-
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!
How to raise the stakes? (1 Viewer)
- Thread starter mummel
- Start date
In most NL/PL games with the same players, the buy-in cap has more of an impact than the size of the blinds. Your players have already told you that they don't want to raise the stakes. Listen to them or risk losing them.
If your main objective is getting your $5s on the table, use them for rebuys.
If your main objective is getting your $5s on the table, use them for rebuys.
Thats the thing, with the 100 BB stacks we have, hardly anyone busts, maybe 1 for the night! I've just used another barrel of $25c and a barrel of $1s for these rebuys. With a $50 buy, each starting stack would get 5 redbirds and then a rebuy would be 10 redbirds! Lots of chip ProN at that point.
I'll think about it but it sounds like going under 100 BBs isnt an option, so I think I should just make it $30 buyins and get some redbirds on the table, and slowly up the stakes from there if possible.
A small increase in the cap sounds like a good idea. If everybody buys in for $25 now, then make the range $25-30. If you currently allow a range of buy-ins, then increase the cap.
I also suggest that players be allowed to top up to $25-30 whenever they want.
The game should determine what chips are used and their distribution among the players.
thorwilliam
3 of a Kind
Maybe add some alcohol?
Mr. Cheese
Full House
We start out with anywhere from 80 to 200 BB's and people still manage to get knocked out in 10-20 minutes. Of those that get knocked out that quick they unfortunately almost always sit out then until the tourney starts. I keep telling them you don't need to see every hand until the river 
I would make the Cap for buyins like 60 dollars. That way you can lead by example and buy in for more and show them how nice it is to have a big stack. People will see that its advantageous "most of the time" *unless you're @courage ^^^^ I guess
.
I would make the Cap for buyins like 60 dollars. That way you can lead by example and buy in for more and show them how nice it is to have a big stack. People will see that its advantageous "most of the time" *unless you're @courage ^^^^ I guess
.
justsomedude
Straight Flush
It sounds like your problem is your players' playing style, and not so much your stakes/blinds. I host 200BB .25/.50 and we usually have 2-3 bustouts, a couple reloads, and multiple addons on an 8-9 man table in a 5-6 hour session.
You just happen to have ultra-tight players who don't want to let go of their cash. You're not going to change that - it simply is what it is.
It would be better to drop down to .05/.10 or .10/.10 and get people to loosen up with their $20 stacks, push allin, etc., and start REALLY playing poker, than to try and work people into spending money they aren't comfortable spending..
Guy at my game one time, he got all exasperated when he lost another hand and goes "I haven't gotten a hand all night!"I keep telling them you don't need to see every hand until the river
Me and my buddy just looked at each other then looked at him and say "all night? you JUST got here. You've played 8 hands. And by the way you don't have to play them all"
Why try to up the stakes when the people in your game don't want to play bigger? You are bound to lose people if you push them to play bigger where they are not comfortable. Home games are for fun with friends I think.
Obv solution is obv. Drop buy-ins to $20 max and drop stakes to 10c/25c. Game will loosen up considerably, re-buys will increase, actual money in play will increase, and you get to buy cool new 10c chips. Not to mention the advantages of buy-ins in multiples of $20. Redbirds are overrated.
Mental Nomad
Full House
I agree with everyone advocating for removing the cap and letting your players choose their buy-in.
At my two-bit game ($0.125 and $0.25 blinds), buy-ins are anywhere from $10 to $100. They are usually between $25 and $50. We allow anyone to top off any time (to max stack.) Nobody at that game wants to move beyond the two-bit big blind... but we often have someone losing $100 or more (I have, and once was on a night of only buying in for $20 at a time), and we always have several people cashing out well over $100 (or one person cashing out with a ton of money.)
For some players, seeing what there is to play for is motivation for bigger buy-ins next time. But nobody is pressured to buy in for more than they want. We still allow $10 buy-ins.
As @DrStrange noted, the smaller stacks are not at a disadvantage in a cash game, although proper small-stack strategy is a less fun to play.
Oh, THAT's your problem. The table is too passive.
We overcame that a long time ago by:
1. Two of us intentionally discussed how the game is too passive for proper poker. We had this discussion at the table in front of the crew.
2. Next game, two of us declared that we're setting out to play better poker and be more aggreessive. It was not the same two people!
3. Also, I took up the habit of showing my bluffs, and laughing out loud and showing them any time I was caught. Basically, being the best loser I could. (See above re: losing over $100, $20 at a time...)
The game plays well now. New people come in with $20, they generally come back buying in for $40, or bringing multiple $20 buy-ins.
At my two-bit game ($0.125 and $0.25 blinds), buy-ins are anywhere from $10 to $100. They are usually between $25 and $50. We allow anyone to top off any time (to max stack.) Nobody at that game wants to move beyond the two-bit big blind... but we often have someone losing $100 or more (I have, and once was on a night of only buying in for $20 at a time), and we always have several people cashing out well over $100 (or one person cashing out with a ton of money.)
For some players, seeing what there is to play for is motivation for bigger buy-ins next time. But nobody is pressured to buy in for more than they want. We still allow $10 buy-ins.
As @DrStrange noted, the smaller stacks are not at a disadvantage in a cash game, although proper small-stack strategy is a less fun to play.
Oh, THAT's your problem. The table is too passive.
We overcame that a long time ago by:
1. Two of us intentionally discussed how the game is too passive for proper poker. We had this discussion at the table in front of the crew.
2. Next game, two of us declared that we're setting out to play better poker and be more aggreessive. It was not the same two people!
3. Also, I took up the habit of showing my bluffs, and laughing out loud and showing them any time I was caught. Basically, being the best loser I could. (See above re: losing over $100, $20 at a time...)
The game plays well now. New people come in with $20, they generally come back buying in for $40, or bringing multiple $20 buy-ins.
Last edited:
RowdyRawhide
Full House
I agree that you should allow a buy in range instead of a single fixed buyin....not sure why you're so focused on that aspect. If I go to the casino and some player is sitting on $1000 at 1/2 table that still doesn't stop me from buying in for $200-300. Raising your buyin by 5 bucks isn't gonna do anything to change your game IMO. Allowing some guys that are willing to sit down with starting stacks 2-3x larger than the other guys that are ok with a $25 buyin should help open up your game some I would think. I still think you risk losing players, but less than if you straight up double the blinds
Mental Nomad
Full House
For some people, how they manage their nightly bankroll is part of the game... limiting them to one buy-in size, the same as everyone else, is taking away part of their game. You might be surprised to find someone is quite willing to play $60 at your game, as long as it's $15, $15, $15, $15... But buying in for $50 is far too much, that's like blowing three wads in one shot.
Adam Crowley
Two Pair
When I go to cash games I try to take 400bb with me. I get invited to a lot of games I can't attend due to larger blinds. Most games I get invited to are 1/1 or 1/2 which means I need $400 - $800 to attend. All of these games allow buying of $40 but playing so short is not desirable for me.
While 400bb is more then your players might budget for a night, I prefer to have this buffer so that I can buying for 200bb and rebuy once in the event I bust out. This allows me to play my proper game and not have an early night due to bad variance.
I simply don't attend games higher than .25/.50 because I don't have the money to play in higher games.
You should consider what is best for your players financial situation, increase the max buyin first and see how the game plays. I play in a .25/.25 game, as the game gets shorter and the night gets deeper the opening raise size increases and sometimes we even up the blinds. If you let your game evolve naturally over time you don't risk busting your game prematurely. Your games life is determined by the amount of people you can get to turn up, and they will only come if they enjoy it and it falls within there tolerance to risk.
While 400bb is more then your players might budget for a night, I prefer to have this buffer so that I can buying for 200bb and rebuy once in the event I bust out. This allows me to play my proper game and not have an early night due to bad variance.
I simply don't attend games higher than .25/.50 because I don't have the money to play in higher games.
You should consider what is best for your players financial situation, increase the max buyin first and see how the game plays. I play in a .25/.25 game, as the game gets shorter and the night gets deeper the opening raise size increases and sometimes we even up the blinds. If you let your game evolve naturally over time you don't risk busting your game prematurely. Your games life is determined by the amount of people you can get to turn up, and they will only come if they enjoy it and it falls within there tolerance to risk.
joseywales
Straight
It's entirely possible I'm not seeing the issue, on either side.
Our game:
.25/.50 blinds
$15 Buy-in
$15 Rebuy
$20 Finally buy in
All stacks have the following and the $20 stack just gets a $5 chip:
.25 x 12
.50 x 8
1.00 x 8
If anyone wants to buy-in 4 or more times, we take it to a vote (no one has ever been denied). The formal 3 buy-in rule gives everyone a warm and fuzzy that the most they can lose is $50. They could walk way, no guilt about not buying back in, etc. The vote lets anyone lose more than $50 if they choose.
Our game:
.25/.50 blinds
$15 Buy-in
$15 Rebuy
$20 Finally buy in
All stacks have the following and the $20 stack just gets a $5 chip:
.25 x 12
.50 x 8
1.00 x 8
If anyone wants to buy-in 4 or more times, we take it to a vote (no one has ever been denied). The formal 3 buy-in rule gives everyone a warm and fuzzy that the most they can lose is $50. They could walk way, no guilt about not buying back in, etc. The vote lets anyone lose more than $50 if they choose.
detroitdad
Royal Flush
That doesn't make any sense to me at all for a cash game. 15 dollar buy with a .50 BB? wow....I don't get the vote thing either. Our stakes are .25/.50 with a 100 max buy in. Some guys bring one and buy in short twice. Some guys bring 5+ buy ins. I guess I don't understand all these cash game rules when it comes to buy ins.
I could handle a 15 max buy in. The blinds would have to be substantially lower. Is this limit? if not, is the game just full of limpers?
This is a shovefest.
Mental Nomad
Full House
Was thinking about this while walking, and a thought came to mind...
It sounds almost like you're trying to find a way to force the game play bigger, but you don't want the change that a lot of us think will allow the game to play bigger (relaxing the strict buy-in rules).
Why, exactly, are you interested in .25/.50 instead of .25/.25? What change to the game are you really looking for? Because if your game is as passive as it sounds, it's the lack of aggression that's keeping the stakes down... and pushing up the blinds or forcing up the buy-in is liable to make it even more passive, not open things up.
It sounds almost like you're trying to find a way to force the game play bigger, but you don't want the change that a lot of us think will allow the game to play bigger (relaxing the strict buy-in rules).
Why, exactly, are you interested in .25/.50 instead of .25/.25? What change to the game are you really looking for? Because if your game is as passive as it sounds, it's the lack of aggression that's keeping the stakes down... and pushing up the blinds or forcing up the buy-in is liable to make it even more passive, not open things up.
Rhodeman77
Straight Flush
Have you thought about mixing in some other games besides Hold'em? PLO or even Crazy Pineapple will help creat bigger pots and people going bust, thus creating more re-buys. If you are only getting 1 re-buy per night this should change that.
You wouldn't need to change your blinds or buyin structure for it. Those games will play bigger naturally.
You don't need to play them all night either. Go slow, play 1 round every hour or so to "mix it up" you could say.
You wouldn't need to change your blinds or buyin structure for it. Those games will play bigger naturally.
You don't need to play them all night either. Go slow, play 1 round every hour or so to "mix it up" you could say.
detroitdad
Royal Flush
Mr. Cheese
Full House
I think rules about the amount of times you can buy in would just hurt the game. It's a cash game not a freeze out tourney. If someone wants to donate hundreds of dollars to the table let them lol.
My rules are simple: minimum buyin of $40 (.25/.50 blinds) to prevent shovefest and a maximum of $100. Most players go for $50-60 and the game plays fine. Imo no need for additional rules.
My rules are simple: minimum buyin of $40 (.25/.50 blinds) to prevent shovefest and a maximum of $100. Most players go for $50-60 and the game plays fine. Imo no need for additional rules.
thorwilliam
3 of a Kind
Is this game designed to remove as much of the skill factor as possible from the game?
I've never really understood the rules for minimum buy-ins, unless you have more players than chairs. That's not a problem for my game; we're perpetually shorthanded. So when Eric, the cheapest bastard you ever met, busts out and wants to re-buy for $12, we let him. Why not? Sometimes he'll rebuy for $8 or $6 after that. Who cares? Better to have him playing than not.
detroitdad
Royal Flush
About 10 years ago I played in a .25/.50 game with a 50 max buy in. One of the guys would rebuy for whatever he pulled out of his wallet. Sometimes it was 12 bucks. Sometimes it was 26 bucks, ect....Funny thing is he went through over 300 dollars this way. Nobody complained. We just enjoyed his money..........errrrrrrrr, company.
manamongkids
Full House
I agree to an extent, its not really fun for anyone when someone buys in for $20 at a $1/1 game and is either all in or folding every hand.
Our minimum buy in for my game is 40 bbs
Mr. Cheese
Full House
We used to not have a minimum but we found one player that would just buy in for 10 bucks and go in almost every hand. It ended up disrupting the game and made it much less enjoyable for all the players who didn't want to just have a coin flip shovefest every few hands after he'd rebuy back in.
joseywales
Straight
How about instead of throwing comments, throw suggestions?
I'm always open to ideas, but this has been working for 5 years, including the 3 years I've hosted the game. I'm open to higher stakes, but not sure about the others. Like the OP, I've thought about proposing it.
What about my structure could be improved? Our game seems to run fine. We some players who are stronger than others, but to be honest, mostly it's just social and the true hold'em players have to play loose, or they get creamed.
I'm always open to ideas, but this has been working for 5 years, including the 3 years I've hosted the game. I'm open to higher stakes, but not sure about the others. Like the OP, I've thought about proposing it.
What about my structure could be improved? Our game seems to run fine. We some players who are stronger than others, but to be honest, mostly it's just social and the true hold'em players have to play loose, or they get creamed.
thorwilliam
3 of a Kind
Reducing the blinds to 10c/20c would be a big improvement, opening up for more post flop play.
joseywales
Straight
OK. So this could be about the skill level of players then. In my game, a guy with pockets AAs better go at least $2.50 if they don't want to see the flop. I'd go $3 or more and still probably get one caller. So $2.50 to win the .75 in blinds. I know, I know, but it's how it works at this game. If you let guys at this table flop, you'll eat your AAs to 222. Our game never folds the 2s. I will say our largest gambler has move, to it's calmed down a bit. But guys don't give up their hands easily in this game. It's just a different kind of fun I guess.
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.
