Cash Game Chips needed for .25/.50 cash game. (1 Viewer)

[AdamAAAA]

Hi guys,

Need to get a cash set, but I don't really know how many of each denom I'll need. We play .25/50 and never higher really. Usually around 8 people and a few rebuys each, maybe most in for 20 each in the night.

What would be a reasonable set to cover this with a few spares?

Adam

 

[slisk250]

For OCD purposes I'd go with

200 - .25s
200 - 1s
100 - 5s

20 bucks X 8 X avg. 2 avg. rebuys a head....this is more than you need. You could go this route and save some money

160 - .25s
160 - 1s
80 - 5s

 

[AdamAAAA]

Excellent, thanks.

I've just seen that I can get a 500pc Milano set for $180 and only $20 shipping. I'll probably have to pay taxes on top but that's not too bad considering...

 

[churlbut18]

I completely agree with @slisk250's recommendation of 200 / 200 / 100. To add, this allows for the following starting stacks:

20 x .25 = $5
15 x $1 = $15
35 chips for $20 buy in
Reserve $5 chips for rebuys

To take OCD a step further, go with $25 buy in, add 5 more $1 chips and you're starting with 2 even barrels of 20 chips each.

 

[churlbut18]

I should add the following to my earlier statement though. If you think your group will ever want to increase the stakes to .50/$1 in the future, there are a few slight variations to the above that would allow you to support both games with your 1 set of 500 chips. Future planning. Or simply buy another set. Lol.

 

[12thMan]

I love those breakdowns for a .25/.50, but I would take the nerdiness a bit further and find a way to make the set a 600 piece set so you could use the nice acrylic birdcage in the 600 size. Be it adding a rack of fives to make the set more future proof or a few barrels of a higher denom like 25s, I don't think you are going to regret the few extra dollars for the extra hundred chips or the 50 bux or so you will be spending on the birdcage and racks... Imo a 600 piece set in a birdcage on a shelf is the perfect gateway to chip addiction and just plain looks bad ass.

 

[churlbut18]

With a 600 chip set in mind, you can simply go with a 200 / 200 / 200 breakdown. Everything else stated above holds true and remains the same. Actually the extra 100 chips better supports that .50/$1 game if this group eventually decides to transition to that.

I personally don't feel $25 chips are necessary until you get to $1/$2. Keep denominations to 3 for a cash game at these lower stakes.

 

[12thMan]

I 100% agree that three denoms is plenty and usually I want full racks of each, but if it was possible I don't think a barrel of twenty fives and the other 80 fives would be a horrible thing. You add 500 to the bank in one barrel instead of 100 in fives and while it's not perfect for it a small 1/2 home game could easily be played with this set so that's realistically three game levels it could play. Nothing wrong with either way, the only thing for sure I will say is that I would 100% go with 600 over 500 however your do it.

 

[Shaggy]

You guys kill me with your recommendations for so many quarters. My OCD is people betting a bunch of quarters instead of few singles. Having a crap ton of quarters and counting bets slows the game down way worse than occasionally making change from the pot when someone is running low. This game would play great with just 300 chips. One rack each of quarters, dollars, and fivers. If the game ever grows to deeper buyins... Keeping the .25/.50 blinds, adding two barrels of $25, a row of $1, and two rows of $5 is perfect...

Buying half as many chips allows you to buy chips that are twice as good. That's my preference.

 

[12thMan]

I wasn't even going to get into that, but yeah, I would probably stick to one rack of quarters, that's plenty. And you are absolutely right, you could definitely get away with a 300 piece set, and I really like your rationale of being able to spend more with out feeling it, but I also don't think 600 (or 500) chips is an unreasonable amount either. Personally I wouldn't want 300 chips as a "set", to me a "set" starts at 500.


Edit: although, for .25/50 is one rack enough? I'm not an expert on breakdowna but I feel like if you were playing a passive game at those stakes it might be better to have two racks?

 

[liftapint]

My crew plays a very timid $0.25/$0.50 game ($20-40 buy in, rebuy almost never happens), and almost the only chip that gets played all night long is the quarter. When a $1 hits the table, somebody means business! So yeah, in MY game, one rack of quarters would not be nearly enough. But I also can't ever see needing more than 2 racks.

Of course, because for me, it is less about the game (and what's *needed* for my game), and much more about the chips...I want chips in my set spanning $0.25 to $25. $5s never even make the table, but the set looks better in the birdcage with as many denoms as possible

I am currently working on a mixed hotstamp casino set, 600 chips, and I think I am going to go with:

200 quarters
300 $1
80 $5
20 $25

I may get an extra rack of $5s in case my game ever gets less timid. Not likely, but the $5 chip is so cool, I feel like I must

 

[12thMan]

The breakdown for my game would almost certainly mimic liftapints, maaaayyybbbeee I would swap out a rack of ones for fives but either would work.

 

[Shaggy]

I can appreciate the need for the quarters in the game liftapint describes. My game is very much the opposite... Is .25/.50 blinds, but $100 buyin and most players bring $300. Preflop raises are in the $3-$5 range. So for me, lots of quarters are a pain. Dollars and fives mostly. Each buyin gets a $25 too. Rebuys are done with $25 for the first couple, then the rest get hundos.

OPs game may be similar to liftapint or 12thman, so I guess the takeaway is depending on player dynamics, different breakdowns are optimal.

 

[BGinGA]

Personal preference, but 160 quarters is plenty for a full table (and 100 usually works just fine). I'd rather add more $1s and/or $5s (depending on the game and set size) to that partial rack of 25c chips, ocd be damned.

 

[gopherblue]

I concur with @12thMan and @Shaggy regarding set size and breakdown...some very good advice. I am in the camp of folks who think that too many quarters is a bad thing. Unnecessary, and slows the game down with so many in play. For a single table, a rack of quarters is plenty. @abby99 has sage advice that she uses one rack of quarters for a single table, giving out a stack to each of the first five players, and the others then make change from these as the game gets going. Frankly, after an orbit or so, the quarters are distributed around the table anyway. Quarters are just needed for the blinds, and if you are limited in budget or want to keep the set small, then those extra quarters are better off being allocated to your workhorse denominations, the $1s and $5s.

Best breakdown for a small starter set? I'd go with 400 chips:

100 x .25c
200 x $1
100 x $5

But I'd think about also future-proofing your set. As the game grows (and it should--as @bergs says, that's just good poker), you can add the following 200 chips, which should cover you for if your game gets bigger or plays bigger (or even if you play small $1/$2):

100 x $5
80 x $25 (or $20)
20 x $100

This results in what I think is the best all-around breakdown for most single table low stakes games, a 600 chip cash set (that as 12thman says, looks badass in a 600-chip acrylic birdcage):

100 x .25c
200 x $1
200 x $5
80 x $25 (or $20)
20 x $100

If your game gets bigger, or you want even more flexibility, all you need to do is just add a couple more racks of $5s, for 800 total. (This is exactly the breakdown of my PNY cash set):

The beauty of this set is that you can start incrementally with a smaller set if you are limited by budget and bolt on to it as necessary, and it will handle almost anything you throw at it.

Good luck!

 

[Mr. Cheese]

My crew plays a very timid $0.25/$0.50 game ($20-40 buy in, rebuy almost never happens), and almost the only chip that gets played all night long is the quarter. When a $1 hits the table, somebody means business! So yeah, in MY game, one rack of quarters would not be nearly enough. But I also can't ever see needing more than 2 racks.

Of course, because for me, it is less about the game (and what's *needed* for my game), and much more about the chips...I want chips in my set spanning $0.25 to $25. $5s never even make the table, but the set looks better in the birdcage with as many denoms as possible

I am currently working on a mixed hotstamp casino set, 600 chips, and I think I am going to go with:

200 quarters
300 $1
80 $5
20 $25

I may get an extra rack of $5s in case my game ever gets less timid. Not likely, but the $5 chip is so cool, I feel like I must

My game is very similar to this as well. Most of the time it's min bets and when there is a huge hand the dollars make it into play. We do use a couple 5's but that's because the minimum buyin is 40 dollars. 20x.25, 20x1, 3x 5. Sometimes I'll do two barrels of .25's because I like having lots of chips in the table.

 

[Trihonda]

I'm in the camp that would recommend 200 quarters. My buyins include two full barrel of each $.25 and $1 chips, and the remaining amount in reds. All rebuys are $1's and $5's. With a full ring 9-10 players each player has 20 quarters. There isn't an insane amount of betting utilizing the quarters. I don't see people betting $3 in quarters (maybe once in a great while). It's usually a raise to $2.75, $2.50, etc... (utilizing 2 $1's and 2 $.25s). On some nights quarters are hardly used. There's no harm in them being on the table, and I've seen no stoppage or slowing of the game (any more than making change does on occasion) with each player having 20 vs 10 quarters. We're not talking about a lot of chips here... By the end of a 1/2 game, it's not uncommon to have people with stacks and stacks of redbirds (100-200 total chips in front of them). For a game to start out with 40 chips/player, it's not a big deal. This IS poker CHIP forum, right?

I think the orig suggestions of 200/200/100 (or 200/200/200).

 

[doakwolf]

It's interesting how the chips in front of the player can alter the way he/she plays, isn't it! I run a 25c/25c PLH game and in the past have started with 25c x 20 and $1 x 15 and reserving the $5s for re-buys. Recently, I noticed once the $5s hit the table, people got excited about them and (with just 2 chips on the table, that night) it became a game to "win" the $5s. It was like a $5 chip had far more value than the five $1s.

So now I always start each player with a barrel of quarters, 10x $1s and a fiver each. Then there are 8 from the get-go and I find the game is played more loose (that's how I like it!!).

 

[links_slayer]

When playing 25c/50c NL I use the "stack of quarters for the first 5 guys" rule, too. It works very well - but it seems like all the quarters somehow find their way to one stack. Hmmm.

 

[12thMan]

When playing 25c/50c NL I use the "stack of quarters for the first 5 guys" rule, too. It works very well - but it seems like all the quarters somehow find their way to one stack. Hmmm.

'
I've noticed that to, one person becomes the bank with like 60 quarters, they are the same people who bet $1.50 with two $1 dollar chips.

 

[doakwolf]

Haha yeah there's always (at least) one!

I had a guy at the last game end up with at least 60-70 and was using them as a wall hiding the rest of his chips. Someone asked for change and he refused (he was quite drunk) because he was so in love with his towers. He gave in eventually haha.

It's all fun and games

This thread has got me really thinking about quantities for my custom set too. I was going to go 300x 25c, 400x $1 and 200x $5 (with some $20s and hundos to sit on the shelf). I wonder if I should run with 350/350/200 or 400/300/200 instead considering my game is usually just 25c/25c PL. Don't mean to hijack Just thinking out-loud.

 

[chipjoker]

I have 12 players, $20 - 60 buy-in, my break down I love is
100 - 25 cent
100 - 1
100 - 5
40 - 25
10 - 100

this works super well with 25,s for rebuys and every body rebuys, I have never NOT had enough chips and cashing out is easy....making change at the table is no problem for anyone....once in a while I get a hundo on the table...

 

[doakwolf]

I have 12 players...

Wow, you're doing well to cater for 12 heads with 100 max of any denom. Goes to show, it's possible to work with almost anything. I'm with some of the others above and would prefer slightly more chips on the table. Out of interest, what blinds/betting are we talking for your game?

 

[chipjoker]

I have done these three .25/.25, .25/.50, and .50/.50

 

[AdamAAAA]

WOW -- some fantastic and very useful replies here. To add a bit more detail about my games.

We're a group of friends (around 8-10) who have started a couple of games together which looks likely to be moving to a regular thing. This group ranges from people who have played on and off for years and people who have never played before. Moreover, I've also moved into a new house and the neighbours are trying to get a game on the go, but only 4 of us so not as many chips needed there.

I don't mind buying a cash set for around $300-$400 to just see how it goes and where we end up. Because the group consists of a real mix of experience, my only requirement is that I want denominations on the chips as the set in use at the moment doesn't have them and someone always asks 'how much are the blues worth again?'

At the moment the Milano seem to tick all the boxes (subject to getting some in the UK at a reasonable cost). They're relatively cheap. I've read good things about them. And I like the look of them. I'm trying to get a sample to ensure they feel as good as they look.

At the moment we're still getting a feel for how the betting will go. The games are quite tight, so I think for now the .25 1 and 5 would be a good start. However, I can always add on with more barrels if needed. Raises tend to be small but people may loosen up as they learn the game.

I don't think we'll increase the blinds for a very long time. Most will probably put in a max of £20 so for 10 of us we only need around £200 in chips available (convert the £ to $ for the purpose of chip denoms). Even if we got wild with the below we should be good for an average of £70 in each on an 10 player game. So, with this in mind I'm thinking the following for now. The beauty with this is I can always add on later and when things get more serious think about a better set:

100 * $0.25
200 * $1
100 * $5

With starting stacks of:

12 * $0.25
7 * $1

Any rebuys will be 1s or 5s.

This sound sensible as a good starting point? I've tried to take all the information above and Excel it to calculate the above.

Thanks again,
Adam

 

[detroitdad]

Just figure out what starting stacks you want and multiply it be 10. Then add extras for rebuys/add ons.

For my 60 dollar starting stacks I like

12 x .25
17 x 1
8 x 5

for my 100 stacks I go with

12 x .25
17 x 1
16 x 5 (or 11 x 5 and 1 x 25)

Its all a matter of preference honestly.

starting stacks for my birthday/poker party next week. A shot is offered with each one

 

[Marius L]

I don't think we'll increase the blinds for a very long time. Most will probably put in a max of £20 so for 10 of us we only need around £200 in chips available (convert the £ to $ for the purpose of chip denoms). Even if we got wild with the below we should be good for an average of £70 in each on an 10 player game. So, with this in mind I'm thinking the following for now. The beauty with this is I can always add on later and when things get more serious think about a better set:

100 * $0.25
200 * $1
100 * $5

With starting stacks of:

12 * $0.25
7 * $1

Any rebuys will be 1s or 5s.

This sound sensible as a good starting point? I've tried to take all the information above and Excel it to calculate the above.

Thanks again,
Adam

This does sound very sensible, but if your game plays really tight and slow, and you dont think blinds will increase for a long time, I would suggest adding more 0.25 chips. In my game I'm more than happy with 100 of the lowest denom, but that game plays much looser and deeper. (we should probably have increased the blinds ages ago. but we just play 200-300bb deep instead). Sounds to me like having 120 or 140 fracs in your game could be better.
(This depends on your OCD with full racks though, as I think 200 fracs is way too much.)

How about something like this:

120* 0.25
180* 1
100* 5.

Or

120* 0.25
200* 1
80 * 5

or if you want even more fracs, you can go

140* 0.25
180* 1
80 * 5


Although you probably dont need it at the moment, I would probably mix in a barrel of 25s, just to have that nice green color in the set as well. This will almost double your bank as well. Not that that is really needed though, but adding a color looks cool.


To be honest I think all these suggestions will work fine, including the one you just suggested yourself. cant go wrong either way

 

[Trihonda]

We're a group of friends (around 8-10) .... The games are quite tight ...

100 * $0.25
200 * $1
100 * $5

With starting stacks of:

12 * $0.25
7 * $1

I don't HATE the starting stacks, but that leaves you with only 19 chips? That's a pitiful amount of chips for a chipping forum to recommend to you to start your folks out with. Hardly enough to shuffle with..

Much better to start with nice numbers like 20 + 5/15. I made the switch to full barrels for starting stacks (for cash games), and won't ever go back. For tournaments, I divvy up the chips differently, but then it's a tournament.

That said, even if you stick to the 12 quarters starting, if you get 10 people (that's 120 chips), or you're issuing different amounts to different people. It's 'ok' to do this, but I really prefer to do keep the stacks the same if possible. Going different amounts to different people always feels like something you HAVE to do because the set is lacking (can't spread the game). It might be on purpose, but that's just how it feels to me. There's just no reason to purposely go with 10 quarters per person on the table vs 20. Really no negatives in having 20 each.

Having 20 quarters per person is better IMHO. It's nice to have a full barrel of chips to play with, and the nice bonus is it's super easy to dispense. Having 20 quarters each on the table will NOT slow the game down whatsoever, compared to 10 quarters each. Won't even register. The only difference will be the increased change making with fewer quarters. Some people don't mind this, but it's preference. NOW, if you have 60 quarters each, ya, that might get people betting in full barrels of quarters...

On a side note, I really like the Milanos. The brown quarter looks SO much better in person (and in stacks) than any of the pictures I've seen. It's almost a purply taupe shade of brown. The ones are standard, and the reds look nice too. I still use a set of Milanos for tourneys, and people really like them. I play cash games afterwards (using very nice Paulsons) and I don't get people complaining that they wished the tourney chips were nicer in comparison.

Edited to add: When ordering, you'll need to consider than Milanos come in 25 chip increments. It's the way theyre packaged from the factory. So no getting around it.

 

[luckbox]

is this too many quarters?

 

[Shaggy]

is this too many quarters?

Looks perfect for a four table cash game... quarter qty at least. They sure are purdy.