Cash games: small blind = big blind? (1 Viewer)

[realcdn]

Just wondering how many people simply make the small blind the same as the big blind for NLH home cash games?

I’m trying to figure out a cash game set (600 chip) that accommodates two different groups I host. $0.25/$0.50 and $0.50/$1.00

I’m thinking it makes more sense at smaller stakes, such as $0.25/$0.50 to change it to a $0.50/$0.50 game, then I wouldn’t have to buy any quarters. No ones folds small blind to a non-raised pot anyways.

Anyone do something similar?

Thanks

 

[v1pe]

Yes, I like a 25c/25c game.

Just buy quarters instead of half-dollars IMO. If you don't want fracs just run a $1/$1 game.

You should be okay with 25c/25c up to $1/$1 with the following:

25c x 100
$1 x 200
$5 x 200
$25 x 80
$100 x 20

You'll have to make change a bit @ 25c/50c maybe, unless you add some more quarters.

 

[Coyote]

Exactly as above, but even better with a non-denominated frac, which would provide awsome flexibility.
Given that this is not going to be a huge set, hence with a not-so-huge number of workhorses (1s and 5s) the ND chip could also be used in higher-stake games for intermediate/filler values of 2 or 10, to assist the workhorses.

 

[realcdn]

Yes, I like a 25c/25c game.

Just buy quarters instead of half-dollars IMO. If you don't want fracs just run a $1/$1 game.

You should be okay with 25c/25c up to $1/$1 with the following:

25c x 100
$1 x 200
$5 x 200
$25 x 80
$100 x 20

You'll have to make change a bit @ 25c/50c maybe, unless you add some more quarters.

Thanks. That’s about what I was thinking but with the $0.50/$1.00 game as my primary focus, I would switch the $0.25’s to $0.50’s

 

[JustinInMN]

Thanks. That’s about what I was thinking but with the $0.50/$1.00 game as my primary focus, I would switch the $0.25’s to $0.50’s

Nothing wrong with that if you are sure you would never need flexibility below 0.50-0.50

If you are going to use ones as the workhorse chip you could even get by with 50-60 of the 0.50 chips.

 

[churlbut18]

I agree with @v1pe

First, buy $0.25 instead of $0.50 because it offers you much more flexibility to play $0.25/$0.25, $0.25/$0.50, $0.50/$0.50, $0.50/$1, and so on...

And 100/200/200/80/20 is just about perfect if limiting yourself to 600 chip breakdown.

 

[Rhodeman77]

I like a 50c chip for 50/50c games. It plays no different than a 25/50c game. The added bonus is that you would only need 60 of the 50c chips to run a full table. Freeing up 40 chips that you can use for your workhorse chip.

 

[DrStrange]

Lots of my vintage casino sets do not have a fractional or if they do have fractional chips, the cost is prohibitive. In those cases I play a $0.50/$1 game as a $1/$1 game. There is a lot to be said for not having fractional chips who's only use is for the small blind.

Along the same line, lots of sets only have a fifty cent chip as a fractional. So a $0.25/$0.50 game becomes a $0.50/$0.50 game.

There isn't much difference in how the games play. Perhaps some confusion in the first hour of the first session, but after that the game runs smoothly like any other.

If you are hosting a game with split pots, then there is an extra advantage to cutting out a level of chips.

Sometimes the chips dictate the game -=- DrStrange

 

[trigs]

I usually run my game with $0.50-$0.50 blinds $100 buy-in. It also makes it easier for pot limit games.

 

[realcdn]

I usually run my game with $0.50-$0.50 blinds $100 buy-in. It also makes it easier for pot limit games.

How many $0.50’s and $1.00’s do you typically use or start with?

 

[trigs]

I have a rack of $0.50s that I try to get all in play. That's plenty since they're only used for blinds. I have two racks of $1s which most get into play. I have 4 racks of fives for rebuys and a rack of $25s.

For $100 buy-in (full table of ten) starting stacks would be 10-$0.50s, 15-$1s, 16-$5s. Although i could do 10-$0.50s, 20-$1s, 15-$5s as well if I felt like we needed more $1s (or I'll add in some $1s in the first rebuy or two). If less than full table I'll usually give out 12 $0.50s just so there's enough in play.

 

[davin]

5/5 cash game is awesome no need for 1$ chips

 

[Mojo1312]

Your intuition is spot on.

I don't fully grasp the flexibility argument. I would like someone to define precisely what they mean by flexibility.

The flexibility to check raise someone's $1.25 bet to $2.75? WTF? Seriously?

Make life simple. Ditch the quarters.

 

[churlbut18]

Your intuition is spot on.

I don't fully grasp the flexibility argument. I would like someone to define precisely what they mean by flexibility.

The flexibility to check raise someone's $1.25 bet to $2.75? WTF? Seriously?

Make life simple. Ditch the quarters.

Relax. Flexibility in this context usually means flexibility for a single set to support different stakes based on the need as I stated above. Not the flexibility to place odd bets within a game as you’re suggesting and apparently getting tilted by...

 

[Mojo1312]

The O.P. expressed a desire to play .25/.50 or .50/$1. Nowhere did he state he would like to play a .25/.25 game.

Even so, that doesn't give me a reason to be an ass. And yes, a $2.75 check raise does tilt me.

 

[72o]

I love raising to $3.75 JUST to tilt people...it usually works and gives me an advantage.

 

[JustinInMN]

The O.P. expressed a desire to play .25/.50 or .50/$1. Nowhere did he state he would like to play a .25/.25 game.

Right, which is why I replied with this.

Nothing wrong with that if you are sure you would never need flexibility below 0.50-0.50

If the op does not think there's a need to spread .25-.25 in his case, then there is no reason to get quarters.

I know for most set builds it makes sense to use a progression of values that are 4x and 5x in between, but if 0.50-0.50 is the minimum game to be spread, I find this to be an obvious exception to that principle.

If 0.50 is the minimum chip necessary, players probably still prefer to use 1s and 5s above rather than 2s and 10s for the sake of the 4x and 5x "rule."

While 2x jumps aren't always an efficient use of chips since the chip's use is mainly for the blinds some of that efficiency is brought back by needing fewer of the chip in the first place.

So point is, if you are content doing 0.50-0.50 at the minimum then go ahead and forgo quarters and get halves with 1-5 chips. But if you think you need to do 0.25-0.25 forgo the halves and get quarters, that's all to which flexibility is referring. Having quarters enables more stakes downward.

I usually run my game with $0.50-$0.50 blinds $100 buy-in. It also makes it easier for pot limit games.

This is a really sneaky cool benefit of the equal blind method. I occasionally play in a 0.50-0.50 pl pineapple game, with these blinds anyone opening outside the blind can go for 2 flat and subsequent calls and rasies are also whole numbers. Whereas that limit would be 1.75 is a .25-.50 game, maxing the max a little more complicated to count.

 

[BGinGA]

This is a really sneaky cool benefit of the equal blind method. I occasionally play in a 0.50-0.50 pl pineapple game, with these blinds anyone opening outside the blind can go for 2 flat and subsequent calls and rasies are also whole numbers. Whereas that limit would be 1.75 is a .25-.50 game, maxing the max a little more complicated to count.

Many places consider the small blind to be a full bet when calculating the pot size pre-flop. Makes the math much easier.

 

[Poker Zombie]

Quarters in a 50c/50c game FTW.

MOAR CHIPS!

Also if the frac and the $1 look awesome together in a no-limit pot, you can bet your ass I'm raising to $1.75 or $2.25. Chips are meant to be fun. If you are using it as a blind token and nothing else, you could save money and stick with dice chips.

 

[JustinInMN]

Many places consider the small blind to be a full bet when calculating the pot size pre-flop. Makes the math much easier.

Makes sense, it's effectively the same thing, just allows one to get simple math benefit from the equal blind structure while still keeping blinds of different sizes.

 

[David O]

Ok, I have read through and will give my input.

I struggled for a long time with the question of .25 over .50 and after sometime I found that unless you run a .50/$1 game exclusively then quarters are your best bet. Instead of just one rack get two racks because we all know more chips is best! Also if a strange bet tilts you then please come to my game. I love playing against tilted players.

Either way that you go, it is your game and you will end up doing what is right for your game. I run a .25/.25 game all of the time and my sets are set up to handle it as well as .25/.50, .50/$1 and so on.

David O

 

[v1pe]

I appologize if I took this discussion off the rails with my initial reply regarding 25c/25c blinds. I simply meant to highlight that I have run games with sb = bb many times with good success. When I'm putting a set together, I like to be able to spread as many limits as possible. I have friends who would rather play 5c/10c, and friends that would rather play $1/$2.

I agree with @David O - if you exclusively run a 50c/50c game then 50c chips will work well. If you run a 50c/$1 game I would recommend you just skip the fracs all together and play $1/$1. If you have any desire to run a 25c/25c or 25c/50c game, go with 2 racks of quarters.

 

[Schmendr1ck]

I've tried to justify getting some .50 chips a few times, but I have to go with @David O on this one. Quarters provide a lot more flexibility. That's why in the US, you almost never see half dollars in circulation.

Of course, I have the guys who like to bet 2.75 with all quarters sometimes. I just roll my eyes and take their money. :

 

[Schmendr1ck]

And for the record, I started my cash game as .25/.25 and still use it sometimes for low buyin post tourney games.

Most players have no problem with the idea, and they like that it plays a little smaller than the .25/.50 that I usually run.

 

[72o]

Honestly I love quarters for my low stakes/low buy in games ($40 typical buyin) and advocate hard for quarters all day everyday...unless you’re building a true PCA set and want to get some of the best fracs in existence in play. I can/and do make an exception for those fiddy centers.

 

[realcdn]

Thanks for all the replies everyone!

I can see the benefits of going quarters instead of halves, such as smaller game limits (which could occur) and getting more chips in play. My problem I don't think i can do all that with a 600 ct set? i.e. is single rack of quarters enough to replace the rack of fifties I was going to get and still spread those limits? Maybe i shouldn't be limiting myself to a 600 ct set, but i picked that number for a couple of reasons: a) to fit nicely in a 600 ct birdcage; b) to keep initial cost down. But obviously I can always add and expand the set. Hmmm... decisions, decisions!

 

[JustinInMN]

I spread .25-.50 with a rack of quarters, it's plenty. You would in theory need fewer for 50.-1. The breakdown @v1pe initially gave you is a good answer if you want to stick with 600, which should be fine for one table for this range.

You should be okay with 25c/25c up to $1/$1 with the following:

25c x 100
$1 x 200
$5 x 200
$25 x 80
$100 x 20

Now if you think there will be multiple tables, or you need to widen your range for 1-2 or 1-3 then you will need more chips (particularly fives)

 

[v1pe]

You can do it with 1 rack. I prefer 2, but you'll find opinions are polorized for 1 rack vs 2 racks.

You'll just have to make more change in a 25/25 game.

 

[David O]

One rack works well. I always get two racks because you never know when you will need MOAR CHIPES!!!
Most of the quarters that I have I have in the quantity of 200. Why? because 2 racks is a nice round number!

 

[Coyote]

Opt for 2 x600ct birdcages, to have Hell break loose, opinion-wise, in the forum