moose
4 of a Kind
Excuse me while I post some limit game pictures...I wouldn't want the post to be uhh too long so uhh I'll have to restrict to pictures from uhh like actual casinos...
\
@moose what stakes where you have the $5s also in play? $3/$6?
Isn't that funny how some hate stacks, and some (me) love mountains regardless of the denomination.This is what I’m afraid of. My players want to color up in tournaments to remove stacks of chips. I’m afraid huge stacks of $1’s would not be appealing.
Are you on the right forum? Next you'll be telling us that you certainly don't need chips - matchsticks will do. And yes, this is friendly humour, not meant to be offensive or anything so I apologize in advance if you take it the wrong wayBut you certainly don’t need that many and can do with far less.
Are you on the right forum? Next you'll be telling us that you certainly don't need chips - matchsticks will do. And yes, this is friendly humour, not meant to be offensive or anything so I apologize in advance if you take it the wrong way
I realize this is a poker chip enthusiast forum but regular people don’t like massive amounts of chips in play. Two racks per person is ludicrous. My group was as loose as they come. The amount of chips in play doesn’t mean anything.
If you are trying to get encouragement to buy a ton of new chips you are in the right place though.
In a limit game (ex 10/20) I would consider a starting rack of reds worth $500 (25 big bets) should be sufficient. I would even consider colouring up two barrels for some $20s that can be used for the big bet on the 4th and 5th street.
I agree that limit games move much quicker than NL but why would using two denominations make things less efficient if both chips match the betting limit. For example, in a 10/20 limit game I understand the $5 chip being critical because it can be used for the blinds, small and big bets. However the $20 chip wouldn’t make things less efficient because they can be used for the big bet on 4th and 5th street. Throwing in one $20 chip wouldn’t make things any slower than 4x $5 chips. I suppose if a $25 chip was in play it could get a little more complicated because the amount doesn’t work well with the betting structure.Limit games move much faster because they typically only use one color of a workhorse chip, so there is no time wasted counting out chips or stacks. Also there is very little "Hollywooding" or tanking which drive me nuts at an NL table. In limit, since the betting amount is fixed, it makes using one color the most efficient way to go. There can be color ups or chips bought at the table because of the limit nature of the game, but generally, only one color is used.
Oh come on! The topic in discussion is poker chips, not religion or politics. There is no reason for hard feelings. I think there is a lot of truth in what Old State is saying. He’s not against anyone buying lots chips. He is strictly stating what HE feels is a necessary amount. Nothing more nothing less. I also appreciate his concern that a novice person reading this would get the wrong impression that one NEEDS 2000+ chips on the table for a limit game to be efficient.Wow I'm up to two people I'm ignoring on this forum now.
I’d argue way 800 is MORE convenient.While I agree that there is a minimum amount of chips required I don’t believe that, in the big picture, a shitty game verses a good one is determined by the amount of chips on the table. I’m pretty certain that having 800 chips may not be as convenient as 2000+ , it wouldn’t make the game shitty.
Anyways the reason I got involved with this topic is because I’m planning my next custom set which will be designed to accommodate limit games. So far, you, Old State, and many others, while perhaps having conflicting Ideas have shed some light on me, and for that, I thank you guys.
To the point of the OP, here you go @CraigT78 . Here is the $2 mountain I just picked up. Pretty convincing?So convince me that I need $2's and $20's for a limit poker set.
Or, convince me to go with $1s and $20s ($25s?)
Here's the details. I have a solid group of cash happy players. Usually good for a couple of buyins a night. Anywhere from $100 - $500 a night. Would like to introduce limit - circus or NLHE.
Not sure what stakes would be right. I figure $2/$4 to start, $4/$8 once I shake out the right 7 or 8 guys.
BUT I can see $3/$6 being a solid game all the way around.
What stakes and associated chips would you go with? And what breakdown for a single table?
Finally huge piles of chips generates action. Spreading a game with a 1 chip/2 chip betting structure will generate less action because the pots visually look smaller than a 2/4 chip structure. Ie a $5/10 limit game has more action using pink $2.50 chips, than using $5 chips. A $2/4 limit game runs better with $1 chips than $2 chips and so on. In fact I prefer a 3/6 chip or even a 4/8 chip structure, though this requires significantly more chips to run well.
Moose, I agree with pretty much everything you say. But I look at limit games as either a 1 chip 2 chip structure or a 2 chip 3 chip structure. Most games will be a 1 / 2 structure, which means that the small blind will need to post half of the big blind. A 2 / 3 structure such as $3/6 or $6/12 means that the small blind will post 2/3 of the big blind. So for a $3/6 game, the initial bet would be $3, and if you are the sb in an unraised pot, it only costs you one extra dollar to see a flop. This will encourage more action than a 1/2 chip structure. The pink chip games are $7.50/ 15, and use 2/3 structure.
You've got that mixed up. It doesn't have anything to do with the blinds, SB small blind and BB big blind - rather in limit it refers to the SB small bet and BB big bet. Ie the number of chips per bet in the first two rounds of betting (preflop and flop) and the number of chips in the last two rounds (turn and river).
The blinds can be pretty much anything. The Sahara ran their $2/4 limit game with a single $2 blind. A ratio of 1:2, 1:3 or 2:3 of the small blind to big blind only affects the preflop decisions of the player in the small blind, whether they should play or fold. It has limited to no effect on any of the other players decisions.