Cash Game Casino Cash Games that use the wrong denominations (opinion) (1 Viewer)

[asian bino]

I was going to post this in a currently ongoing thread about 'chip efficiency,' but it seemed just enough off the topic to derail, so I am giving it a life here.

The below is among the ultimate of 'chip inefficiency.'

TL; DR-->
My point is that inefficiency leads to
-expense (more chips that are not needed, IF expense is an issue)
-fewer hands dealt (less fun/hour)
-less room on the table
------------

The Boulder Station 4-8 Half kill Omaha High game, played with 1$ chips. Pots are often capped preflop, and more time is spent counting out calls and raises instead of the game being played MAINLY with 4$ Chips (yes, you'd still need 1s or 2s for kill pots and chops, but not many....) Boulder does not HAVE 4$ chips, but what is worse, they claim they don't NEED them! If you try using 5$ chips, the dealer takes them out of play because they are 'confusing.'

The guy below had won a pot, and then won the next 3 kill pots. The dealer couldn't even deal cards because this guy had so many unstacked chips around him that they took up too much room. It also leads to people playing 'out of their rack' and having racks ON the table, which takes up MORE room and slows the game down more. I took this shot after he was more than half done racking chips just to get them out of the way....3 racks in front of him, plus 3 more he has to fill. But the Poker room managers there tell me there is NO NEED for 4$ chips. That they would make the regulars leave because they want 'big piles of chips.'

Coincidentally, the room RAN OUT of blue chips this particular night, and people started being FORCED to buy 5$ chips, which was STILL more efficient than 1s. And instead of walking around the room with green or black chips to 'buy up' the racks of blues so there would be enough, they were on the PA system pleading with people to turn in the blues, and announcing THROUGHOUT the casino that if you were not in your seat, and had a lot of blues on the table, you would be 'picked up.'

-

 

[Moxie Mike]

Most casinos that spread $3-6 and $4-8 FL games use $1 chips. It's just not worth the expense to get special chips made for one game.

Think about it from their perspective - switching to a $2 chip might make the game run more efficiently, but how many more hands per hour are we really talking? If it makes the game run 10% faster and they're dealing 20 hands per hour, you're talking about 2 additional hands. Assuming every hand is max raked of $5, the casino take will increase by $10 for this one or two games in the room that probably don't even run all the time.

And when you factor in minimum manufacturing quantities per order, it doesn't make for a very sound investment.

FWIW, I agree. We use $3 chips in the $3-$6 games we run - they make split pot games incredibly more efficient.

 

[Rhodeman77]

Using $1’s in a $4/8 with any kind of kill would annoy me for sure. But $4 chips would be annoying too! 2 chip/4 chip is my preferred structure. It is the best compromise of having lots of chips on the table that get people to chase everything because they see a big pile of chips in the pot and efficiently running the game.

If the casino runs the game on a daily basis it should have the best chips to run the game.

If they don’t have enough $1’s to run it anyways seems they need to order more chips, adding 3k $2’s is nothing to a casino.

 

[asian bino]

Most casinos that spread $3-6 and $4-8 FL games use $1 chips. It's just not worth the expense to get special chips made for one game.

I agree that for one 'game' it makes no sense, but Boulder has 2-4 tables of 4-8 Omaha going at any one time, plus tables of 2-4 and 4-8 holdem.....

 

[BEANO52]

O8 6-12 with 1/2 kill (9-18).

I've pleaded to go 5-10 with full kill (10-20), which the poker room is fine with but the players resist, sigh.
It would play basically exactly the same. It's so stupid to have all those ones in the game.

 

[RowdyRawhide]

Most 4/8 games I’ve played use $1 chips. However if they are routinely running out of $1’s or players have 6 racks in front of them, then a case could be made for a $2 chip.

 

[JRReynolds6181]

I don’t know, I like it. I would make huge towers and look at the other players ominously.

 

[moose]

$4 chips in this game would be terrible. $1 chip is the standard for $4/8. Large amounts of chips in the pot encourages action.

If you are incapable of cutting chips in piles of 4, don't play limit. 80 year old guys seem to manage it just fine.

 

[Kidsthesedays]

The card room I play at uses $2s for 2-100 spread limit. I never remember to ask for 5s so I color up at my next big pot. Pretty inefficient

 

[asian bino]

$4 chips in this game would be terrible. $1 chip is the standard for $4/8. Large amounts of chips in the pot encourages action.

If you are incapable of cutting chips in piles of 4, don't play limit. 80 year old guys seem to manage it just fine.

Not sure what 80 year old guys are in YOUR game, but they seem to be the primary culprits.....

Or people putting in 7 instead of 8, and the dealer has to correct it....'string calls' are also time consuming. In the half kill pots, a raise on the turn requires *24* chips......ridiculous!

If the players need 'large amounts of chips' to generate action, why is no limit so popular, and NOT played with 1s?
Lots of hands/hour, a well regulated game by the dealer, and poor players generate action.
It would be an interesting poker room experiment to offer the 4-8 game in both formats, with 1$ chips, and with 4$ chips as the main chip, and see which game player's chose. I think when players saw how much faster the action is with larger chips, that game would get more players.

 

[Blacksox1]

As a chipper now, the use of a $1 THC chip to this orderly stack of chipcos at my usual 1/2 NL game, appeals to me.

 

[moose]

If the players need 'large amounts of chips' to generate action, why is no limit so popular, and NOT played with 1s?

If you have to ask this question then you know nothing about poker. I suspect the real reason you object to the $1 chips is that you are running out of fingers and toes to count with.

 

[Rhodeman77]

Not sure what 80 year old guys are in YOUR game, but they seem to be the primary culprits.....

Or people putting in 7 instead of 8, and the dealer has to correct it....'string calls' are also time consuming. In the half kill pots, a raise on the turn requires *24* chips......ridiculous!

If the players need 'large amounts of chips' to generate action, why is no limit so popular, and NOT played with 1s?
Lots of hands/hour, a well regulated game by the dealer, and poor players generate action.
It would be an interesting poker room experiment to offer the 4-8 game in both formats, with 1$ chips, and with 4$ chips as the main chip, and see which game player's chose. I think when players saw how much faster the action is with larger chips, that game would get more players.

Why do you think there are so many $5 in a $1/2 no limit game? For the same reason as there are so many $1’s in a limit game. Big piles of chips. Realistically 1 stack of $5’s and the rest in $25’s would keep the action going faster in a NL game, but you (and nobody else) is complaining. Piles of chips create a psychological desire to play more and win those big pots.

I used to play in a home game that gave 15 $5 chips in the $300 starting stack. There were times that I would have $2k+ in front of me and only have 15 chips. It made me feel short stacked and I played tighter because of it!!! It is a real effect. Bigger piles of chips induce more action. If it is only 4 chips from a pile of 300 to call who isn’t calling?

 

[allforcharity]

But at what point does it get silly to have masses and masses of $1s at the table? It's conceivable to have 20-30 racks of $1s at the table just to start. What if there's 50 racks? 60 racks? 80 racks? Can you play well if all your sight lines are blocked by stacks and stacks of chips? (not that I'd ever know that situation)

 

[BGinGA]

But at what point does it get silly to have masses and masses of $1s at the table?

My personal preference is for 2-chip/4-chip games (1/2 played with 50c chips, 2/4 played with $1s, 4/8 played with $2 chips, etc.), with 3-chip/6-chip usage as acceptable and 4-chip/8-chip bordering at the upper level of being manageable. I've played in several of the latter, and they have been action-filled and lots of fun, and although quite a few chips are on the table, I've never considered it excessive.

But no way would I want to play a 4-chip/8-chip game that included a kill -- 16 chips is just too many per big bet imo, and collecting/stacking pots becomes cumbersome -- but then, I'm not particularly fond of kills in the first place.

On the other hand, playing 1-chip/2-chip games requires an additional chip for the SB, while also tightening up the game to the point of it almost becoming boring.

More chips > less chips, but there is a point of diminishing returns. I put that threshold at anything larger than 4-chip/8-chip. If playing 4/8 limit with a kill, going with a 2-chip/4-chip structure would be much better.

 

[TheBigTater]

A 2/4 chip game ($2 chip for a $4/$8 game) is the most efficient while maintaining the larger stacks of chips enviroment. 4/8 chip game ($1 chips for a $4/$8 game) can get unweildy with chip stacks. If playing a $4/$8 game with $1 chips I'd rather use $5 chips as well. This is how the $4/$8 game used to play at the Grand in Tunica back in the day. Any 1/2 chip game ($4 chips for a $4/$8 game -or- $2 chip for a $2/$4 game) is awful IMO.

 

[abby99]

For me, the sweet spot is 3 chips / 6 chips.

 

[allforcharity]

So a limit set with $2 base chips would be great for 4/8 or 6/12, but awful for 2/4. Got it.

 

[dkersey]

The card room I play at uses $2s for 2-100 spread limit. I never remember to ask for 5s so I color up at my next big pot. Pretty inefficient
View attachment 420065

What is the deal in MSP? The Canturbury room does the same thing. For the essentially 1/2 game, the dominant chips is a $2 chip and $1s are very scare. 5s are used somewhat. Perhaps I understand for a limit game, but this is 1/2 (they call it 2-100 spread, but its 1/2 essentially NL. I don't get why the 2s are even there. It slows the game down. For example, a $20 bet is typically made with 10 $2...takes a little longer to count and stack and move all these for every player. And if the bet is an odd number, the same $2 stacking/counting occurs, then a $1 has to be searched for change to be made. WHY?!?!?!?!

 

[upNdown]

I've never understood or accepted the "big stacks and big pots promote action" argument. I know that it doesn't affect me one way or the other. If affects you guys that way, I'd say you're a bunch of gambly-face flakes. And if that's the way of the poker world, fine, I can live with that. But in my limited limit experience (10-15 sessions of 2-4 and 4-8 O8, stud8 or a mix of the two) I'd 100% rather play 2-4 with $2 chips. Who cares that you need $1's for antes? You need them on the table for chopped pots and tips anyway.

 

[upNdown]

So a limit set with $2 base chips would be great for 4/8 or 6/12, but awful for 2/4. Got it.

If awful means perfect, I agree.

 

[Legend5555]

I wouldn't want to do it all the time, but one of the most fun sessions I ever had was a $1 chip 4/8 LHE game at the Orleans back in like 2007. I had 8.5 racks. It was kind of fun. 2chip/4chip just doesn't feel as fun, doesn't feel like as much action as 3/6 or 4/8.

 

[Kidd32]

 

[JustinInMN]

The card room I play at uses $2s for 2-100 spread limit. I never remember to ask for 5s so I color up at my next big pot. Pretty inefficient
View attachment 420065

What is the deal in MSP? The Canturbury room does the same thing. For the essentially 1/2 game, the dominant chips is a $2 chip and $1s are very scare. 5s are used somewhat.

So the 2-100 game was an outgrowth from the regulation raising the "bet limit" from 60 to 100 in Minnesota. I think it's been about 7-8 years now. I think using 2s instead of 5s in this game is easily a 7-figure mistake by now.

But before that, only limit games from 2/4 to 30/60 were spread here. 6/12 and 8/16 were played with twos.

But no way would I want to play a 4-chip/8-chip game that included a kill -- 16 chips is just too many per big bet imo, and collecting/stacking pots becomes cumbersome -

Oh the joy that it 8/16 half kill at Canterbury. But I do agree a full kill would be out of the question, the half kill has been in this game a few years now and players have adapted well to the 6- 12-chip structure.

 

[Kidsthesedays]

So the 2-100 game was an outgrowth from the regulation raising the "bet limit" from 60 to 100 in Minnesota. I think it's been about 7-8 years now. I think using 2s instead of 5s in this game is easily a 7-figure mistake by now.

But before that, only limit games from 2/4 to 30/60 were spread here. 6/12 and 8/16 were played with twos.



Oh the joy that it 8/16 half kill at Canterbury. But I do agree a full kill would be out of the question, the half kill has been in this game a few years now and players have adapted well to the 6- 12-chip structure.

Are you calculating the loss due to amount they can rake? 10% up to $4 vs 10% up to $5?

 

[JustinInMN]

Are you calculating the loss due to amount they can rake? 10% up to $4 vs 10% up to $5?

They raked 5+1 since 2008 and switched to 4+2 last year. But I figure using yellow 2s instead of red 5s on each 100 bet costs them about two drops/hour. So 10 bucks and hour * 2 tables (at least) * 16 hours (at least) is 320 a day * 364 days is about 116K over the 7-8 years that game has been active is right about a million bucks.