Cash Game System but with Tournament Chips? (1 Viewer)

[Drosoph]

Hello, I am planning a poker cash game, as follows:

A person buys in for $20 and receives chips with value 4,000. At the end, the remaining chips are counted back (and rounded down if necessary). Is this kind of chip system common practice or rather a no-go?

Advantages I see:
- You can play with higher values
- You can't see directly how much you are betting (less connection to the real value = more relaxed).
- Just on Chip Set necessary

Opinions?

 

[sethwanab]

If you have enough chips. Just play them as T value divided by 100 or 1000 ( just take off the zeros) and use them as a cash value. $100 play as $1 etc. it fun and everyone gets it after 5 min.
I have even moved the decimal and played $25 as Fracs. Fun way to play.

 

[hod]

If you have enough chips. Just play them as T value divided by 100 or 1000 ( just take off the zeros) and use them as a cash value. $100 play as $1 etc. it fun and everyone gets it after 5 min.
I have even moved the decimal and played $25 as Fracs. Fun way to play.

Played exactly this way last weekend after leaving my cash set at a friends house. Everyone gets it within seconds. Or acts like they do

 

[SteveEH]

The message to my players and is "pretend the $ is actually a ¢" and there's no problem.

WARNING: Not many here condone this behaviour.

 

[ekricket]

We usually use a 4:1 or 5:1 ratio. If you buy in for $20 in the 5:1 you get $100 in chips, reverse it for the payout.

 

[mipevi]

At the end, the remaining chips are counted back (and rounded down if necessary).

At the end you could do a tournament style color-up chip race for the necessary lower denominations to be able to pay out exactly as much as was bought in. But without actually removing any chips, just award the loose change to the color-up winner(s).

Advantages I see:
- You can play with higher values
- You can't see directly how much you are betting (less connection to the real value = more relaxed).
- Just on Chip Set necessary

Around here that last part counts as a disadvantage.

 

[hod]

The message to my players and is "pretend the $ is actually a ¢" and there's no problem.

WARNING: Not many here condone this behaviour.

View attachment 1581968

I wouldn’t generally do that…

However with those fine chips I would make an exception. Always liked your set. Stayed at the Hotel National many years ago too.

 

[Baxit]

it's not uncommon to do that with tournament chips, esp in non-dollar, non-quarters countries. You'll have to watch chips as if they were cash, and possibly stick to a single multiplier value, or else people may hold back a chip (or bring one at your table) and reuse it with x100 value given the opportunity.

 

[cpac54]

Normally, I’d say no due to potential risks involved. I did however make a one-time exception earlier this year to get a newly acquired tournament set into play in a 0.50/1.00 game.

 

[merkong]

Personally, I think it’s too complex. Get a cheap cash set.

 

[Labrat]

Why not just play the values of the chips as cents? In other words, T25 = a quarter, T100 = $1….etc?

 

[ekricket]

I’ve been thinking about a tournament style that might fit this.

Say you start a tournament with 1,000,000 in play.
Normal tournament structure of your choice
Here is the payout structure:
Play ends and prizes are awarded according to chip stack sizes when one player reaches $800,000 in chips. The end.

Similar to a survivor where the pot is split after a certain number of players are knocked out.

But this would force people to look closer at their chip stacks and how much others are winning. Put some increased emphasis on another part of the game.

 

[Drosoph]

Ok thanks for the answers

 

[dizzyChipper]

I’ve been thinking about a tournament style that might fit this.

Say you start a tournament with 1,000,000 in play.
Normal tournament structure of your choice
Here is the payout structure:
Play ends and prizes are awarded according to chip stack sizes when one player reaches $800,000 in chips. The end.

Similar to a survivor where the pot is split after a certain number of players are knocked out.

But this would force people to look closer at their chip stacks and how much others are winning. Put some increased emphasis on another part of the game.

Cool. Modified landmark tournament but instead of the tournament ending when x number of players reach the landmark it ends when 1 player reaches landmark.

Nice way to get that final table back into the cash games with way less waiting around, especially if there’s no chop.

 

[Drosoph]

I’ve been thinking about a tournament style that might fit this.

Say you start a tournament with 1,000,000 in play.
Normal tournament structure of your choice
Here is the payout structure:
Play ends and prizes are awarded according to chip stack sizes when one player reaches $800,000 in chips. The end.

Similar to a survivor where the pot is split after a certain number of players are knocked out.

But this would force people to look closer at their chip stacks and how much others are winning. Put some increased emphasis on another part of the game.

The drawback what I see here is that no one wants to risk it an play with the chip leader, when the chip leader is close to 800,000.

 

[ekricket]

The drawback what I see here is that no one wants to risk it a play with the chip leader, when the chip leader is close to 800,000.

If think there would be a lot more play around chips stack sizing.

I’m always happy to take on the chip leader. That’s where the chips are.