paper trail standpoint, it's just safer.

None of these services are truly private, and it really doesn't take long to move enough money to raise scrutiny. I mean people that do transactions on PayPal at PCF get warned about limits after a while.

Not to say cash is perfect, there is one obvious downside to cash on site is the game could get robbed. There are measures to take to mitigate that risk, surely.

I think what's tough is mixing cash and e-pay. For e-pay to really work everyone has to do it. Otherwise to mix the host has to cover the e-pays with cash. So if only the cash players win, there is enough to pay out.

 

[Denali]

Did you ever wonder why - since we have a twenty dollar bill, then why do we have quarters and no 20 cent coins instead? And what do you suppose they do with those little pieces of metal they punch out when they make a flute?

 

[Kidsthesedays]

From a paper trail standpoint, it's just safer.

None of these services are truly private, and it really doesn't take long to move enough money to raise scrutiny. I mean people that do transactions on PayPal at PCF get warned about limits after a while.

Not to say cash is perfect, there is one obvious downside to cash on site is the game could get robbed. There are measures to take to mitigate that risk, surely.

I think what's tough is mixing cash and e-pay. For e-pay to really work everyone has to do it. Otherwise to mix the host has to cover the e-pays with cash. So if only the cash players win, there is enough to pay out.

From a paper trail standpoint, it's just safer.

None of these services are truly private, and it really doesn't take long to move enough money to raise scrutiny. I mean people that do transactions on PayPal at PCF get warned about limits after a while.

Not to say cash is perfect, there is one obvious downside to cash on site is the game could get robbed. There are measures to take to mitigate that risk, surely.

I think what's tough is mixing cash and e-pay. For e-pay to really work everyone has to do it. Otherwise to mix the host has to cover the e-pays with cash. So if only the cash players win, there is enough to pay out.

I agree, I also ran into the problem of some making e payments and some paying cash last week and it was a mess. It's all or nothing there.