Cash Game Fractional chips: a diatribe (16 Viewers)

Machine

Machine

4 of a Kind
Supporter Plus
Joined
May 11, 2021
Messages
5,232
Reaction score
10,081
Location
Indy
Frac(s)? Frack YOU! Is this moar GenAlpha slang, ins't rizz enough?

'Fracs' is a shortened version of fractional, meaning less than a whole dollar (okay, I'll try to be more inclusive, or Euro).

Examples: .25 | .50 | .10 | .05 - popularity in this order

Rarely written as 1/4 or 1/2, this is a very rizzy way to denom a chip ( while we are here, denom is short for denominated or denomination )

I'm a data guy. I often see a significant number of people ask about breakdowns. I wrote a post about the Optimal Cash Chip Breakdown.

There is some nuance with breakdowns and fracs, I wanted to cover everything Frac() ... here goes:

Let's start with the most economical, .50. Okay, scratch that. Let's start with how to denom a frac.

This will be a poll. Please keep track of your selection and compare it to the correct answer below.

How do you write fifty cents on a chip?
Fifty cents
Fiddy cents
$.50c
.50c
50 cents
.50
$0.50c
0.50c
50c
$.50


The most correct answer: .50

The most incorrect answer: $0.50c

While I can be pedantic, I'm going to try to refrain from discussing each option ad nauseam and why it's incorrect, but I will note that '.50c' would be read as 50% of a cent.

The most economical frac is the .50. Often people will want to start or host a .25 / .50 game, and therefore will need .25 fracs; that is fine. If you can spread a game with a .50 frac, this can be the best value. Some people are motivated to spend the least money on chips, and others want to be as efficient as possible. A game .50/.50 game can be ran with 40 fracs at these stakes, though I wouldn't advise it, put in at least 60

But Machine, chip denoms are supposed to be 4-5x the previous chip, that would mean I would need a $2 or $2.50 chip or I'm losing efficiencies on chip denoms. We have weirdos who love this and build these sets. (.10 / .50 / 2 / 10)

There is a simple solution, denom the chip with 'X' or leave it blank aka nondenom; which isn't the same thing as NCV. No Cash Value is typically printed on tournament or drink chips.

The 'X' means that you can assign its value at game time. Hosting a .25/.25 game is no problem; it's a .25. If it's .50/1, it's a .50. Now, you're not losing the efficiencies regardless of the chip.

Here is one of the better examples:
1747946373204.png

Photo / Set Credit: @BillyBluff ​

Here is an example of non denom chip:
1747946776828.png

​
I would not advise buying less than a rack of a given frac or buying more than a rack of the same fracs. There is more on that in the Chip Breakdown thread posted above. Basically, buying excessively more chips than you need will slow the game down. Buying less than a rack of fracs will likely limit resale value. Regardless of your current mindset, resale value will come into play.

Playing .05/.10 or anywhere up to .10/.50 would require additional chips. I would like to be able to play .05 / .10, so I have 2 fracs that are non-denom. I built the set to be very versatile.


For example:
Pink - non denom | Green - non denom | Blue 1 | Tiger - 5 | Black - 20 | White - 100

In a .05 / .10 game the pink would be used as a .05 and the green .25
In a .25 / .50 or .50 / .50 game I could use either one and I would felt the black $20
In a 1 / 1 game the blue chip is a dollar and I would prefer to use a $25 chip, I can use the Green as $25

1747945796880.png



Happy Chipping!
- Machine
 
Last edited:
I will emphatically state that the OP is a raging lunatic and possess little knowledge about anything poker related. Everyone knows that you should have at least two (2) racks of every chips. Furthermore, the fracing fracs are THE most important chip in the set, therefore, fracs should consume the largest portion of the chip budget, not counting 5's (just because everyone needs 5 racks of these at a minimum).

However, he does smoke a pretty good brisket...or, he use to before the...accident.
 
Regarding no more than a rack of fracs.. generally agree that would be ideal (or starting stacks of 12 or so).

That said, I host a very casual group that is nearly all there to hang/drink and poker is a means to that largely. We also have a lot of folks rotate in that are relatively new to poker. We have a $50 buy-in (.25/.25), which is starting to push into the territory of too much for folks (not that they can't afford, but not where they want to spend their money).

I've found that I like more fracs for the group (barrel each at initial buy in) to prevent more regular change making (keeps things more simple) and I like keeping the game a little slower with the group, because there's little desire from some to buy back in. We've tried a smaller buy-in in the past and it's been too loose.. so this seems to be our groups sweet spot, but still not perfect.

That all said.. agree with the guidance, but also know that sometimes you also just need to balance to what's best for the group you have too. But hey, open to tweaking/pivoting too, especially as players get more experienced/etc.
 
That 'best frac' ".50"... reads as a tournament chip. Would be a weird tournament (you do you). If it's a cash game chip it needs a $ symbol. Quick, Amend OP!
 
drdr said:
That 'best frac' ".50"... reads as a tournament chip. Would be a weird tournament (you do you). If it's a cash game chip it needs a $ symbol. Quick, Amend OP!
Click to expand...
?

Here is a tournament 50 (which I do use as a frac for my RHC set):

IMG_1914.jpeg
Here is one of my denom .25s

1747958637709.png

​
 
Last edited:
Cratty said:
Regarding no more than a rack of fracs.. generally agree that would be ideal (or starting stacks of 12 or so).

That said, I host a very casual group that is nearly all there to hang/drink and poker is a means to that largely. We also have a lot of folks rotate in that are relatively new to poker. We have a $50 buy-in (.25/.25), which is starting to push into the territory of too much for folks (not that they can't afford, but not where they want to spend their money).

I've found that I like more fracs for the group (barrel each at initial buy in) to prevent more regular change making (keeps things more simple) and I like keeping the game a little slower with the group, because there's little desire from some to buy back in. We've tried a smaller buy-in in the past and it's been too loose.. so this seems to be our groups sweet spot, but still not perfect.

That all said.. agree with the guidance, but also know that sometimes you also just need to balance to what's best for the group you have too. But hey, open to tweaking/pivoting too, especially as players get more experienced/etc.
Click to expand...
While I say no more than a rack, I think there is a valid / solid argument for 120, this would let 10 players start with $3 in fracs.

I’ve played in that game where everyone has barrels of fracs and personally I was annoyed at the time it took ppl to move all in and or stack chips. Also it makes it harder to guess what’s in the pot, though that would be an edge for more exp players. I agree with you, you gotta do you ;)
 
I might have been a bit harsh on OP, he really does have some nice chips... he just needs more fracs. #morefracs #goteamfrac
 
Machine said:
Often people will want to start or host a .25 / .50 game,
Click to expand...
For this, the .25 is only needed for folding the small blind.
So give everyone 4 quarters and 8 fifty centers. For a full ring table that would be 40 quarters and 80 fifty centers. That’s enough for four small blind folds (who does that for an extra quarter?) and 8 calls. Making change after 8-12 hands isn’t that bad.

You could even get by with 2 quarters per person for a .25/.50 game.

You could apply similar logic to a $1/$2 game using $2 chips. The $1 in that game is pretty much for small blind folds as well.
 
Tonysquander said:
Couple of suggestions (and I’m just spitballin’ here)

1. I f’d up and will destroy the chips;
2. I will talk to original designer and ask his thoughts on the matter and roll with whatever decision he wishes to make;
3. I will submit the dispute to Gematria Consultants and let @bergs oversee binding arbitration;
4. The potatoes made me do it.

That’s all I have so far kid.
Click to expand...

springbox said:
Funny how more than a barrel of quarters is a change making problem but 6 racks of $5s is an appropriate single table spread :unsure:
Click to expand...
Good, you get it!

MOAR FRACS
 
Geremie said:
Nothing better than getting an invite to a 1¢/2¢ game with 10000BB max buy in with 7 denoms on the table and 3/4 of the table being OMCs.

I would have had more fun watching Requiem again :ROFL: :ROFLMAO:
Click to expand...
Actually seems like fun. Entertainment potential of seeing OMCs going further into tilt as the piles of fracs migrate away from them.
 
Machine said:
There is a simple solution, denom the chip with 'X' or leave it blank aka nondenom; which isn't the same thing as NCV. No Cash Value is typically printed on tournament or drink chips.

The 'X' means that you can assign its value at game time. Hosting a .25/.25 game is no problem; it's a .25. If it's .50/1, it's a .50. Now, you're not losing the efficiencies regardless of the chip.
Click to expand...
Good post. I've been posting this idea for a while now, mostly in "new design" posts. Same concept as you've suggested except I use "AV" on the chips instead of "X". Assigned Value is what it means. I use it as that lower frac or even as a higer denom, anything I want. All other chips in the set are denominated and I haven't had a problem by using that chip. I like the way AV looks on a chip, but no one has to adopt that nomenclature. They can use "X" or a design (such as the Ironbound Lounge) or whatever makes sense to them - it serves the same purpose. I just wanted to state my agreement that this adds flexibility to a set. I've done fine with just one rack of "AV" chips to fill those gaps.
 
Technically the most efficient jump is an ex jump (as in Euler's number), but people here like 4-5x apparently so I'll probably do that when I buy a custom set several years down the road. When I do get one, it will probably be $.25 or 25¢ AND twenty-five cents on it, but the larger will probably be whichever of the first two.
 
KingZilla said:
Good post. I've been posting this idea for a while now, mostly in "new design" posts. Same concept as you've suggested except I use "AV" on the chips instead of "X". Assigned Value is what it means. I use it as that lower frac or even as a higer denom, anything I want. All other chips in the set are denominated and I haven't had a problem by using that chip. I like the way AV looks on a chip, but no one has to adopt that nomenclature. They can use "X" or a design (such as the Ironbound Lounge) or whatever makes sense to them - it serves the same purpose. I just wanted to state my agreement that this adds flexibility to a set. I've done fine with just one rack of "AV" chips to fill those gaps.
Click to expand...
You need some Latin text that says “Assignable Value” or some catchy Latin phrase like “Value Defined at Owners Discretion”
 
ekricket said:
You need some Latin text that says “Assignable Value” or some catchy Latin phrase like “Value Defined at Owners Discretion”
Click to expand...
Not a bad idea. You must play with a more sophisticated crowd. I need it understood by a broad range, even to the "lowest common denominator", if you know what I mean. :wtf:
 

Create an account or login to comment

You must be a member in order to leave a comment

Create account

Create an account and join our community. It's easy!

Register

Log in

Already have an account? Log in here.

Back
Top Bottom
Cart

Cart

Total -