I've been contemplating doing a hotstamp set similar to this, and going with T2K/T10K is just more effecient overall. Any reason not to do so, other than it's not what players are familiar with?
-
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!
Tourney Arguments against T25/T100/T500/T2000/T10000 sets? (1 Viewer)
- Thread starter Beakertwang
- Start date
Players are not familiar with it...... oops sorry. 
Since you are talking about doing customs then that negates the only real point against which is cost to obtain them. Since nobody really does stock chips with those denoms (probably one or two out there, I don't know of any) and no casinos usually use those denoms either, so the only way to get 2K,10K set is to do custom.
Other wise it's all personal choice. Go for it!
Since you are talking about doing customs then that negates the only real point against which is cost to obtain them. Since nobody really does stock chips with those denoms (probably one or two out there, I don't know of any) and no casinos usually use those denoms either, so the only way to get 2K,10K set is to do custom.
Other wise it's all personal choice. Go for it!
I contemplated doing it as well... fits with the 4-5x rule... but if I recall correctly there have been a couple of folks who said they went with the 2k, only to regret it later. I think the main complaint was that most players are familiar with the 500/1000 chip progression and would make betting mistakes (at first), and any new players to the game took time to adjust. You’d think your regulars would get used to it, and they probably do... but it’s the addition of new players every game that would have you constantly explaining the 2k chip... it’s probably NOT that big of a deal, but it was enough to steer ME to the standard 500/1000 progression. But in a perfect world, we’d abolish the 500/1k crap and switch entirely to 500/2k. But since that’s not gonna happen anytime soon, I’ll stick to the standard for now
I run a well established home game with two dozen or so regulars and we mostly play tournaments - so a chip progression like this would pretty much only be good for seeing players heads explode. It would be quite an adjustment, and probably pretty hilarious.
James McGill
High Hand
Well, I'm going to piss everyone off with my setup then.
OP
OP
You should change the 25K to a 20K, and make brains explode!
God, I hope that's a troll post ^^^
OP
OP
By the way, @James McGill, I dig your set. Wouldn't tilt me in the least!
Those denoms would gnaw at me something fierce... But then I wouldn't give a dam...
James McGill
High Hand
Love the puns
James McGill
High Hand
I don’t know about you, but I carry around $20,000 bills and still have yet to see a $25,000 bill.
I think it’s absolutely disgraceful that all this talk about using a more optimal breakdown resulting in FEWER chips has been allowed to carry on for so long. This thread should be locked immediately.
Ah,but that's not true. In fact, more T500 chips are required, and if the stacks and/or fields are large enough, more T10000 chips will see play than T25000s would if using a more standard 1000-5000-25000 set. Overall, it's usually about break-even for most applications where a T2000 actually provides benefits.
But the real beauty of it all is that you can create a 9-denomination set that contains T25-T100-T500-T1000-T2000-T5000-T10000-T25000-T50000 chips and use it in either configuration (T500-T2000-T10000 or T500-T1000-T5000), depending on which is the optimal breakdown for your current application. That totally solves your FEWER chips dilemma.
Only caveats I routinely advise on:
- design a T2000 chip that is NOT a color generally associated with a T1000 -- that pretty much rules out yellow and orange, but pretty much anything else works fine (red, blue, white, etc.). Avoid using pink or gray too, as those are common T5000 colors. This helps avoids a lot of the confusion over the value of the chips in hand, since it's not readily-identified or associated by color.
- T500-T2000 progression works best for larger stacks (20K+) or larger fields (20+). Small fields and small stacks really don't benefit much, and can actually play worse in some circumstances. Definitely not advised for 10 player x T10K stack events.
BeesKnees
Two Pair
If efficiency is the goal and you don’t mind being outside of the norms, you might as well just use a T1 base.
I have done a fair amount of spreadsheet experimenting on this subject. See https://www.pokerchipforum.com/thre...-fallen-out-of-favor.28932/page-2#post-536672 for more details. I started believing that the T2000 would win most of the time, and realized quickly it didn't, but it certainly is the most efficient for many possible configurations.
The bottom line between a T1000 and T2000 is one isn't always better than the other. They are actually pretty close, but some configurations do favor one over the other, and sometimes by a lot. Overall, the T1000 has a slight edge. It may seem counterintuitive, but because it requires fewer T500s, that swings the argument slightly in favor of the T1000.
I experimented with 100BB, 200BB, 300BB, 400BB, and 500BB. I used the smallest chip values of 1/4, 1, 5, 25, and 100. I measured using 100 players. I used 10 to 12 of the lowest 2 value chips except when the lowest value was T100 where I didn't use as many T500s. Casinos are more likely to go with 8 to 10 of the lowest value chip, and fewer with the next lowest. With those specific configurations, the T1000 has a slight edge of about 1.17%, but that is small. For a casino, buying thousands of chips, that's a lot of chips and ultimately a lot of money. For a home set, it's about 17 chips for every thousand. I'd get 17 more chips to get what I want!
Of the 25 specific comparisons, 5 were ties, 12 times the T1000 was more efficient, and 8 times the T2000 was more efficient. But that's somewhat misleading because there are thousands of possible starting values (there are 401 possible BB variations between between 100BB and 500BB). I didn't measure but a few.
Things I didn't measure
The bottom line between a T1000 and T2000 is one isn't always better than the other. They are actually pretty close, but some configurations do favor one over the other, and sometimes by a lot. Overall, the T1000 has a slight edge. It may seem counterintuitive, but because it requires fewer T500s, that swings the argument slightly in favor of the T1000.
I experimented with 100BB, 200BB, 300BB, 400BB, and 500BB. I used the smallest chip values of 1/4, 1, 5, 25, and 100. I measured using 100 players. I used 10 to 12 of the lowest 2 value chips except when the lowest value was T100 where I didn't use as many T500s. Casinos are more likely to go with 8 to 10 of the lowest value chip, and fewer with the next lowest. With those specific configurations, the T1000 has a slight edge of about 1.17%, but that is small. For a casino, buying thousands of chips, that's a lot of chips and ultimately a lot of money. For a home set, it's about 17 chips for every thousand. I'd get 17 more chips to get what I want!
Of the 25 specific comparisons, 5 were ties, 12 times the T1000 was more efficient, and 8 times the T2000 was more efficient. But that's somewhat misleading because there are thousands of possible starting values (there are 401 possible BB variations between between 100BB and 500BB). I didn't measure but a few.
Things I didn't measure
- How aggressive the blind schedule is. I really believe that would make a difference, but I don't know for sure. There you get so many more variables it would take measuring 25 more for each one (average increases of 20%, 25%, 30%, 33%, 40%, 50%, 60%, etc.), I didn't think it was worth considering.
- All were measured assuming starting with using only one of the very smallest chip. Starting with something like 10/20; 50/100; 75/150; 200/400; etc. might well make a difference.
- All field sizes were 100 players. Once again small or larger field sizes could alter the results.
- You could get a 9 value set and use the configuration that is most efficient for your specific game. I find though that I stick with the same configuration for quite a while. I don't vary it that often. Or, you could get 2 different sets -- one geared for T1000 and one for T2000. That would overall mean more chips, but then you'd have two completely different sets. That's not a bad thing. But you could effectively create 2 different sets with 9 values for far fewer chips.
- Use a color for T2000 that isn't a traditional color for either the T1000 or the T5000. Though he didn't say it, the same applies to the T10,000 and T25,000; T25,000 and T50,000; etc. You don't have to because in theory, if you use the T2000, neither the T1000 or T5000 would not be on the table. While you could use say orange for T1000 and yellow for T2000, I think many players would be misled by the yellow T2000 because yellow is a traditional color for T1000. Habit would probably cause some issues.
James McGill
High Hand
That’s what I’m going for: I wanted denominations that didn’t overlap with my cash set. Also, this setup lets everyone know that I’m in charge, lol.
Kid_Eastwood
Full House
T.25 base would be the nuts in terms of efficiency. ;-)
Only issue I could imagine - other than it’s not conventional - is that people could think that the amount of the buyin is equal to the amount of chips received.
We did exactly that a couple of weeks ago -- T.25-base set, $25 chip stack with T.25/T.25 opening blinds.
Ken
Pair
As others have mentioned, get what you like. It's not a big deal either way.
I don't think it makes any difference UNTIL you get either large starting stacks or a large number of players / rebuys. When the total chips in play gets high and you get down to a few players with very large stacks.
The 500 to 1k transition is ugly, for sure. Thinking in 2k/10k chips isn't as intuitive as 5k/25k/100k, but not a big deal. You can make whatever bet you like to a round 1k as long as the 500 chip hasn't been chipped off yet. Once that chip is gone I have to make even thousand bets only.
Example 1: 10 players and 5k starting stacks.
There are only 50k chips in play. There can't be a meaningful 35k bet, even heads up, as that is more than half the chips in play. Maybe a 20k bet is the biggest non-all-in bet likely. Making with with 2k/10k or 5k chips is no problem. Making 35k might be but it isn't going to happen.
Example 2: 20 players and 10k starting stacks.
Now there is 200k in play. That is only 20 of the 10k chips so still not that big.
The 35k bet is now reasonable when it gets to six or fewer players. If it is 2k/10k I make the bet 34k or 36k and move on with my life. No big deal, really. However, we think in 5's and 10's a lot and we were forced to earlier in the tourney when the biggest chip that hit the pot was 500.
Example 3: 20 players and 20k starting stacks.
400k in play. Still only 40 of the 10k chips for the total value so totally possible with this chip set. I have to limit the blinds to sizes like 8k/16k which happens anyway. Still not a big deal and this will work. When it gets down to 2 or 3 players the best will be generally on the 10k boundaries because of the chips but might have been anyway.
Example 4: 50 players and 20k starting stacks.
1000k in play. Now 100 of the 10k chips. It can be done as only the last few players need to deal with 3 or 4 barrels of chips bets.
However, now I kinda want another denomination higher than 10k. 20k? Maybe. But that is the 2:1 none of us like. 40k/50k? Better at 4:1 or 5:1.
I run a tourney with 20 players at 25k starting stack so I have 25k chips. Only a few (10 at most) get into play. That is 500k in total chip value. With 6-10 25k chips in play that leaves 50-80 5k chips in play. Depending on the blinds there may be 1k chips still in play as well.
If you do antes there will be lower denomination chips in play and you can still bet just about any amount you like. I hate antes in home tourneys as you keep having to bump that one guy to get his ante in. I also don't really like the one player antes for all movement. So, I just don't do antes.
So, no big deal, probably. I guess I am just not used to counting out a bet with a T2 or T200 or T2000 chip so it just feels unusual.
I don't think it makes any difference UNTIL you get either large starting stacks or a large number of players / rebuys. When the total chips in play gets high and you get down to a few players with very large stacks.
The 500 to 1k transition is ugly, for sure. Thinking in 2k/10k chips isn't as intuitive as 5k/25k/100k, but not a big deal. You can make whatever bet you like to a round 1k as long as the 500 chip hasn't been chipped off yet. Once that chip is gone I have to make even thousand bets only.
Example 1: 10 players and 5k starting stacks.
There are only 50k chips in play. There can't be a meaningful 35k bet, even heads up, as that is more than half the chips in play. Maybe a 20k bet is the biggest non-all-in bet likely. Making with with 2k/10k or 5k chips is no problem. Making 35k might be but it isn't going to happen.
Example 2: 20 players and 10k starting stacks.
Now there is 200k in play. That is only 20 of the 10k chips so still not that big.
The 35k bet is now reasonable when it gets to six or fewer players. If it is 2k/10k I make the bet 34k or 36k and move on with my life. No big deal, really. However, we think in 5's and 10's a lot and we were forced to earlier in the tourney when the biggest chip that hit the pot was 500.
Example 3: 20 players and 20k starting stacks.
400k in play. Still only 40 of the 10k chips for the total value so totally possible with this chip set. I have to limit the blinds to sizes like 8k/16k which happens anyway. Still not a big deal and this will work. When it gets down to 2 or 3 players the best will be generally on the 10k boundaries because of the chips but might have been anyway.
Example 4: 50 players and 20k starting stacks.
1000k in play. Now 100 of the 10k chips. It can be done as only the last few players need to deal with 3 or 4 barrels of chips bets.
However, now I kinda want another denomination higher than 10k. 20k? Maybe. But that is the 2:1 none of us like. 40k/50k? Better at 4:1 or 5:1.
I run a tourney with 20 players at 25k starting stack so I have 25k chips. Only a few (10 at most) get into play. That is 500k in total chip value. With 6-10 25k chips in play that leaves 50-80 5k chips in play. Depending on the blinds there may be 1k chips still in play as well.
If you do antes there will be lower denomination chips in play and you can still bet just about any amount you like. I hate antes in home tourneys as you keep having to bump that one guy to get his ante in. I also don't really like the one player antes for all movement. So, I just don't do antes.
So, no big deal, probably. I guess I am just not used to counting out a bet with a T2 or T200 or T2000 chip so it just feels unusual.
Interesting. How did people like it?
It was well-received, and since they were used to playing tournaments at 100x those values (25/100/500 etc.), it didn't create any weird math issues, either. And I got to use some great cash chips that normally never see play.
Mr Winberg
Full House
But the real beauty of it all is that you can create a 9-denomination set that contains T25-T100-T500-T1000-T2000-T5000-T10000-T25000-T50000 chips and use it in either configuration (T500-T2000-T10000 or T500-T1000-T5000), depending on which is the optimal breakdown for your current application. That totally solves your FEWER chips dilemma.
You cost me money, @BGinGA! I joined this forum to look at poker chip pr0n, learn about tournament structures, and perhaps pick a tip or two on poker strategy, not to lose money! I was minding my own business reading about the pros and cons on T2000 and you write this?? What other choice did I have than to place an order from The New Land to expand my Milano set? With @Gear's help I transformed the peach $10,000 into T2000 and the blue $10 into T10,000, so now I can have 25/100/500 followed by either 1000/5000 or 2000/10000!
Since this is BG's fault, the way I see it he owes me a free pass the next time I post something stupid...not counting this post!
Mr Winberg
Full House
...and since I hosted a 22 player T10k freezout yesterday, I can confirm a theory I've had regarding when T2000 chips can be useful.
I've hosted T10k several times with starting stacks of 20/20/15. I love the tall stacks, and I don't find the drawbacks of having many chips to be too painful. However, I always found it awkward when introducing the T1000. Especially after the T100 are removed (and the T1000 become more plentiful) they take over the role of the workhorse and the large stacks of T500 become value holders. Therefore, I started removing a large portion of the T500 as well at this stage because with the T1000 they just aren't that useful anymore.
This is not the case if I use T2000. The large stacks of T500 and the T2000 cooperate nicely.
So my theory, supported by one tourney of experience, is that a T2000 is a good alternative when the T500 is the largest chip in the starting stack.
Bad pic, but you can just about see some peach T2000 behind my top stack of T500. Cashed in 4th, if anyone cares...
Last edited:
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.
