Cash Game Ideal 1,000-chip breakdown for underground 1/2 & 2/5 NLHE and PLO game (3 Viewers)

[dmoney]

I have to ask.

What do you get out of this rake other than action.

Food? Beverages?

Beverages - cooler stocked with water, sports drinks, and beer, not sure on cocktails or hard liquor. A few players drink a couple beers but water seems most popular.

Food - assorted packaged snacks (chips, cookies, crackers) and there’s been mention of a menu, but no one’s ordered from it while I have been there. Another player and I did get chicken fingers once, and they were very good, apparently Sam’s Club has good ones.

 

[TomC727]

I vote that he invests in a big custom CPC set.

 

[dmoney]

I vote that he invests in a big custom CPC set.

Given that his initial price point is $500 this is exceptionally unlikely.

 

[TomC727]

Given that his initial price point is $500 this is exceptionally unlikely.

He’s either very cheap, or business is bad.

Not going to lie. If I’m running a raked game, I’d feel guilty not having a top notch custom table(s), chairs, and chips.

 

[upNdown]

He’s either very cheap, or business is bad.

Not going to lie. If I’m running a raked game, I’d feel guilty not having a top notch custom table(s), chairs, and chips.

And a spread of food hot food. And liquor.

 

[TomC727]

And a spread of food hot food. And liquor.

Yes!!!!!

 

[TomC727]

And a spread of food hot food. And liquor.

I should start raking.

 

[Taghkanic]

1 x 200
5 x 500
25 x 200
100 x 80
500 x 20

^^^ THIS

 

[dmoney]

Not final, but I'm considering recommending 1,300 chips broken down in either option A or B:

	A	B
$1	200	200
$5	700	600
$25	300	400
$100	80	80
$500	20	20
Bank	$29,200	$31,200

Both can accommodate ~30x $1k buy ins for a 2/5 game, while being heavy on $5s with lots of chips on the table for 1/2. I think Option B is slightly better for 2/5, as it allows two full barrels of $25s per player.

In either case, I would advise making sure to get all of the $1s, and $5s on the table first, with all higher denoms used for rebuys and top ups.

Thoughts?

 

[JustinInMN]

Not final, but I'm considering recommending 1,300 chips broken down in either option A or B:

	A	B
$1	200	200
$5	700	600
$25	300	400
$100	80	80
$500	20	20
Bank	$29,200	$31,200

Both can accommodate ~30x $1k buy ins for a 2/5 game, while being heavy on $5s with lots of chips on the table for 1/2. I think Option B is slightly better for 2/5, as it allows two full barrels of $25s per player.

In either case, I would advise making sure to get all of the $1s, and $5s on the table first, with all higher denoms used for rebuys and top ups.

Thoughts?

Don't really love issuing $500 denom chips to be honest unless he is planning to spread 10-20 or more.

Otherwise I like either breakdown, but would add 100-200 more singles to account for the rake effect. 200 singles while raking is going to force time lost for reintroducing rake chips into play. If an average of 3 singles go down the hole (between rake and tip) each hand, 200 singles would be gone in about 3 hours give or take. (That said, the option of charging for time may be a good alternative as well. Say $5/player/30mins would keep singles completely out of the equation except tips.)

With my suggested modifications to option B. You would be doing 400/600/400/100 or still covering $23,400. Even at 2-5, that covers over 460 BB per player.

 

[dmoney]

Don't really love issuing $500 denom chips to be honest unless he is planning to spread 10-20 or more.

Otherwise I like either breakdown, but would add 100-200 more singles to account for the rake effect. 200 singles while raking is going to force time lost for reintroducing rake chips into play. If an average of 3 singles go down the hole (between rake and tip) each hand, 200 singles would be gone in about 3 hours give or take. (That said, the option of charging for time may be a good alternative as well. Say $5/player/30mins would keep singles completely out of the equation except tips.)

With my suggested modifications to option B. You would be doing 400/600/400/100 or still covering $23,400. Even at 2-5, that covers over 460 BB per player.

The $500 are mostly help cover the need for ~$30k and stay near the ~1,000 chip request. Without them there’s $21k bank which probably covers most normal scenarios. I wouldn’t predict they would get felted much.

I’m a little hesitant to suggest more $1s - host/dealer is making it work with ~260 right now with a 1/2 game so there doesn’t seem to be a need for more of the lowest denom chips with a higher stakes game that’s even less reliant on $1 chips.

Maybe 280/600/300/100/20 is a compromise? Bank $30,780 with ~1000 chips likely working from the jump, $100s handling rebuys, $500s as backup.

 

[GetUrShineBox]

Maybe 280/600/300/100/20 is a compromise? Bank $30,780 with ~1000 chips likely working from the jump, $100s handling rebuys, $500s as backup.

You might have nailed it with this breakdown.

I think most are saying more $1's bc we don't know how the rake is taken, was that clarified?

 

[dmoney]

I think most are saying more $1's bc we don't know how the rake is taken, was that clarified?

Host mentioned dealer is paid hourly rate+tips. My assumption: dealer rakes the game and takes tips. Host pays dealer his rate after the game, dealer keeps his tips, and host keeps the difference.

I have more questions regarding exact specifics, but I’m again hesitant to really drill down on that area.

 

[JustinInMN]

I’m a little hesitant to suggest more $1s - host/dealer is making it work with ~260 right now with a 1/2 game so there doesn’t seem to be a need for more of the lowest denom chips with a higher stakes game that’s even less reliant on $1 chips.

Well I certainly wouldn't go from 260 to 200 on the singles. I am just trying to estimate how long it would take for enough to singles to leave the economy before there are too few in play.

Let's assume the following possible outcomes for how many singles leave the economy. Assuming rake is rounded to a whole dollar and has a five dollar max.

Rake - singles taken (including tip)
$0 - 0 (no-flop, no-drop)
$1 - 1
$2 - 3
$3 - 4
$4 - 5 (4 singles for rake, 1 for tip, I assume these must be tracked separately)
$5 - 1 ($5 chip for rake, 1 single for tip)

Let's weigh these outcomes. For simplicity and reasonability, Let's say max rake is taken on 75% of the hands and the other scenarios account for 5% of the hands each. (One could study drop patterns and get a better idea of how frequently each outcome would be.) But the math with my assumptions above is something like: 0.75(1) + 0.05(5) + 0.05(4) + 0.05(3) + 0.05(2) + 0.05(0) = 1.45 singles leaving the economy each hand on average. Assuming 25 hands per hour, that roughly 36 singles. If the games are lasting 6-7 hours, he's probably left with somewhere between 50-90 singles in play at the end of the night assuming gets all 260 in play over the course of the game. That seems reasonable, especially if the final hours of the game are shorthanded.

So if this is an estimate of the status quo, cutting to 200 is probably not an option. Maybe accepting 300 instead of 400 is an option. But the more singles available, the longer the game can go without having to stop and do a "fill" to recirculate singles. Having less than 10 singles per player in play is the point where it gets tight. And that lost time is money. (Which is why so many of us are frustrated with trying to cheap out on the chips that are making the host profit.)

I have more questions regarding exact specifics, but I’m again hesitant to really drill down on that area.

In this case, your advice should certainly be on the high side, not on trying to minimize the rake/tipping chips needed.

Maybe 280/600/300/100/20 is a compromise? Bank $30,780 with ~1000 chips likely working from the jump, $100s handling rebuys, $500s as backup.

Do 300/600/400/80/20 if you are sure you need $500s. Basically your original breakdown B with me only adding 100 singles instead of 200. 1400 chips in total, bank of $31,300. Could probably lose 1-2 racks of 25s unless he is pretty confident 2-5 games are in the future.

 

[TheOffalo]

B

I think most are saying more $1's bc we don't know how the rake is taken, was that clarified?

@dmoney said dealer uses a tray only, no drop slot. So perhaps the dealer is converting singles from rakes and tips to $5s (or higher) on the fly and reintroducing the $1s continuously?

 

[JustinInMN]

B


@dmoney said dealer uses a tray only, no drop slot. So perhaps the dealer is converting singles from rakes and tips to $5s (or higher) on the fly and reintroducing the $1s continuously?

This would be the best case scenario as far as minimizing lost time for change making. But honestly, if you are raking the game, buy the extra 1-2 racks to make it easier on your dealer.

 

[dmoney]

converting singles from rakes and tips to $5s (or higher) on the fly and reintroducing the $1s continuously?

I think this is the case - dealer will take a $5 from the pot and then replace it with 2-3 singles, etc.

 

[Camoflaws]

Any good dealer around here at the raked games will only drop $5+ chips. ALL $1 chips stay on the table and he just chips up in the well before converting to a $5 or $25 to drop. I personally would say to go easy on the $1 chips because of that. 130 $1 chips for 1/3 or 2/5 games will suffice and put the additional quantity to your work horse chips or some extra big chips. Between 40-60 $1 chips in the well for the dealer to start with each player getting 10 chips at initial buy. Rebuys should not include any $1 chips. Let the dealer do their thing and make change for players. Having big chips in the game helps the dealer in these situations as the well fills he can buy a big chip from a player who might need $5's (happens more often than you think) and then he can drop or rack a single chip.

 

[JackDeRke]

I´ve seen some interesting approaches on the not having chips go off the table for rake approach.

Best I´ve seen yet was actually the first time I´ve seen someone rake a game. They had some ULtimaTe PoKER (imagine the soundtrack playing in the background) 10$ and 50$ chips in the dealer tray, which they´ve counted beforehand. From there Rake is fluently moved back into the dealers tray and whenever he has 10 or 50$ full they drop one of the trash chips in the dropbox keeping all the chips in play.

They´ve had two tables at some times playing 1/3€ with 5% at 15€ cap 200€ min buyin.
Their breakdown was:
200x1€
300x5€
200x25€
100x100€
50x500€

Never had any issues with not having chips left. Having some really big chips really makes that situation rare.
Obviously having huge stacks infront of you if way cooler, but it is less practical and makes for a slower game especially with newer ish players so having them sit on a few big chips is actually what you want for your rake.

Disclaimer. I don´t like games being raked heavily, but I can understand why people do it. In the end if the host is playing bad then they´ll eventually give it back to you so idc.

 

[Machine]

which they´ve counted beforehand. From there Rake is fluently moved back into the dealers tray and whenever he has 10 or 50$ full they drop one of the trash chips in the dropbox keeping all the chips in play.

If you're the house, the issue is the players also can count the 50s and know how much the rake is. Something else that can be problematic with this approach is it leaves an opportunity for an unscrupulous dealer to help themselves to the rake.

It also reminds player more often that there IS a rake.

 

[Camoflaws]

Really the host should add a drop slot as he’ll run into problems if the rake is just piling up in the dealer tray. It’s an “out of sight, out of mind” type of thing for the players.

 

[JackDeRke]

If you're the house, the issue is the players also can count the 50s and know how much the rake is. Something else that can be problematic with this approach is it leaves an opportunity for an unscrupulous dealer to help themselves to the rake.

It also reminds player more often that there IS a rake.

That´s true.
I´d just not have a dealer that I wouldn´t trust with the rake. Also I´m actually always stating exactly what amount of rake has been taken for the day if anyone asks. I think it is only fair to be transparent about it.
I´d say trying to be shady about it is worse as people feel like they are being robed.

If you just tell them that they are being robbed it´s their fault for staying. I haven´t had any complaints about the rake since it has been open and clear. Just have to trust your dealers. If you can´t then go ahead and pay up for the extra chips.

 

[Camoflaws]

That´s true.
I´d just not have a dealer that I wouldn´t trust with the rake. Also I´m actually always stating exactly what amount of rake has been taken for the day if anyone asks. I think it is only fair to be transparent about it.
I´d say trying to be shady about it is worse as people feel like they are being robed.

If you just tell them that they are being robbed it´s their fault for staying. I haven´t had any complaints about the rake since it has been open and clear. Just have to trust your dealers. If you can´t then go ahead and pay up for the extra chips.

That’s awesome that you are stating exactly how much rake has been taken for the game but that is not the norm in a raked game. People will just stop playing this particular raked game I would guess if he is spreading 1/2 and 2/5 which are essentially rake traps. So much money is coming off the table in low stakes compared to what people are winning and buying in for that if the rake numbers were widely known people just wouldn’t play. That’s why the game runner in this situation should really be going above and beyond to make sure they have nice setups and don’t skimp on chips, table, food, booze etc.

 

[JackDeRke]

That’s awesome that you are stating exactly how much rake has been taken for the game but that is not the norm in a raked game. People will just stop playing this particular raked game I would guess if he is spreading 1/2 and 2/5 which are essentially rake traps. So much money is coming off the table in low stakes compared to what people are winning and buying in for that if the rake numbers were widely known people just wouldn’t play. That’s why the game runner in this situation should really be going above and beyond to make sure they have nice setups and don’t skimp on chips, table, food, booze etc.

Well I've also been stating what exactly I've paid for food/drinks for the particular session not accounting for leftovers from last game or just spare drinks we have around.

That's the difference between wanting a friendly game and wanting to make money off it.

Imo it's fine to make some money off hosting a game. But some money shouldn't be a salary or similar size.

 

[JustinInMN]

Something else that can be problematic with this approach is it leaves an opportunity for an unscrupulous dealer to help themselves to the rake.

It also reminds player more often that there

Exactly. I just don't get why so many posters on here want to make change when if they are profiting from the game a few extra racks of singles does the trick and is a minor expense compared to the rake.

it's almost as if proving there is a work around in the name of saving chips (which is outright PCF blasphemy, mind you) is more important that the practical reality that change making takes time in a business where time is literally money and out-of-sight out-of-mind is the best policy for minimizing player awareness of the rake which is also in an operator's best interest.