Tourney T500 base?? (1 Viewer)

saskbull

Two Pair
Joined
Aug 21, 2018
Messages
331
Reaction score
420
Location
canada
has anyone moved from t25 base to t500 base with players that are used to t25 base. how did it go? i’m looking at grabbing some of the apache 43mm, was going to do t100 base. but if the t100 is switched to white edgespots, i would rather pass on them and go with t500.
-did your players have trouble with the higher values?
- what is the workhorse chip?
(in my current t25 2 table, the 500 doesn’t get coloured up, so it’s def the workhorse)
3E8EA221-72F2-49A6-809E-D6F4E98A47F1.jpeg
 
A two-table T500-base set requires 800 chips: two racks each of T500, T1000, T5000, and T25000. The 10/10/7/x stacks color-up perfectly, with the extra T5000 chips replacing the T500 and T1000 chips when no longer needed. Starting stacks can range from 50K to 300K or anywhere in-between; if using 500/1000 opening blinds, that's anywhere from 50BB (turbo/charity) to 300BB (very deep-stack).

https://www.pokerchipforum.com/threads/making-a-higher-denom-tourney-set.34768/#post-636105
 
A two-table T500-base set requires 800 chips: two racks each of T500, T1000, T5000, and T25000. The 10/10/7/x stacks color-up perfectly, with the extra T5000 chips replacing the T500 and T1000 chips when no longer needed. Starting stacks can range from 50K to 300K or anywhere in-between; if using 500/1000 opening blinds, that's anywhere from 50BB (turbo/charity) to 300BB (very deep-stack).

https://www.pokerchipforum.com/threads/making-a-higher-denom-tourney-set.34768/#post-636105
thanks Dave. seems very efficient :tup:
 
And you should be able to easily tailor it to match your existing game flavor/feel and time frame with an appropriate combination of starting stack size and blind level times.
 
I use both base T25 and base T500 structures.

I use very different structures, not just the T25 starting at 500/1000, but have not had any player issues.

I have also ordered an Apache 43mm set to use as another base T500 set. My plan is to use the black chip though as the T100,000. Also hoping it remains as pink, not white.
 
Our regular game is a 10k base T25 but we occasionally play a 100k base T500 and the guys don't even blink with the change.

Recently when I tried a base T5 they complained that their chips were worth less so I'm not trying that again! Time to sell all my T5 chips
 
BG, I have a question on this:
The 10/10/7/x stacks color-up perfectly, with the extra T5000 chips replacing the T500 and T1000 chips when no longer needed.

I agree that it is very neet indeed with one rack per denom and player! But esthetics aside, aren't there too many T500? In a T25k base tournament this forum usually agrees that between 3 and 5 are enough (depending on the other denoms). With a T500 base, my suspicion (I haven't played in one myself, but might get chips to do it) is that they will be used even less. Probably only used for the small blinds, and when calling it will probably be dragged back anyway.

So my question is: If I am more concerned with maximizing my set than even racks, wouldn't less T500 be more effective? Perhaps 6 or even 4 per player?
 
BG, I have a question on this:


I agree that it is very neet indeed with one rack per denom and player! But esthetics aside, aren't there too many T500? In a T25k base tournament this forum usually agrees that between 3 and 5 are enough (depending on the other denoms). With a T500 base, my suspicion (I haven't played in one myself, but might get chips to do it) is that they will be used even less. Probably only used for the small blinds, and when calling it will probably be dragged back anyway.

So my question is: If I am more concerned with maximizing my set than even racks, wouldn't less T500 be more effective? Perhaps 6 or even 4 per player?
I personally hate making change - you will see it is the basis for most of my chip distribution breakdowns.

I use 6 T500s per player in my base T500 structure and there is very little change making - but the T500s are raced off after the first hour in my current structure. The structure you use will also dictate how many T500s will actually be needed.
 
I suspected as much.

The structure you use will also dictate how many T500s will actually be needed.
The only levels where I can see them used are 500/1000, 500/1500 (if using a BG-level ;)), 1500/3000, and 2500/5000. I'm not sure what kind of structure would require more than 6 T500?

People could of course get fancy and bet 7.5k instead of 7k or 8k (just like when betting 875 instead of 900), but then again only one chip gets used.
 
My Apache 43mm will use a Big Blind Ante structure. In this case, I anticipate a greater need for T500s (one to pose the ante, and one to post the blind).

Otherwise my current base T500 structure uses the 500/1000 and the 1500/3000 levels, and that is it for the T500s. Off the top of my head, I don't recall ever seeing anyone needing change, but I'm sure it must happen. It's just not very frequent, like when using 8xT25 starting stacks :wtf:.
 
My Apache 43mm will use a Big Blind Ante structure. In this case, I anticipate a greater need for T500s (one to pose the ante, and one to post the blind).
Sorry for being an idiot, but why would you need more T500s for BB antes? Will you perhaps be using an ante size the size of the small blind instead of the size of the big blind?
 
Sorry for being an idiot, but why would you need more T500s for BB antes? Will you perhaps be using an ante size the size of the small blind instead of the size of the big blind?
...you're right, it doesn't, per se...

I won't be using the BBA from the very start, so there is a 1500/3000 no ante level and a 1500/3000/3000 ante level. Because of the extra level requiring T500s, I thought I would start with 8x T500 per starting stack.
 
BG, I have a question on this:


I agree that it is very neet indeed with one rack per denom and player! But esthetics aside, aren't there too many T500? In a T25k base tournament this forum usually agrees that between 3 and 5 are enough (depending on the other denoms). With a T500 base, my suspicion (I haven't played in one myself, but might get chips to do it) is that they will be used even less. Probably only used for the small blinds, and when calling it will probably be dragged back anyway.

So my question is: If I am more concerned with maximizing my set than even racks, wouldn't less T500 be more effective? Perhaps 6 or even 4 per player?
I don't think in actual practice that you will find a mere ten T500 chips in your stack as "too many".

Could theoretically get by with fewer (8 or perhaps 6), but there is literally zero change-making with ten, and without so many chips in play that it becomes cumbersome or distracting.

I also think they see more use in actual play than you suspect. A typical 2.5xBB raise in each of the first four levels are 2500, 3500/4000, 5000 (often 5500 to avoid single-chip raise confusion), and 7500.
 
Last edited:
I don't think in actual practice that you will find a mere ten T500 chips in your stack as "too many".

Could theoretically get by with fewer (8 or perhaps 6), but there is literally zero change-making with ten, and without so many chips in play that it becomes cumbersome or distracting.
...a perfect example of how a different structure warrants more T500s.

I also agree that 10 T500s isn't "too many". Early levels see few all-ins, so you will have very few instances where someone tries to count out twenty T500s in ten stacks of two :mad:. At most you are paying a little more for more chips, and you are taking a few extra seconds coloring up.
 
I don't think in actual practice that you will find a mere ten T500 chips in your stack as "too many".
I also agree that 10 T500s isn't "too many".

Yeah, you're probably right. I thought so because I have yet to see any of the "regulars" here suggest to use more than 5.

The main difference is that I am comparing to T10k tournaments where the T500 has a high value. When I am a guest at local tournaments it is not uncommon for the host to "over use" the T500, for example 12/12/9/4. Throughout the tournament the stacks of T500 will be more than twice as high as the T1000, but hardly put in use except the odd chip or when counted as part of all-ins. Seems such a waste. The T500 is the T1000's side kick, so very few are needed, and if you run out you can use T100s instead.

In this case, however, it's the least valuable chip, so I will probably not be bothered by them just sitting in their stacks. It will be just like having an excess of T25s which is perfectly fine.

Thanks guys!
 
FWIW, this is my plan for the 8Vs I grabbed from ABC's clearance when I finally get around to designing labels.

Figuring 500-1000, 1000-1500, 1000-2000, 1500-3000, color up (and maybe 500-500 to open if I want to make the first level really deep.)

Now I haven't done this in practice, but the benefits I imagine are in the first color up.

1) Since the first color up is only a 2x change, it is easier than a 4x or 5x change. Can just have players make two equal stacks of T500s and put one corresponding stack of T1000 right next to them. (Buying the needed T1000 from chips already on the table of course.)

2) The first color up won't remove as large a percentage of chips in play. With an 8/8/4/7 base T25 stack, removing the greens removes 30% of the chips in play immediately, 35% if using 12/12/5/6. (Though this diminishes in both cases if re-entries are done only by larger chips.) If you do 4/8/8/6 (T500/1K/5K/25K) for T200K, you are only removing 15% of chips in play. Most of your set is useful for longer. Even doing 10/10/7/6 is closer to removing 30 than 35. (And I do see the racking benefits of the 10/10/7 approach :), but like I said I got 8Vs, no racks for me.)

So I am in planning on this, but I haven't tried it yet, I will let you know how it goes, but these are a couple reasons why I think it might make a good alternative to base T25.
 
Yeah, you're probably right. I thought so because I have yet to see any of the "regulars" here suggest to use more than 5.
Okay, here's one real-world example where more than five T500s are in play:

In our league championship game (8 players, average starting stack ~35K), each minimum 20K baseline stack is constructed using 20 x T25, 20 x T100, 15 x T500, and 10 x T1000 chips (65 chips total), with the remainder of each player's earned bonus chips added on as T1000s (typical big-stack of 50K would contain roughly 40 x T1000 chips). All color-ups are done with T5000 chips.

Those 160 x T25 chips are in play for a couple of hours, as the tournament structure also has antes. But the use of T25 chips is restricted to posting blinds, posting antes, and all-in bets. The physical stacks are big (typically 65 to 90+ chips each, but there are still only three primary chips/colors in play (T100, T500, T1000, or T500, T1000, T5000) at any given time. Change-making at the final table is almost unheard-of, yet the volume of chips does not impede play.



Figuring 500-1000, 1000-1500, 1000-2000, 1500-3000, color up (and maybe 500-500 to open if I want to make the first level really deep.)

Now I haven't done this in practice
I'd suggest using 500/1500 (vs 1000/1500) for L3 blind values (or L2, if no starting 500/500 level), simply because it keeps the total blinds increase percentages more consistent at 50%/33%/50%/50% (vs 50%/67%/20%/50%).
 
Okay, here's one real-world example where more than five T500s are in play:

In our league championship game (8 players, average starting stack ~35K), each minimum 20K baseline stack is constructed using 20 x T25, 20 x T100, 15 x T500, and 10 x T1000 chips (65 chips total), with the remainder of each player's earned bonus chips added on as T1000s (typical big-stack of 50K would contain roughly 40 x T1000 chips). All color-ups are done with T5000 chips.

Those 160 x T25 chips are in play for a couple of hours, as the tournament structure also has antes. But the use of T25 chips is restricted to posting blinds, posting antes, and all-in bets. The physical stacks are big (typically 65 to 90+ chips each, but there are still only three primary chips/colors in play (T100, T500, T1000, or T500, T1000, T5000) at any given time. Change-making at the final table is almost unheard-of, yet the volume of chips does not impede play.

Another example is my T10K starting with stacks of 20/20/15. These T500 get center stage in the absence of a T1000 :)

It's a bit awkward when the T100 are colored up, because that's when I introduce the T1000, meaning the T500 lose all their glory. Therefore I also exchange about half the T500. I've been thinking if this could be a good use case for a T2000? With T2000 instead of T1000 I can keep all T500 on the table since they are still useful.
 
It's a bit awkward when the T100 are colored up, because that's when I introduce the T1000, meaning the T500 lose all their glory. Therefore I also exchange about half the T500. I've been thinking if this could be a good use case for a T2000? With T2000 instead of T1000 I can keep all T500 on the table since they are still useful.

"T2000" is a fine search term to use on PCF. If you have some time you can see lots of digital ink spilled over that. :)

FWIW, my very first tournament set (in like 2004) was super diamonds with official WSOP colors :). (I thought it was awesome) And I did exactly that 20/20/15 breakdown for starting stacks. I had some T1000 and T5000 we would get in later, but I didn't think of color ups then the way I do now that I have found PCF :).
 
"T2000" is a fine search term to use on PCF. If you have some time you can see lots of digital ink spilled over that. :)
Believe me, I have! Almost as much as "pr0n" and "boat chips"! ;-) Haven't found anyone mention this particular use for it, i.e., as a T1000 replacement when the biggest chip in the starting stacks is T500. For example, I could also imagine it coming to use in T5 base tourneys starting with 10/10/7/2.

No wait, "pr0n", that's just google in general...
 
A T500-base set using T500 / T2000 / T10000 / T50000 chips is certainly plausible, although perhaps not readily available.....
 
At an absolute push, for a larger number of players than usual, is a starting stack of 4/8/8/2 (22 chips) workable for a T500-base - with starting blinds at 500/500 (200bb).
 
At an absolute push, for a larger number of players than usual, is a starting stack of 4/8/8/2 (22 chips) workable for a T500-base - with starting blinds at 500/500 (200bb).

I think that's workable. It would help if you had extra T25K (4 per reentry if you are allowing that, or 2 per staring stack for color ups, or failing that, some T100K chips to introduce later on.
 
I think that's workable. It would help if you had extra T25K (4 per reentry if you are allowing that, or 2 per staring stack for color ups, or failing that, some T100K chips to introduce later on.
Thanks, Justin. Based on that, I think I can probably just scrape by using a combination of some remaining T25K and some T100K. By having the above configuration of chips, I'd have plenty of spare T1000 and T5000 to use, too. I know it's not ideal adding chips that will subsequently be removed, but might be useful adding some more of most used chips (and making the stacks look more playable).

FWIW, my group is a mixture of experienced and beginners; where the beginners I play with tend to get clumsy with bigger stacks. Change making hasn't really been an issue in the past when needed (we're good with numbers), and was even with multiples of 25/100.
 
I recently ran a tournament with a T500 base 6/7/8/x/x. It ran "fine", but it was uncomfortably tight with change being made nearly every hand. Change making almost inevitably slows the game down.
 
I'd have plenty of spare T1000 and T5000 to use, too. I know it's not ideal adding chips that will subsequently be removed, but might be useful adding some more of most used chips (and making the stacks look more playable).

Honestly if you have plenty of spare T1000 and T5000 see if you can do 6/12/12/1 (or 4/13/12/1) for T100K stacks. Then you need 3 T25K's for each five entrants to color up the T500 And T1000 chips. And if you have T100K chips that's better for coloring up the T5K and T25K if the tournament would ever go that deep.

Here's the link to a color up procedure post I made a while back:
https://www.pokerchipforum.com/threads/how-to-create-a-tournament-structure.32785/page-2#post-628586
 
I recently ran a tournament with a T500 base 6/7/8/x/x. It ran "fine", but it was uncomfortably tight with change being made nearly every hand. Change making almost inevitably slows the game down.
Still maintain that 10/10/7/x is the best config for T500-base (among others, like T5-, etc.).

Rarely is fewer than 8x sufficient for the smallest denomination in a set, and the next-smallest is usually a workhorse chip and typically requires at least 10x for smooth game play.
 
6/12/12/1 is much more ideal, of course. It wouldn’t be a problem having as many of those stacks mixed with several 4/8/8/2 to make it work, right? That’s something I’ve never done before, though, and need to recount and do some math first.

10/10/7/X is something I can’t do this time unfortunately, so have to compromise somewhat :/
 
Still maintain that 10/10/7/x is the best config for T500-base (among others, like T5-, etc.).
I totally agree. The only reason I had to drop to 6/7/8/x was because the number of late "yes" players. Once I've committed to a set I hate to change it out. It usually runs well with 8/11/12/x. It was astounding to me how the wheels start to fall off with just 6 of the lowest denom. I can only imagine 4 would be downright terrible.
 
6/12/12/1 is much more ideal, of course. It wouldn’t be a problem having as many of those stacks mixed with several 4/8/8/2 to make it work, right?

That depends on your level of OCD! ;)

Personally I don't have a problem with having different breakdowns in the startingstacks, but some do. However, if it means getting more highly needed lower denom chips in play, then IMO playability trumps equal starting stacks, even if that makes your OCD itch.
 

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!

Log in

Already have an account? Log in here.

Back
Top Bottom