• This site contains affiliate links. If you choose to make a purchase after clicking a link, Poker Chip Forum may receive a commission at no additional cost to you. Thank you for your support!

600 chip limit set (2 Viewers)

Old State said:
It Is faster to throw a red and three whites for and $8 bet then eight whites. There is simply no practical way to justify it. It’s really all about “moar chips”. Just admit it.
Click to expand...

So say you put out your red and three whites to call, someone raises to $12, and it comes around to you. How do you mange your red and three whites to call 12? You may simply put out chips, or you may put out chips and pull back a chip. You have to make at least two decisions, based on the chips of each denom in your stacks, and decisions take time.

And there is more time involved than just that needed to call a bet. There's also the time needed for the dealer to stack different denoms and split pots when necessary.

I'm with the camp that prefers $2 or $3 chips for limit games from 2/4 and 3/6 on up.

But there's a reason that the BARGE pink chip games use tons of snappers to play $7.50/$15 limit. BARGE players are arguably the most enthusiastic poker group in the country, and except for one or two, they are not chip lovers. It's just that as long as you don't have to sort by denoms, moar chips = moar fun.
 
Why don't you just play $2/4 limit with $5 chips then? You can just make change for everyone with $1 bills. When a player accumulates too many $1 bills they can buy a $5 chip. No need for mountains of chips. Just give everyone 5x $5 chips and 3x $25s. Should work perfectly fine.
 
pltrgyst said:
So say you put out your red and three whites to call, someone raises to $12, and it comes around to you. How do you mange your red and three whites to call 12? You may simply put out chips, or you may put out chips and pull back a chip. You have to make at least two decisions, based on the chips of each denom in your stacks, and decisions take time.

And there is more time involved than just that needed to call a bet. There's also the time needed for the dealer to stack different denoms and split pots when necessary.
Click to expand...

Are you being serious or sarcastic? A $12 bet is two reds and two whites...again, conveniently 4 chips. Not much of a thought process going on there. o_O
RainmanTrail said:
Why don't you just play $2/4 limit with $5 chips then? You can just make change for everyone with $1 bills. When a player accumulates too many $1 bills they can buy a $5 chip. No need for mountains of chips. Just give everyone 5x $5 chips and 3x $25s. Should work perfectly fine.
Click to expand...
That’s almost as absurd as giving two racks of chips to each player



Again “problems” and scenarios I never once knew I had until people on this forum told me. :tdown:

I get it, chip collectors feel more chips equals more fun. But I’m quite positive the overwhelming majority of poker players don’t give it a thought until it becomes annoying.

For the record, I’m not a chip collector, but rather a connoisseur of custom chips. The amount of chips makes absolutely zero difference in my enjoyment of the game unless they are so numerous to be cumbersome. I value quality chips over quantity. I’ve never “caught the bug”. I’d much rather quickly stack a pot of 30 chips than 100.

So far I’ve seen mostly emotional justifications....and a ton of group think
 
Old State said:
I get it, chip collectors feel more chips equals more fun.
Click to expand...
I have played in hundreds of limit sessions (2/4,3/6,4/8) at dozens of casinos over the last 9-10 years and have never seen a limit game spread using more than one denom on the table....If there were other denoms (and very few at that) on the table they came over with a player from a PL or NL table, or were high hand/bbjp/ etc payout. Not saying it is not done, but I personally have never seen it, I'm also not sure I would want to play limit with that situation anyway.

Old State said:
So far I’ve seen mostly emotional justifications....and a ton of group think
Click to expand...
I feel the emotion is on your side for the most part here......as far as group think goes, I think it is more group experience.


Hopefully you don't take this post too personally, as I feel you are most likely an exclusive NL/PL player thus that is where your experience mostly lies.
 
RowdyRawhide said:
I have played in hundreds of limit sessions (2/4,3/6,4/8) at dozens of casinos over the last 9-10 years and have never seen a limit game spread using more than one denom on the table....If there were other denoms (and very few at that) on the table they came over with a player from a PL or NL table, or were high hand/bbjp/ etc payout. Not saying it is not done, but I personally have never seen it, I'm also not sure I would want to play limit with that situation anyway.


I feel the emotion is on your side for the most part here......as far as group think goes, I think it is more group experience.


Hopefully you don't take this post too personally, as I feel you are most likely an exclusive NL/PL player thus that is where your experience mostly lies.
Click to expand...
I played nothing but limit holdem in for several years in AC before NL was spread. So did most of my home game crew. That’s where my experience lies. Unless something changed drastically in the past few years I was always cashed in with two denominations. We played mostly at Borgata. My first ASM custom set was put together ~2002 entirely based on my experience playing there. In other words I ordered my custom chips based on how the games were played at Borgata (and everywhere else I played)
 
Old State said:
It Is faster to throw a red and three whites for and $8 bet then eight whites.
Click to expand...

Four and eight chip structure means 8/16 is played with twos, and 20/40 is played with fives.

As for your speed assertions, I just don't see a way in which pulling from two different stacks is faster than one. Furthermore, from a visual recognition standpoint there is no way distinguishing three reds and a blue from three blues and a red visually is faster than seeing piles of 4 and 8 chips all the same color.

In short fewer denominations is better than fewer chips. In NL this is true, even with the recognition that larger stacks are more trouble in NL from a counting standpoint.

Old State said:
There is simply no practical way to justify it. It’s really all about “moar chips”. Just admit it.:unsure:
Click to expand...

I don't doubt you have played in games in AC as you have described. I have never played in AC. I have been playing live limit games since 2003 in Minnesota, Wisconsin and Vegas and 100% of the time, it has been the single denomination approach. (They are still poplar here, on part because of the 100 per bet limit here.)

I have also played in Iowa and Illinois, though they seem to only have NL games, but even in NL in those rooms (and for that matter in Vegas as well) they prefer one denomination except for blind chips.

Point is you have seen it one way and thought it was fine. Nothing wrong with that.

But most of us have seen it done the one denomination way and we understand the reasons why, but your persistence and tone of insisting it is somehow sinister for thinking that 1-2 racks per player to produce a reasonable if still imperfect facsimile of this style of casino limit game for home games is starting to approach ridiculous internet schtick.
 
JustinInMN said:
But most of us have seen it done the one denomination way and we understand the reasons why, but your persistence and tone of insisting it is somehow sinister for thinking that 1-2 racks per player to produce a reasonable if still imperfect facsimile of this style of casino limit game for home games is starting to approach ridiculous internet schtick.
Click to expand...
This is completely inaccurate and has a lot of projection. The OP asked about a 600 chip limit set (it’s even in the title). He is playing with around 8 people. 600 chips is more than enough, however, like when ever this topic comes up, people immediately chime in that 1000 chips is a minimum and 2000 is ideal. A newbie searching and reading these threads may think they MUST have 2000 chips to play limit poker. This is absurd when 600 would do just fine....actually more than just fine

And I don’t doubt there are casinos giving out racks of chips. But it wasn't the case when I played. There were always red chips in play at $2/4 and $3/6. If that wasn’t the case I would have ordered way more white chips when I got my first set (purchased before NL cash was a casino option)

As for NL. This is absolutely 100% not a single denomination game in AC. If you cash in for $300 at a $1/2 NL you will get three barrels of reds. Then the dealer will make change for you from the pot and you eventually end up with at least a barrel of whites soon enough. $2/5 has a tremendous amount of both reds and greens (plus white).
 
Last edited:
JustinInMN said:
but your persistence and tone of insisting it is somehow sinister for thinking that 1-2 racks per player to produce a reasonable if still imperfect facsimile of this style of casino limit game for home games is starting to approach ridiculous internet schtick.
Click to expand...

Yes, @Old State, please stop trying to answer the OP with your own perspective and just fall in line with the majority.

Old State said:
I just get worried people with little experience read this stuff and think they “need” 2000 chips. They absolutely do not.
Click to expand...


Old State said:
My point is that new guys looking for advise on buying limit set are being told they “need” FAR more chips than they actually do. 600 chips for 8 -10 people is actually MORE than enough if the denominations are right.
Click to expand...
 
5B91954B-91F3-4C71-8CBC-3B52051AB70A.jpeg


Don’t worry... it’s a rhetorical question :ROFL: :ROFLMAO:
 
Old State said:
This completely inaccurate and has a lot of projection.
Click to expand...

Noticed you haven't actually engaged the arguments I laid out in favor of single denomination play.

I have noticed you are trying to act blameless for your use of combative rejoinders as "just admit it" and not to mention countless dismissal of actual arguments behind the position of everyone on the board.

I have also noticed deliberate exaggeration that everyone is saying 2000 or bust. I see a lot of "1000 are preferable" arguments. I personally said that for the exact structure the OP was saying he could make it work for 600 chips.

And nothing wrong with people showing they have gone for more and are happy about it. Those pics are my favorites :).

We all advocate for our preferences, but I think most of us are decent to assume purchasers will make their own decisions and are adult enough to do so.

What's not cool is that you have seemed to take it upon yourself to assume anyone that disagrees with you on this issue is offering advice in bad faith for our own amusement.
 
WedgeRock said:
Yes, @Old State, please stop trying to answer the OP with your own perspective and just fall in line with the majority.
Click to expand...

If that's all he was doing I would let it slide. But accusations of bad faith motives and group think are over that line.

Old State said:
The group think is very strong here sometimes.
Click to expand...
Old State said:
So far I’ve seen mostly emotional justifications....and a ton of group think
Click to expand...
Old State said:
about “moar chips”. Just admit it.:unsure:
Click to expand...

And obviously I just scrolled the thread, no one was suggesting the OP had to buy 2000 chips, several were suggesting 1000-1200 and giving reasons why. That's what happens when people seek advice, it is to explore issues beyond initial assumptions.
 
Last edited:
JustinInMN said:
Noticed you haven't actually engaged the arguments I laid out in favor of single denomination play.

I have noticed you are trying to act blameless for your use of combative rejoinders as "just admit it" and not to mention countless dismissal of actual arguments behind the position of everyone on the board.

I have also noticed deliberate exaggeration that everyone is saying 2000 or bust. I see a lot of "1000 are preferable" arguments. I personally said that for the exact structure the OP was saying he could make it work for 600 chips.

And nothing wrong with people showing they have gone for more and are happy about it. Those pics are my favorites :).

We all advocate for our preferences, but I think most of us are decent to assume purchasers will make their own decisions and are adult enough to do so.

What's not cool is that you have seemed to take it upon yourself to assume anyone that disagrees with you on this issue is offering advice in bad faith for our own amusement.
Click to expand...
Don’t even know where to start with this. I did engage your “arguments”. I never realized the problems you pose. We played with a 4 4 structure and it worked great. I feel strongly the average poker player is smart enough to make a $12 bet using two reds and two whites vs 12 whites. Your “arguments” are non issues for me.

I dint think anything is bad advise but many people here get real bent out of shape if you suggest anything but what the group thinks. Also, no one was suggesting you could get by with less chips until after I chimed in.

“Just admit it” is tongue and cheek. I’ve spent most of my time defending an alternative view but people actually seem offended someone would suggest anything different.


WedgeRock said:
Yes, @Old State, please stop trying to answer the OP with your own perspective and just fall in line with the majority.
Click to expand...
It does feel like that doesn’t it?
941B1D70-EB6A-42FA-B009-7B58B6990BB9.jpeg
t
 
Last edited:
JustinInMN said:
If that's all he was doing I would let it slide. But accusations of bad faith motives and group think are over that line.
Click to expand...
So suggesting that a person new to chips should consider other opinions are “accusations of bad faith”? :rolleyes:

Also, my reference are not just to this thread but to this topic on this forum. 2000 chips has been recommended plenty. 1000 as a minimum. That’s pretty much consensus here

I didn’t chime in until 3 racks per players was suggested.
 
Last edited:
Old State said:
“Just admit it” is tongue and cheek.
Click to expand...

Yeah right. The implication is clearly we are pushing some agenda detrimental to the OP.

Old State said:
So suggesting that a person new to chips should consider other opinions are “accusations of bad faith”? :rolleyes:
Click to expand...

Suggestion our opinions, even when we defend them beyond "moar chips," are damaging to new posters is where I believe you crossed the line.
 
Old State said:
Well that’s one possible way to interpret my intentions...but it’s 100% wrong
Click to expand...

You would have me believe your cheap shots were 100% innocent and not intended to question the motivation of the commentors with whom you disagree.

You weren't trying to incite by directing at me the whole "just admit it" schtick?

Spare me.
 
Last edited:
Old State said:
You are nuts. Maybe you should read the thread rather than skim it. There were cheap shots but not from me

https://townhall.com/tipsheet/timot...icans-say-people-offended-too-easily-n2545481
Click to expand...

So one breath after complaining others were throwing cheap shots you are going to passive-aggressivly imply I am some sort of snowflake?

This isn't a question of recoiling at a tasteless joke. This is defending myself and the others at which you directed the implication that our opinions are harmful.

You think you have hid your intention well enough by walking the line, but not from me.
 
JustinInMN said:
So one breath after complaining others were throwing cheap shots you are going to passive-aggressivly imply I am some sort of snowflake?

This isn't a question of recoiling at a tasteless joke. This is defending myself and the others at which you directed the implication that our opinions are harmful.

You think you have hid your intention well enough by walking the line, but not from me.
Click to expand...
Please. Harmful?o_O We are talking about poker chips not medical advice. My point was to express an alternative position based on my experience. I never had any intent to insult anyone. If you were insulted than you are a snowflake. Passive aggressive isn’t my style. Im pretty direct.
 
Last edited:
Old State said:
Please. Harmful?o_O We are talking about poker chips not medical advice. My point was to express an alternative position based on my experience. I never had any intent to insult anyone. If you were insulted than you are a snowflake. Passive aggressive isn’t my style. Im pretty direct.
Click to expand...
Me too. You're an asshole, and thanks to your posts in this thread, everybody now knows it.
 
BGinGA said:
Me too. You're an asshole, and thanks to your posts in this thread, everybody now knows it.
Click to expand...
Says the guy who enters the discussion by telling me my opinions are irrelevant and makes routine condescending comments on several of my posts in numerous threads. You obviously have zero tolerance for differing opinions.
Pretty pathetic
 
Last edited:
It's getting rather childish in here.

You are welcome to your opinions @Old State, and you can play whatever games you like with whatever chips you like. No one is stopping you. But you are speaking out of ignorance with respect to how limit games are generally spread - and by generally, I mean that out of the literally more than 10,000 hours of live limit games I've played over the years at dozens of different casinos all across the western United States and a few other countries, I've never once seen a limit game where players bought in with any denom other than the workhorse chips. I personally never buy in for less than 2 racks. The only times I've even seen larger chips on the table in low stakes games is when a player gets paid out for a high hand with $100s or when players amass mountains of chips and they request to color up a few racks. In $30/60 and higher, some players will be allowed to have $100s/$500s, but even that isn't very common. In fact, every time I've seen a player move from another game who has bigger denom chips than what we're using, they are forced to color down (e.g., we are playing $8/16 with $2 chips and they move from NL with barrels of $5s, they are always forced to color down to $2s).

This "limit set" concept isn't something that a snobby group of chip collectors invented to bestow their chipping greatness upon the have nots, it's simply a reflection of how limit games are played.

I have no reason to think you're lying about your limit game in AC, but if what you say is true, I can promise you that it is an extreme outlier, and for good reason. Limit games were the only games running for a long time before NL became popular. Card rooms suffered when games didn't have enough action. One way to drive action is to make the pots look as big as you can. This is why $4/8 games are so common but $5/10 is almost never spread. $5/10 pots look tiny and players quit because they feel like there's no money to be won on the table, but drop the stakes to $4/8 and use $1 chips and all of a sudden the pots look huge. Players stick around and it drives more action. More chips = the pot looks bigger = more action = better games = more players = happy card room owners. Another reason, historically, that larger chips are often not allowed is because players could easily remove their winnings from the table if they colored up just by sneaking a $100 chip off of their stacks. This problem persists in NL as well of course, but historically this has been something that limit games have tried to prevent. But in NL, there's just not much you can do about it.

Anyhow, hate away all you want. But the fact is, this is just how limit games are almost always run. When we talk about "limit sets" we are referencing what it would would take to spread one of these games in the manner in which they are typically (>99% of the time) played. If I'm sitting at a limit game and there's only 1000 chips in the table, it's time to leave because the game sucks. Most games that I think are worth my time have at least 2000 chips on the table, and often much more than that.

So yes, I claim that a set isn't a "limit set" unless it has at least 1000 chips, and that's pretty generous IMO. Like I said, I'd want 2000+ personally. If you wish to spread a $2/4 game using a barrel of $1s and a stack of $5s for each player, have at it. You'll be making a lot of change, your pots will look small, and the game probably won't have much action. Just don't ask me to call your 600 chip set a "limit set". But that doesn't mean you can't spread the game however you'd like and still have fun.
 

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!

Register

Log in

Already have an account? Log in here.

Similar threads

ChaosRock
  • Locked
SOLD EMPRESS STAR MINT 600 CHIP CASH SET
2
Replies
33
Views
2K
ChaosRock
ChaosRock
M
Ratio of value chips in a limit set
Replies
8
Views
443
allforcharity
allforcharity
FearlessFred
Limit Set - Non denom chip?
Replies
8
Views
561
Labrat
L
MatB
  • Locked
SOLD HSI - 2 playable sets - PRICE DROP $1800 per set
2
Replies
42
Views
3K
MatB
MatB
andrebttx
Help decide the value chip(s) for this Navy-themed hot stamp limit set
Replies
7
Views
266
andrebttx
andrebttx
Back
Top Bottom