If you can't have both (1 Viewer)

[mooremo]

If you can't have multiple large sets, would you prefer more sets with fewer chips per set, or fewer sets with more chips per set?

 

[links_slayer]

For me it depends:

Tourney: more sets with fewer chips per set

Cash: fewer sets with more chips per set

 

[abby99]

If you can't have multiple large sets . . .

I overlooked the quoted part and responded with fewer sets, more chips per set. Larger set provide more flexibility.

 

[jbutler]

For me it depends:

Tourney: more sets with fewer chips per set

Cash: fewer sets with more chips per set

I want to make the ultimate degen tiny tourney set. It has exactly as many chips as players. Starting blinds are 1 chip/1 chip. Button draw is brutal.

 

[churlbut18]

Great question. I've been pondering the same myself so thank you for this thread. Very interested to see the feedback.

From my perspective, a larger set looks awesome but could be harder to acquire the desired quantities of each denomination. Whereas a few smaller sets could be acquired more easily and could give you more variety in chips (casinos, denominations, colors, molds, etc...). I don't see flexibility being an advantage of one over the other if you have the right set/sets.

I'm leaning towards a small cash set to spread my groups' stakes, a limit set, and a tournament set rather than 1 massive set that could spread all. And because of limited funds, I can't justify multiple of each (yet).

But if difficulty of acquiring was a non issue, I think I'd go large cash set over a few small cash sets that spread the same stakes and get the variety I speak of from cash, limit, and tourney.

 

[DJ Mack]

MOAR CHIPS.

But seriously it comes down to what your set consists of and what the future may hold. If you acquire chips by making once in a lifetime purchases of rare, out of production sets then the cash/tourney consideration comes into play. But if you're acquiring production chips or customs that you could reorder later at reasonable quantities then it's kind of a moot point.

 

[MaxB]

give me a big ass set of chips ..... if for some magical reason I host a tourney or cash game with 50+ people, I want big ass stacks of chips. Even though I said I wouldn't get more, I am still picking up Aztars, because 3000+ is not enough.

 

[ChipEnvy]

For me it depends on what one considers big and small. I don't like having any set smaller than 600 chips. So small tourney sets don't bother me but I like having big stacks when playing cash, so I don't have a cash set with less than 1000 chips.

 

[RowdyRawhide]

For me it depends:

Tourney: more sets with fewer chips per set

Cash: fewer sets with more chips per set

I can't sum it up any better than this.......but I voted MORE CHIPS......




it's the lesser of two evils...or the better of two positives

 

[abby99]

I don't see flexibility being an advantage of one over the other if you have the right set/sets.

By flexibility, I was referring to one massive set with which you can spread any game you might play now and in the future. When I ordered my BCC Lady Luck Club set, I thought 1900 chips would be more than I'd ever need for a cash game. LOL! Did I ever miss that mark. At the time it didn't occur to me that I'd be spreading limit games that require 1200 $1 chips. Sigh!

If I could go back in time, I'd order a massive set that would include both cash and tournament denominations and 2000 $1 chips.

 

[DJ Mack]

When I ordered my BCC Lady Luck Club set, I thought 1900 chips would be more than I'd ever need for a cash game. LOL! Did I ever miss that mark. At the time it didn't occur to me that I'd be spreading limit games that require 1200 $1 chips

How many people are you hosting?

 

[abby99]

How many people are you hosting?

8.

 

[DJ Mack]

8.

Damn! Makes me thankful that I don't really play limit much!

 

[abby99]

Damn! Makes me thankful that I don't really play limit much!

Limit poker is great with stacks and stacks of chips. Just ask @jbutler. 1200 is only 1.5 racks per person. Ideally I'd like to have 2 racks per person, or 1600 total. However, @Payback and I like to buy in for 3 racks each, especially if the limits are 3/6 or 4/8. For limit games, moar is truly better.

This is from a recent 2/4 mixed game. In for 300, out for 411.

 

[jbutler]

Limit poker is great with stacks and stacks of chips. Just ask @jbutler. 1200 is only 1.5 racks per person. Ideally I'd like to have 2 racks per person, or 1600 total. However, @Payback and I like to buy in for 3 racks each, especially if the limits are 3/6 or 4/8. For limit games, moar is truly better.

This is from a recent 2/4 mixed game. In for 300, out for 411.

View attachment 46422

Agreed! You're not doing it right unless you're overdoing it

 

[abby99]

Agreed! You're not doing it right unless you're overdoing it

+ Eleventy Billion

 

[Chicken Rob]

I'm planning to order about 5000 CPC customs this year. And not a single tourney chip in that order.

 

[Chicken Rob]

I'm planning to order about 5000 CPC customs this year. And not a single tourney chip in that order.

I just have to wait for J5 to get to me...

 

[Poker Zombie]

I used to have 2 sets (at the time that felt like a lot). But as the game grew, I had to put both sets into play in the same game. Not an ideal circumstance. So fewer sets more chips is a no-brainer here.

Now, by fewer sets, as long as we're talking fewer sets than say... a dozen, then we can hang. Fewer than half a dozen would be an issue.

I need

1. Tournament,
2. Secondary tournament,
3. Low stakes tournament,
4. High stakes tournament,
5. Cash,
6. Secondary cash.
7. Limit

And each needs to cover 3 tables.

So I guess what I'm saying is, If I can't have both, I'm still going to have both.

 

[GenghisKhan]

This is sure to help.
A few months back I decided on keeping 1 cash set and 1 tourney set. I would add on to those 2 sets only (so fewer sets more chips).
And I would sell all other complete sets, incomplete sets and misc racks. So away they went.

But then, I had chip money. So I bought more sets.
No wait...that doesn't help at all does it?(n) :thumbsdown:

Ok so 2 cash (650 chips and ~2000 chips) and 2 tournament (600 chips and ~1400 chips) isn't that bad.
1 small and 1 big of each still makes sense. I voted fewer.

 

[BGinGA]

If you can't have multiple large sets,

Whaaaa.......I don't understand the question.

 

[mooremo]

Whaaaa.......I don't understand the question.

Your input on the set will help me in choosing more or fewer sets.
I think I am going to have to sell more chips, in order to buy more chips.

 

[courage]

It kind of depends on your game and poker space. I have friends that only have room for one table so for them more small sets would be ok, however, I define small tourney sets as 600 and small cash sets as 800 chips.

Personally I think larger but fewer sets are preferred and more flexible.

 

[RowdyRawhide]

By flexibility, I was referring to one massive set with which you can spread any game you might play now and in the future. When I ordered my BCC Lady Luck Club set, I thought 1900 chips would be more than I'd ever need for a cash game. LOL! Did I ever miss that mark. At the time it didn't occur to me that I'd be spreading limit games that require 1200 $1 chips. Sigh!

If I could go back in time, I'd order a massive set that would include both cash and tournament denominations and 2000 $1 chips.

Damn! Makes me thankful that I don't really play limit much!

Limit poker is great with stacks and stacks of chips. Just ask @jbutler. 1200 is only 1.5 racks per person. Ideally I'd like to have 2 racks per person, or 1600 total. However, @Payback and I like to buy in for 3 racks each, especially if the limits are 3/6 or 4/8. For limit games, moar is truly better.

This is from a recent 2/4 mixed game. In for 300, out for 411.

View attachment 46422

Agreed! You're not doing it right unless you're overdoing it

I have become a big fan of limit poker over the last few years.....still love NL, but limit is a nice change of pace especially if you have people that may not be quite as experienced

 

[Psypher1000]

Somehow this thread escaped me...

You're not doing it right unless you're overdoing it

Hmmm...seems legit.

I just have to wait for J5 to get to me...

You and me both! Speaking of both...

If I can't have both, I'm still going to have both.

Exactly.

As for which I'd choose, well... Madame Empress doesn't exist for no reason. She covers everything from $.25/$.25 (fracs to be revealed "soon"...like, whenever they get here) to $5/$10, including support for a 10-person $1/$2 limit table with 2 racks of $25's per person. That's not to say that I actually spread all those games...simply that I could.

And that's just the secondary set...

Because of the Empress collection I have no strict need for a massive CPC set, nor even a desire for one. My Armory cash set is plenty big at 1220 pieces (soon to be 1320 ), but I can always add true $100's and higher denoms if needed. If for some reason I'm playing a game where I need more than 300 $5's, then I go Empress or my Paulson customs/relabels. The Armory cash set also handles microstakes.

This thread also highlights why I like to have at least one non-denom set on hand such as starbursts, and/or the Cavalry Club. Because they're non-denom, they're pretty flexible. You may not have as many chips in a single color as you'd want to make the game go super smoothly w/o making change, but I can spread a lot of games with 300 chips in each color, and if I want to get bonkers with color/value pairings, I can. Black $1's in a low-stakes game? Let's do it. Purple $5's? Bring it on. Again, not that I would...just that I could.

 

[TheBigTater]

Is this a trick question?
looks at name at top of page, yep still says "PokerChipForum"