Tourney Ideal Chip Amounts (1 Viewer)

[rjbf65]

A couple weeks ago I made the final table of a charity tourney that had 63 entrants and I was the chip leader at $130,000. This tourney had add ons so I'm not really sure exactly how many total chips were in play but my best guess is around $540,000. (63 players at 8k starting stacks plus some add ons).

At the time of coming to the final table the blinds were $5k-$10k and were set to double every time till the tourney ended. The payout was very top heavy so a chop made a lot of sense and we did so with 8 of us remaining.

There are several things that are not ideal about this tourney but what I want to focus on is coloring up to so few chips. It annoys me. I'd be fine coloring up some of the T1000 chips but all of them leaves it looking pretty bare. What do you guys like to see as an average amount of chips per player? This tourney is usually 40 - 80 players and I'm hoping to take up a role in running it in the next few years.

 

[jbutler]

A couple weeks ago I made the final table of a charity tourney that had 63 entrants and I was the chip leader at $130,000. This tourney had add ons so I'm not really sure exactly how many total chips were in play but my best guess is around $540,000. (63 players at 8k starting stacks plus some add ons).

At the time of coming to the final table the blinds were $5k-$10k and were set to double every time till the tourney ended. The payout was very top heavy so a chop made a lot of sense and we did so with 8 of us remaining.

There are several things that are not ideal about this tourney but what I want to focus on is coloring up to so few chips. It annoys me. I'd be fine coloring up some of the T1000 chips but all of them leaves it looking pretty bare. What do you guys like to see as an average amount of chips per player? This tourney is usually 40 - 80 players and I'm hoping to take up a role in running it in the next few years.

In the particular case you cite above, I think coloring up to only 5ks sounds pretty reasonable if blinds were 5/10 and set to double every level. Any significant betting will put players all in and if the players are capable that should be happening relatively frequently. If you leave a mess of 1k chips on the table, it will slow things down.

 

[Ronoh]

If you hit the final table as chip leader with 13 BBs left I'd say as few chips as possible because the players are all doing it wrong... odds are good they don't know how to handle chips so I'd hate dealing with them counting out 10-20-30 chips on their turn. As it goes from 5K/10K to 10K/20K just color them all up to 5Ks and be done with it.

 

[rjbf65]

Not disputing that. The structure is something I'd change if I'm able to help run the tourney. I'd keep t1000 chips necessary without doubling the blinds that late in the tourney. Just wandering if there is an ideal amount of chips for this scenario.

 

[jbutler]

Not disputing that. The structure is something I'd change if I'm able to help run the tourney. I'd keep t1000 chips necessary without doubling the blinds that late in the tourney. Just wandering if there is an ideal amount of chips for this scenario.

I think you'll find widely varying opinions with a tendency toward more chips among those here just based on the subject of this board. Personally I like a starting stack of 30-40 chips and for players at the final table to have about the same amount at that time and for heads up to end up with around 100 chips in play.

 

[rjbf65]

If you hit the final table as chip leader with 13 BBs left I'd say as few chips as possible because the players are all doing it wrong... odds are good they don't know how to handle chips so I'd hate dealing with them counting out 10-20-30 chips on their turn. As it goes from 5K/10K to 10K/20K just color them all up to 5Ks and be done with it.

I was in fold or shove mode way sooner than the rest of the field. I would hover around the 10BB mark which I consider short stacked. But everyone else was in the same boat or shorter. Several of them were trying to fold their way to the money. Do you play short stacked strategy when it's like that? I think you find those types of situations when the blinds double almost every time. A more gradual structure doesn't typically result in that type of short average stack to blinds ratio. As stated before, not an ideal structure.

 

[upNdown]

Safe to say there's some structure problems when the full final table is short stacked.

 

[TexRex]

I might sometimes let a chip stay in play one round longer than necessary to color up at a break early (1st half) in the tournament, but not normally. If the 1000s were no longer needed, they just clutter up the table and slow things down. Everyone will have their own idea about how many chips are ideal, but chips no longer needed for play shouldn't be on the table, especially at the end. If 5000 is the biggest chip, and 1000s are not needed, I'd still remove them. If your guess about total chips is close, there would only be 108 chips left, and between 8 players, I agree that's not a lot of chips. My personal formula, which I impose on my tournaments, is no more than half the total value in the lowest chip still necessary. The exception is if there are 2 left, I'd like to see 40-60 chips and that might require more of the smallest chip.

When my tournament gets down to 5000 is the SB, we remove the 1000s and start exchanging 5000s for 25,000s. I'd say that more often happens when were are down to 3 or 4. Then I think 40-60 5000s is enough since at that point the 25,000 should be the workhorse chip.

Structure of the tournament is a different issue. You didn't give enough info to opine on that, but if the tournament has gone past its scheduled time, they may be trying to end it. At some point, every tournament becomes a shove fest. If the blinds are doubling every time and the chip leader has 13 BB, it should have become a shove fest two rounds earlier. Some think 30 BB is short stacked, 20 BB is all in territory, and 10 BB is desperate.

 

[Ronoh]

When my tournament gets down to 5000 is the SB, we remove the 1000s and start exchanging 5000s for 25,000s.

I'd be curious to see your structure... jumping from 5000/10,000 to 10,000/20,000 is just crazy talk.

Unless it's a screwy shove fest structure the T1000s should never completely leave the table unless you have a shit-ton of runners or astronomical starting stacks. 1K shouldn't leave the table until 15,000/30,000 at the absolute earliest in a well structured game and the vast majority of tournaments aren't going to get to that point.

 

[pltrgyst]

....Just wandering if there is an ideal amount of chips for this scenario.

Excuse me, but this is driving me nuts.

"Number" of chips, please. There is no "amount" of chips unless you're weighing them.

Sorry -- carry on.

 

[TexRex]

Ronoh, our 1000s are needed when the blinds are are either 6000/12,000; 7000/14,000; or 8000/16,000. My comment was based on the 1000s not being needed at that level. Ours doesn't gets to that point unless it's going past its anticipated ending time.

 

[Poker Zombie]

In an ideal tournament, players shouldn't have more than a rack of chips in front of them. More than than could get messy when trying to move a player or breaking down a table.

As others have said, when the T1000 is no longer needed for the blinds, it should be pulled off the table. They can be pulled either at break or by the dealer swapping them out of the pot during play.

As for doubling blind structures, it isn't ideal for highly skilled players. However, you are discussing a charity tournament. The goal here is to get as many players buying in as possible, year after year. A skilled player will still do well if the blinds double, but the unskilled player stands a better chance as more luck plays a factor. Skilled players will keep returning (unless the tournament is just too short), win or lose. Unskilled players will be hooked if they finish well (even if out of the money).

The best method for getting players to return involve:

• Shallow pay structures (paying out 25%-30% of the field) so more novice players are encouraged to return
• A structure that lasts 4-5 hours allowing skilled players to "play", but not so long as to become boring for people that were KO'ed mid-game, but have to wait around because their friend is still in the tournament.

Doubling the blind levels makes sure that few players are ko'ed early. This is because you can start with a ridiculous number of BB in a tourney that doubles. If novice players hung in there for 1/2 the tournament they have a far greater chance of returning, and this means more money for your charity.

 

[rjbf65]

Good points.

Structure is as follows. 25 minute levels. Usually 3 breaks when it's necessary to color up.

8000 starting stack with option of 2000 add on after level 3. I'd say half the players do this. So I figure avg is 9000T per player.

I'd personally prefer 18 or 20 minute levels and a more gradual climb. You could get to 3000:6000 at around the same time. I don't mind the blinds doubling the first 4 levels but after that I don't prefer it.

25/50
50/100
100/200
200/400
300/600
500/1000
1000/2000
2000/4000
3000/6000
5000/10000
10000/20000----it's always chopped before this.

It's advertised to start at 7pm and end at 1 am. The chop happens around midnight usually as avg stack is less than 10BB

 

[Poker Zombie]

I would add on a 15,000/30,0000 level at the end, just in case there isn't a chop (better safe than sorry) and break/color up after the 100/200, the 500/1000, and the 5000/10000 levels. Why break after 100/200 when the T25 is useless after the 50/100 level? Because this evenly spaces breaks for those that need to use the restrooms more frequently.

 

[Ronoh]

I'd personally prefer 18 or 20 minute levels and a more gradual climb.

I really never alter my structure, it's solid so no need to switch it up. I tend to just adjust time per level to suit however long I want it to last

 

[TexRex]

Zombie makes an excellent point about the number of chips a player has. Our last game, for a while I had over 100 each of the 25 and 100. I'm glad I didn't have to move. Odd that I seem to win the hands with a lot of those chips in the pot. Monster chip stacks look cool on TV, and they might give you a good feeling, but they make chip management more difficult.

I'm going to clarify something I said in my first post. I don't want more than half the value in the lowest chip when only 2 remain, but I prefer to have about the same number of chips of both denoms as long as it doesn't leave the lowest value with fewer than 15-20 chips per player.

 

[rjbf65]

Zombie makes an excellent point about the number of chips a player has. Our last game, for a while I had over 100 each of the 25 and 100. I'm glad I didn't have to move. Odd that I seem to win the hands with a lot of those chips in the pot. Monster chip stacks look cool on TV, and they might give you a good feeling, but they make chip management more difficult.

I'm going to clarify something I said in my first post. I don't want more than half the value in the lowest chip when only 2 remain, but I prefer to have about the same number of chips of both denoms as long as it doesn't leave the lowest value with fewer than 15-20 chips per player.

I agree with your final paragraph. I like equal number of chips for each denomination. My 130k stack would of had around 20 T1000 and 22 T5000 chips in that instance. And I agree that the T1000 chips were unnecessary once the 5k/10k level was reached.

For the 540k of total chips in play it would have been a little less than a rack of each denomination. Spread out over 8 players seems pretty reasonable to me.

 

[Ronoh]

This was my stack as we reached HU at the SQM and we were damn near exactly even stacked. It was about where I'd like a HU stack to be with 600-700K total on the table. (Two denoms, black&whites are bounties)

 

[BGinGA]

Three distinct issues have been addressed in the thread so far. Opinions vary, but here's my take:

Number of chips in play at tournament end
I am a big proponent of smaller and more manageable stacks, with most structures having between 80 and 160 total chips in play at tournament end (when two- or three-handed), consisting of only two (occasionally three) denominations. I typically aim for the sweet spot of around 120 total chips in play, but some larger events may have closer to 200 at the end. When the chip total is larger than 200, there are usually some chips on the table that could be colored-up and removed to make play easier and quicker.

Removal of unnecessary chips
T1000 chips (or any denomination chip) should be removed from play after they are no longer needed to post blinds. In most blind structures, that will be after the 8000/16000 (or 12000/24000) level, depending on how the structure is constructed. The same 2:1 ratio of large/small denominations should be roughly maintained.

Blind structure progression
Nothing essentially wrong with a structure that has 100% blind increases for the duration of the entire tournament (not my personal preference, but nothing that is mechanically or logically wrong). Where most people run into trouble is with structures that do not maintain consistency over the course of the entire tournament.

25/50
50/100
100/200
200/400
300/600
500/1000
1000/2000
2000/4000
3000/6000
5000/10000
10000/20000

^ This is a perfect example of a blind structure that lacks consistency. The blind increases are mostly 100% jumps, but with 50% and 67% increases thrown in at random spots. With 25-minute levels and 60 players starting with T8000 (80BB), it will typically last no longer than 5 hours (excluding breaks), but has a lot of room for improvement.

I recommend using one of the structures below, all will complete within the same required 5 hour time frame:

30-minute levels (99% average increases)
rd sb bb
L1 25 50
L2 50 100
remove T25 chips
L3 100 200
L4 200 400
L5 400 800
L6 800 1,600
L7 1,500 3,000
remove T100/T500 chips
L8 3,000 6,000
L9 6,000 12,000
L10 12,000 24,000 ***
remove T1000 chips
L11 25,000 50,000
L12 50,000 100,000

20-minute levels (59% average increases)
rd sb bb
L1 25 50
L2 50 100
L3 75 150
L4 100 200
L5 150 300
L6 250 500
remove T25 chips
L7 400 800
L8 600 1,200
L9 1,000 2,000
L10 1,500 3,000
L11 2,500 5,000
remove T100/T500 chips
L12 4,000 8,000
L13 6,000 12,000
remove T1000 chips
L14 10,000 20,000
L15 15,000 30,000 ***
L16 25,000 50,000
L17 40,000 80,000

15-minute levels (40% average increases)
rd sb bb
1 25 50
2 25 75
3 50 100
4 75 150
5 100 200
6 150 300
remove T25 chips
7 200 400
8 300 600
9 400 800
10 600 1,200
11 800 1,600
remove T100 chips
12 1,000 2,000
13 1,500 3,000
remove T500 chips
14 2,000 4,000
15 3,000 6,000
16 4,000 8,000
17 6,000 12,000
18 8,000 16,000
remove T1000 chips
19 10,000 20,000
20 15,000 30,000 ***
21 20,000 40,000
22 30,000 60,000

 

[Poker Zombie]

I get BG's point about consistency. In a large, one-off tournament setting (like the OP), it is the best way to go - even if you don't have a copy of the blind structure in front of you (and you probably don't), you know pretty much what the next level or 2 is going to be, because it's consistent.

For home multi-table tournaments, I favor a slow-down in bind increases in the middle of the tournament. This is because in any multi-table tournament, there is point where someone is getting eliminated practically every hand. In a MTT home-game setting it is more considerably difficult to balance tables while also playing. To make it easier on the TD-player-host slowing down the blind increases spreads out the eliminations. This is even more helpful if the home game tracks who is eliminated in what position for points or just for simple record keeping.

 

[BGinGA]

It is also noteworthy to mention that a structure can also be consistent even when it contains vastly different and changing values...

For example, some good structures start out with very large increases in the early rounds (to promote loose play and/or re-buys), then taper off to encourage more reasonable play during the middle rounds, and sometimes drop down to even smaller incremental increases towards the end to help minimize luck once 3-handed or heads-up.

Other structures are the exact opposite -- starting with very small increases in the early going (to allow a lot of big-stack play), then ramping up during the middle of the tounament, and sometimes escalating to large increases at the end to ensure the event ends within the desired time frame.

Lots of ways to skin a banana. Just need to have a solid plan on how to approach it, and not start carving a nilly-willy sine wave sculpture with no end goal in sight.