WedgeRock
Royal Flush
So I should start off by saying that I'm not even sure there is a standard European breakdown. I have, however, seen (over and over), the use of the 10 and 50 chips in Europe, and I've seen (from time to time) the use of a 2 chip. For purposes of this exercise, when I mention the European breakdown, I am referring to a 1/2/5/10/25/50 breakdown.
I'm sure there are some cultural overtones at play, but the most obvious difference between the North American breakdown (1, 5, 25) and the European breakdown (1, 2, 5, 10, 25, 50) is chipset efficiency versus betting efficiency.
Common thinking around here (PCF and the US/Canada in general I would say) is that a breakdown that jumps 4-5 times between denoms is most efficient. So 1, 5, 20 or 25, 100, 500 and so on. While it may not be the most efficient in terms of minimizing chips for a bet, it follows a certain logic that appeals to North Americans and allows us to efficiently translate bets into denominations that make sense.
I don't pretend to speak authoritatively about the way Europeans think about currency, but given that the poker chip progression is more often denominations of 1, 2, 5, 10, 25 and 50, I assume there is a tendency towards efficiency in bets, rather than overall chipset efficiency. I came to that conclusion after creating the charts below.
For bets between 1 and 99, the average number of chips needed using the North American breakdown is 5.556 chips. On the other hand, using a European breakdown, the average number of chips needed for bets between 1 and 99 is only 3.434 chips.
While more efficient bets can be made using the European breakdowns, they most certainly require more chips overall in the chipset. This analysis assumes that every bet is as likely as every other bet. To be a fair analysis, each bet would have to be weighted as to how often it is made in a typical game. There are probably also psychological considerations of what amounts people are likely to bet based on the denominations in front of them (for example, in a $1/$2 game, how often does someone bet $73? Are they more likely to bet $75 if using a North American chip breakdown? Or are they more likely to bet $85 using a European breakdown?) that a casino would be interested in, but I haven't really considered here.
I guess I won't ever complain again that a chipset with 10 and 50 chips are inefficient because, in truth, they are efficient in a different way.
Which leads me to two profound conclusions:
I'm going to bed.
I'm sure there are some cultural overtones at play, but the most obvious difference between the North American breakdown (1, 5, 25) and the European breakdown (1, 2, 5, 10, 25, 50) is chipset efficiency versus betting efficiency.
Common thinking around here (PCF and the US/Canada in general I would say) is that a breakdown that jumps 4-5 times between denoms is most efficient. So 1, 5, 20 or 25, 100, 500 and so on. While it may not be the most efficient in terms of minimizing chips for a bet, it follows a certain logic that appeals to North Americans and allows us to efficiently translate bets into denominations that make sense.
I don't pretend to speak authoritatively about the way Europeans think about currency, but given that the poker chip progression is more often denominations of 1, 2, 5, 10, 25 and 50, I assume there is a tendency towards efficiency in bets, rather than overall chipset efficiency. I came to that conclusion after creating the charts below.
For bets between 1 and 99, the average number of chips needed using the North American breakdown is 5.556 chips. On the other hand, using a European breakdown, the average number of chips needed for bets between 1 and 99 is only 3.434 chips.
While more efficient bets can be made using the European breakdowns, they most certainly require more chips overall in the chipset. This analysis assumes that every bet is as likely as every other bet. To be a fair analysis, each bet would have to be weighted as to how often it is made in a typical game. There are probably also psychological considerations of what amounts people are likely to bet based on the denominations in front of them (for example, in a $1/$2 game, how often does someone bet $73? Are they more likely to bet $75 if using a North American chip breakdown? Or are they more likely to bet $85 using a European breakdown?) that a casino would be interested in, but I haven't really considered here.
I guess I won't ever complain again that a chipset with 10 and 50 chips are inefficient because, in truth, they are efficient in a different way.
Which leads me to two profound conclusions:
- Which North American breakdown is most efficient, the 1/5/20 or the 1/5/25?
Guess before you click the spoiler?
They are exactly the same at an average of 5.556 chips per unweighted bet.
- What is the most bet-efficient chipset breakdown?
Unless you are going to suggest something ridiculous like a 1, 2, 3, 4, 5 ... 97, 98, 99 breakdown, the most efficient breakdown is the soon-to-be standard 1, 3, 4, 9, 11, 16, 20, 25, 30, 34, 39, 41, 46, 47, 49, 50 breakdown, where all bets 1-99 can be made with no more than two chips and the average unweighted bet is made with just 1.838 chips! You're welcome.
I think this efficiency breakdown illustrates the point of why a less efficient breakdown (like the North American or even the European breakdown) is actually more efficient overall... It gives us fewer choices that can be processed into actual bets more quickly.
I'm going to bed.
Last edited: