Cash Game One last barrel to add. Which denom? (1 Viewer)

[Santa123]

My chip set contains currently 380 chips.

120x $1
160x $5
80x $25
20x $100
Total bank is 4920$.

I want to add one more barrel mainly from an esthetic point of view.

What denom would you add and why?
(I will not add more chips. I know generally ppl here go way bigger for cash sets. And note: I'm not in the 3 racks minimum workhorse camp.)

Set should cover 1/1 and 1/2 with both min max buy ins between 100$ and 300$. Players can rebuy/ add any time but stack size must not get bigger than 300$.

Set should cover up to 8 players worst case 9 players. Game should last 5 max 6 hours. The bank covers atm with 4920$ 16 max buy ins.

The goal is that the bank covers most of the games but cash on the table is not a no go.

 

[joeyshin]

You need a few more racks of $5s as the workhorse chip

 

[allforcharity]

10 STFU and 10 Show'em chips. Done.

 

[RocAFella1]

 

[Marius L]

I'd add either 25s or 100s. Bank feels a bit short to me for 1/2. But maybe your max stack rule limits it enough where it doesnt matter?

For aesthetic purposes you should add a barrel of $5s, to make three racks of 1/5 and one rack of 25/100

 

[BEANO52]

Playing 1/1 and 1/2, the answer to this poll is going to be $5.

 

[Coyotesetter]

200 more 5's

 

[BirdCage]

Sell the 80 $25’s and buy/create a rack of $20’s.

Killing two birds with one stone.

 

[natumes]

I would say $5s because you've got about half as many as I prefer to get in play. If you're getting cash on the table regularly then $25s would make sense I suppose.

 

[LeLe]

$100 if you are going to cover $1/2 stake.

Not sure how big your $1/2 played but I always like a bank that have at least 300bb per person

 

[Machine]

I would take the 1s and 5s up to 200 each, its not going to really increase your bank, but its going to make buyins and rebuys easier

 

[Santa123]

$100 if you are going to cover $1/2 stake.

Not sure how big your $1/2 played but I always like a bank that have at least 300bb per person

Thanks.
Is there any "deeper" math behind this?

I'm not a super experienced host. My assumption is:
- each player should bring 3 buy ins with him
- lets say half the players win and half the players loose.
=> with 8 players: 4 loosin players each max buy ins of 300$ and 4 winning players who buy in once for max => 3x4+4=16 max buyins

 

[LeLe]

There’s are some scenarios like

1) one guy just sun-run from the start to end so there will be more people who need to rebuy early on

2) the one fish just playing bad but constantly chipping up so you want to keep buyin / add on to the max

3) maniac who keep preflop raise to $15 so that make each person effective stack shorter, so a lot more all in by the river

You will likely used a much bigger bank than 16 buyins in those cases, so for me i will try to get 3x buyin per person for small stake & 5x buyin per person for micro stake but YMMV

 

[Machine]

I take it back, if you're playing 1/2:

1 x 80
5 x 200
25 x 160
100 x 40

 

[Marius L]

The (somewhat wierd) max $300 rule you have might limit the total bank needed, but I do agree with @LeLe. For comparison my 1/2 set has a bank of 40000. Admittedly that's a bit overkill, but we did get 18k in play last game. Our 1/2 game plays big though.

And just nice to have extra bank on the more crazy nights or as the game grows.
Late in the night when the winning players' stacks get big, people might wanna challenge the $300 max rule, if everyone on the table has $800..

 

[Machine]

The (somewhat wierd) max $300 rule

Its not weird, its there for multiple reasons, one is to protect the game and less seasoned players. It sounds like you should change your blinds if you're getting 18k on the table regularly. Consider 5/10 or 5/5

 

[cpac54]

The (somewhat wierd) max $300 rule you have might limit the total bank needed, but I do agree with @LeLe. For comparison my 1/2 set has a bank of 40000. Admittedly that's a bit overkill, but we did get 18k in play last game. Our 1/2 game plays big though.

And just nice to have extra bank on the more crazy nights or as the game grows.
Late in the night when the winning players' stacks get big, people might wanna challenge the $300 max rule, if everyone on the table has $800..

Agreed. The max $300 rule seems unnecessarily restrictive, esp. as other players stacks get bigger. We do re-buy/top-offs to the size of the big stack, which is admittedly large, but I think even just going with re-buys/top-offs to 1/2 the big stack is a reasonable option.

As for the original question, I'd go with $5s, but with 140 more of them. That's just me though.

 

[Marius L]

Its not weird, its there for multiple reasons, one is to protect the game and less seasoned players. It sounds like you should change your blinds if you're getting 18k on the table regularly. Consider 5/10 or 5/5

You're absolutely right we could play bigger stakes. Instead we have fun with straddles and deep stack play.

As for OPs game. Wierd was maybe bad wording. What I meant was that 300 just seems like a way too small max buyin for a 1/2 game. Especially as the night go on. I get having some sort of a max buyin rule, but limiting it yo 150 big blinds is too low. Might work just fine for OPs game, as all home games seem to have a certain individual dynamic based on its history, but I generally dislike a rule like this. We don't have any max buyin, but I've seen a lot of "half the big stack"-rule on PCF, and at least that makes you competitive with the bigger stacks, and you're able to win some money back.

 

[Machine]

you're absolutely right we could play bigger stakes. Instead we have fun with straddles and deep stack play.

So I play in an omaha game that was 1/2 w/ a Mississippi straddle 5 to 15, button has priority, its straddled every hand, so recently we just took the blinds out, and its a mandatory button straddle.

In omaha you can use your buy in as a strategy, so depending on the game and how it plays, its not as straightforward as NLH.

In NLH to keep a game running you need new players, and by new players I mean new to the game of NLH, not just the game. The 300 limit is popular in Casinos because it limits how much a new player can lose, it also limits seasoned players by how big of a mistake they can take advantage of. It provides pressure for them to move up. One of the factors for this is the rake.

If its constantly the same 12-15 guys then sounds like you're all set and sounds lively - I wouldn't encourage this game for someone new to the game or if they were running their first home game.

I don't think weird is poor wording, it circumvents discussing the reasons why its there and why one would disregard it. I don't think your point was to discuss it, but rather how you run your game and your preferences, to have a direct answer for the OP. 18k on the table sounds like its good game, most of the games for NLH seem to play short, and it drives me nuts, most of the NLH games would be better if played limit. NLH should be played with sizable stacks.

 

[Coyotesetter]

There’s are some scenarios like

1) one guy just sun-run from the start to end so there will be more people who need to rebuy early on

2) the one fish just playing bad but constantly chipping up so you want to keep buyin / add on to the max

3) maniac who keep preflop raise to $15 so that make each person effective stack shorter, so a lot more all in by the river

You will likely used a much bigger bank than 16 buyins in those cases, so for me i will try to get 3x buyin per person for small stake & 5x buyin per person for micro stake but YMMV

This. As a minimum.

 

[Coyotesetter]

When you add more fives, the game comes alive.

 

[natumes]

I have an initial buy-in cap of 200 BB and rebuys to the greater of that amount or half the big stack. I also limit the straddle to double the BB and UTG only. I find this is a good balance to keep the game friendly, since I am not trying to run a casino game in my home.

I definitely plan to have bank well above what I expect the average to be, because to get the average you also need data points above and below the average. So some nights you will need less, but some nights you will need more.

 

[minglu812]

For 1/2 game, add $100s. For 1/1 game, add $5s. I play similar 1/2 home game regularly, sometimes a bank of $4920 may not be enough.

 

[Santa123]

Today an other Barrel of $5 arrived excellent packed by @MarCobi to meet the Breakdown stated in my first post.

Still one Barrel missing.

Thanks so far to all replies with your helpful feedback.

 

[joeyshin]

one more rack of $5s and one barrel of $100s should last you a while

 

[joeyshin]

or 80 $5s and 20 $100s would keep it to 500 chipset

 

[Santa123]

Regarding buy ins.

I have no problem to play in an uncapped game with players straddling utg or sleeper straddles. But when hosting I feel responsible to every player to play within his limits / comfort zone.
So if most want to play deep we can play 1/1 with up to 300BB.

 

[LeLe]

Today an other Barrel of $5 arrived excellent packed by @MarCobi to meet the Breakdown stated in my first post.

Still one Barrel missing.

Thanks so far to all replies with your helpful feedback.

View attachment 1031739

This picture just scream 2 more barrels of $5, so which option did you ended up with ?

 

[Santa123]

This picture just scream 2 more barrels of $5, so which option did you ended up with ?

One rack of 1s and one rack of 5s and I am currently looking for an other rack of 25s.

 

[LeLe]

One rack of 1s and one rack of 5s and I am currently looking for an other rack of 25s.

Sound about right, the set is going to end up with at least 800 chips full like most PCF set end up with