Why are there $3 chips in some casinos? (1 Viewer)

[moose]

No casino anywhere on earth is using fracs for rake chips. I guarentee it. Not one. No where in the world. Not ever. Also, I like being hyperbolic. But ya, this ain't happening.

Actually I do know Canterbury raked their low limit stud games to the nearest 0.50. They do 0.50 on every 5 in the pot to a max of 4. (As opposed to one on every 10.)



Here is @pltrgyst 's post on that game

https://www.pokerchipforum.com/threads/limit-poker-breakdown.34143/page-2#post-707023

Old Bill's Gamblin Hall used to rake to the nearest .50 as well.

 

[moose]

100% true....
At our card room way back when we 1st started back in 2000 they tried to spread 10/20 limit with $5 chips. Blinds are $5 & $10 in that game which is 1 & 2 chips. They call that a 2 chip structure game. The game lasted about 2 weeks and hasn't been spread since. 2 chip structure games do not tend to work well. As said above it doesn't look like many chips = no action = no fun and less rake. The game was switched to 8/16 limit which is a 4 chip structure game (2×$2 chips for the small blind and 4×$2 chips for the big blind) and that has been wildly successful ever since.

Card rooms don't like 5 chip structure games because all the chips start to get unwieldy for the dealers and slow things down, especially so if you are playing split pot games like O8 or Stud 8.

$3 chips for $9/18 & $12/$24 (fairly rare)
$4 chips - never seen it as they just go to $5
$5 chips for $15/$30 & $20/$40 limit
$10 chips for $30/$60 & $40/$80 limit
$20 chips for $60/$80 & $80/$160

I know opinions will vary with this, but limit is an excellent game and because the variance is much higher than it is in nl it tends be a better game for a mix of players with varying levels of skill. In the end, the best players & the card room get the money, but the weaker players have a better chance of getting lucky. This makes it more fun for the weaker players and tends to make for great games with LOTS of action.

Agree with everything except the last paragraph.

The game is the same. The variance is exactly the same in limit and no limit. However, due to the betting structure if you can put your entire stack in at once, then variance obviously has a greater effect in no limit than limit.

 

[BigSlick4523]

I love the $3 in this set

 

[cpiaaq]

It's actually the opposite, although I get what you mean as opposed to them using $1 chips. The reason they spread $9/$18 to begin with is because they can get more chips in play using $3 chips than they would if they were to spread a $10/$20 game using $5s. The pots look larger in $9/$18 because there are more chips in the middle, thus it causes more action. More action leads to more players and more rake. And as everyone knows from Daniel Negreanu, "More rake is better".

I've also played a fair bit of $12/$24 games over the years using $3 chips.

I stand corrected. I was thinking of a 2/4 game that uses only $2 chips. I was shocked when they wouldn't let my friend play his chips ($1s and $5s) when he moved from another table. Should have kept my mouth shut due to very limited casino poker experience.

 

[viet rounder]

I like limit poker. And I love chips. But I'll never understand this mentality. Not only don't I care how many chips are in front of me, I'd rather have fewer, because they're easier to manage. I only care how much all of my chips are worth. I know I'm in the minority here, but this whole MOAR attitude is silly. I'm a big fan of ENOUGH.

I’m in the same boat. I am assuming that most here are more chip enthusiasts than they are poker players (which is fine considering it’s a chip enthusiasts forum). I love both and admire a nice set of chips when we get to play with them. But when the poker begins, everything else is secondary. Taking or having to watch a player take a minute or two at the end of each hand to stack their chips would annoy me big time, especially over the course of 8x hours. Not to mention the amount of real estate the chips occupy on a crowded table. Imagine a 9-10 handed table. It’s crowded as it is and now you have to cautiously move around the mountains of chips in front of each player. Yikes!

 

[Nanook]

I’m in the same boat. I am assuming that most here are more chip enthusiasts than they are poker players (which is fine considering it’s a chip enthusiasts forum). I love both and admire a nice set of chips when we get to play with them. But when the poker begins, everything else is secondary. Taking or having to watch a player take a minute or two at the end of each hand to stack their chips would annoy me big time, especially over the course of 8x hours. Not to mention the amount of real estate the chips occupy on a crowded table. Imagine a 9-10 handed table. It’s crowded as it is and now you have to cautiously move around the mountains of chips in front of each player. Yikes!

What I think I hear you saying is that having more chips in a limit game would slow the game down and you don't like the idea of slowing the game down. If I am mis understanding your comment, then disregard the following and my apologies.

1st thing:
The play moves on. Once the dealer pushes a pot, mo matter how big, both he and the game move on. No one is waiting for anyone to stack chips ever.

Next:
I have a massive # of hours of both limit and nl live in a card room and am friends with many dealers and even the director of casino operations in one of the biggest limit rooms in the US and I can tell you, as would all of these guys with massive amounts of experience, with 100% confidence that in our card room with > 50 million hands/yr for the last 20 yrs as evidence that you get approximately 50% more hands per hour in a limit game than you do in a nl game. There is absolutely NO DOUBT or discussion about this whatsoever. It is an UNDISPUTED FACT among all experts.

There is a very good reason for this. In a limit game all the bets are basically the same. If you have never watched or played in a limit game in a casino where most/all of the players are familiar with the flow of the game I will explain...
Let's say you are playing $4/8 limit. They play with $1 chips and the 1st 2 rounds of betting are $4 or 4 chips and the Big Bets arev 8 chips. Everyone and I do mean EVERYONE quickly gets accustomed to cutting out 4 chips at a time. 1 stack of 4 for the small bets & 2 stacks for the big bets. Until you see it, it may not seem like a big deal, but this increases the speed of the whole betting process drastically. No one including the dealers has to count out chips and bets with all sorts of strange bet sizes like they do in nl.

Cut and dry - way more hands/hour in limit vs nl & it's mostly to do with time spent counting out bet sizing vs not having to do that.

 

[MikesDad]

Actually I do know Canterbury raked their low limit stud games to the nearest 0.50. They do 0.50 on every 5 in the pot to a max of 4. (As opposed to one on every 10.)



Here is @pltrgyst 's post on that game

https://www.pokerchipforum.com/threads/limit-poker-breakdown.34143/page-2#post-707023

I played in the "pink chip game" at the Trop back in the day.. it was a blast with lots of action and mountains of pink snappers

 

[JustinInMN]

Everyone and I do mean EVERYONE quickly gets accustomed to cutting out 4 chips at a time. 1 stack of 4 for the small bets & 2 stacks for the big bets. Until you see it, it may not seem like a big deal, but this increases the speed of the whole betting process drastically.

To put it the opposite way, whenever I am in a "big bet" table, I am tilted by players agonizing whether to open for 6 or 8, or tanking everytime they gave a bet.

In limit these decisions are much quicker. Meaning more hands per hour, which means more meaningful decisions per hour, which is better for better players.

In "big bet" games, I do understand a fewer chips may make sense because stacks have to be counted frequently, as I said above. (But I also think there are diminishing returns of you are using too many denominations.)

In limit games there is never a reason to count a stack unless the stack is smaller than a bet, that's the only time a player is all in at limit, so that's why large quantities of chips in uniform denomination make sense in limit.

And besides, plenty of room on this table.

 

[SuckoutKing]

Because why Not! They're beautiful

 

[ADS Aviator]

Because why Not! They're beautiful

View attachment 611509View attachment 611510

Greatness!!!

 

[ekricket]

Odd denomination chips are only used in poker. You will never see them on the casino floor table games. Not even fracs. They just use regular fifty cent pieces and quarters.

In every casino in Oklahoma you will have to pay .50 (a frac) for EVERY hand you play on ANY table game. It’s structured so that the prize you win comes out of that .50 cent “pool”, not directly from the casino. Sometimes the casino has a promotion where they pay it for you, but it gets paid one way or another. It’s all chips, no metal coins in play.

 

[viet rounder]

What I think I hear you saying is that having more chips in a limit game would slow the game down and you don't like the idea of slowing the game down. If I am mis understanding your comment, then disregard the following and my apologies.

1st thing:
The play moves on. Once the dealer pushes a pot, mo matter how big, both he and the game move on. No one is waiting for anyone to stack chips ever.

Next:
I have a massive # of hours of both limit and nl live in a card room and am friends with many dealers and even the director of casino operations in one of the biggest limit rooms in the US and I can tell you, as would all of these guys with massive amounts of experience, with 100% confidence that in our card room with > 50 million hands/yr for the last 20 yrs as evidence that you get approximately 50% more hands per hour in a limit game than you do in a nl game. There is absolutely NO DOUBT or discussion about this whatsoever. It is an UNDISPUTED FACT among all experts.

There is a very good reason for this. In a limit game all the bets are basically the same. If you have never watched or played in a limit game in a casino where most/all of the players are familiar with the flow of the game I will explain...
Let's say you are playing $4/8 limit. They play with $1 chips and the 1st 2 rounds of betting are $4 or 4 chips and the Big Bets arev 8 chips. Everyone and I do mean EVERYONE quickly gets accustomed to cutting out 4 chips at a time. 1 stack of 4 for the small bets & 2 stacks for the big bets. Until you see it, it may not seem like a big deal, but this increases the speed of the whole betting process drastically. No one including the dealers has to count out chips and bets with all sorts of strange bet sizes like they do in nl.

Cut and dry - way more hands/hour in limit vs nl & it's mostly to do with time spent counting out bet sizing vs not having to do that.

I’m more of a NL guy but have played in limit on rare occasions. Using your example of the 4/8 game (and your familiarity with limit games) wouldn’t this be good time for the casino to introduce the $4 an $8 chip? Odd denominations no doubt (which brings us back to original point of this thread). Or am I missing something?

 

[viet rounder]

To put it the opposite way, whenever I am in a "big bet" table, I am tilted by players agonizing whether to open for 6 or 8, or tanking everytime they gave a bet.

In limit these decisions are much quicker. Meaning more hands per hour, which means more meaningful decisions per hour, which is better for better players.

In "big bet" games, I do understand a fewer chips may make sense because stacks have to be counted frequently, as I said above. (But I also think there are diminishing returns of you are using too many denominations.)

In limit games there is never a reason to count a stack unless the stack is smaller than a bet, that's the only time a player is all in at limit, so that's why large quantities of chips in uniform denomination make sense in limit.

And besides, plenty of room on this table.

Wow that photo is insane. That stack is basically the Burj Khalifa. Pretty sure he can colour up every above the first floor and still have plenty to work with lol. That’s so sick.

 

[JustinInMN]

I’m more of a NL guy but have played in limit on rare occasions. Using your example of the 4/8 game (and your familiarity with limit games) wouldn’t this be good time for the casino to introduce the $4 an $8 chip? Odd denominations no doubt (which brings us back to original point of this thread). Or am I missing something?

Using 3 or 4 chip structures in limit games does also protect the game by making action easy to correct if it is off by one chip.

Say someone is facing a bet of 8 and puts out one chip too many ore one too few it's a call and corrected in both limit and no limit. However if you do this with four dollar chips, an extra single chip changes the action to a raise. So using multiple chips to make limit bets prevents this misunderstanding of one chip. Most one chip slips are instantly understood and corrected, another reason limit is faster.

 

[ekricket]

In every casino in Oklahoma you will have to pay .50 (a frac) for EVERY hand you play on ANY table game. It’s structured so that the prize you win comes out of that .50 cent “pool”, not directly from the casino. Sometimes the casino has a promotion where they pay it for you, but it gets paid one way or another. It’s all chips, no metal coins in play.

From the compact involving table games - this is where your fifty cents goes

19. Nonhouse-banked card games means any card game in which the tribe has no interest in the outcome of the game, including games played in tournament formats and games in which the tribe collects a fee from the player for participating, and all bets are placed in a common pool or pot from which all player winnings, prizes and direct costs are paid. As provided herein, administrative fees may be charged by the tribe against any common pool in an amount equal to any fee paid the state; provided that the tribe may seed the pool as it determines necessary from time to time;

 

[viet rounder]

Using 3 or 4 chip structures in limit games does also protect the game by making action easy to correct if it is off by one chip.

Say someone is facing a bet of 8 and puts out one chip too many ore one too few it's a call and corrected in both limit and no limit. However if you do this with four dollar chips, an extra single chip changes the action to a raise. So using multiple chips to make limit bets prevents this misunderstand of one chip. Most one chip slips are instantly understood and corrected, another reason limit is faster.

Good point. Never thought of that before.

Btw. Just to be clear I never believed that NL was faster than limit. NL takes much longer because there’s more to consider with a players entire stack on the line. My earlier post was about how annoying it would be (for ME) to have those chips re-stacked after every hand. Still, nice to know the betting structure behind a limit game.

 

[CrazyEddie]

I am assuming that most here are more chip enthusiasts than they are poker players

I suspect you have opened a sizable can of worms with this comment.

 

[viet rounder]

I suspect you have opened a sizable can of worms with this comment.

Up to the individual to take it how they want but I didn’t mean this in a negative way. Afterall this is a poker chip forum. Appreciating art and creating art are two different things

 

[Mangatang]

I’m in the same boat. I am assuming that most here are more chip enthusiasts than they are poker players (which is fine considering it’s a chip enthusiasts forum). I love both and admire a nice set of chips when we get to play with them. But when the poker begins, everything else is secondary. Taking or having to watch a player take a minute or two at the end of each hand to stack their chips would annoy me big time, especially over the course of 8x hours. Not to mention the amount of real estate the chips occupy on a crowded table. Imagine a 9-10 handed table. It’s crowded as it is and now you have to cautiously move around the mountains of chips in front of each player. Yikes!

Then you’re not a limit player. It’s a whole different animal.

 

[Nanook]

I'll go on record and say I like both games and I have played both a lot.

I think almost everyone that I have ever talked to that says they don't like limit or they criticize limit has either never played it or has a very limited experience with it.

I'm not at all saying one game is good and another is bad. Both games are excellent games having their advantages and disadvantages. Very different games....

 

[viet rounder]

I'll go on record and say I like both games and I have played both a lot.

I think almost everyone that I have ever talked to that says they don't like limit or they criticize limit has either never played it or has a very limited experience with it.

I'm not at all saying one game is good and another is bad. Both games are excellent games having their advantages and disadvantages. Very different games....

They are completely different games. My experience with it dates back to the days of playing at Blackhawk in Colorado. I never understood when people say I hate limit because people always chase. Probably the most typical comment regarding limit poker that I never understood.

 

[Natskule]

I always liked the speed of limit games. You take out bet sizing it streamlines the time players take. Tanking sucks, people act like they have to take along time to be taken serious. Slow players bug the hell out of me, fewer of them in limit, and even the slow players are quicker.

 

[BiGGyT]

I've never once seen a snapper in a poker game (supposedly there's one casino on the east coast that does it, but it's certainly an anomaly). Snappers are for pit games. Pretty much exclusively. They were created for paying 3 to 2 odds on $5 blackjacks.

No casino anywhere on earth is using fracs for rake chips. I guarentee it. Not one. No where in the world. Not ever. Also, I like being hyperbolic. But ya, this ain't happening.

How about tree-fiddy?

 

[Nanook]

I always liked the speed of limit games...... Tanking sucks........fewer of them in limit, and even the slow players are quicker.

All the tanking in nl is the worst part of the game. I think people see guys doing it on TV and they think soul reading is the key to success.

 

[WhiteMamba1646]

They were made to be murdered into cooler denoms!

 

[upNdown]

They were made to be murdered into cooler denoms!

View attachment 611801View attachment 611800View attachment 611799View attachment 611798View attachment 611797View attachment 611796

You took a green $3, the most uncommon of things, and turned it into a green $25, the most common thing?
Hey, as long as you love them.

 

[JustinInMN]

You took a green $3, the most uncommon of things, and turned it into a green $25, the most common thing?
Hey, as long as you love them.

Cheaper than harvesting 25s

 

[WhiteMamba1646]

You took a green $3, the most uncommon of things, and turned it into a green $25, the most common thing?
Hey, as long as you love them.

Thats kinda the point lol. Needed a house mold $25 without spending $25/chip. Works great in my set

 

[Natskule]

Hard to find house mold green chips for under $300 a rack. Isle of Capri KC, is about all I can think of.

 

[coolguy101]

Now, to take the ferry cost a nickel, and in those days, nickels had pictures of bumblebees on 'em. "Gimme five bees for a quarter," you'd say.

Cool story, bro