Limit set "denominations" concept (2 Viewers)

[TheOctagon]

I can kind of guess the response before I post this, but I want the critique anyway just to be sure.

I've done the research on limit sets. I like the thought of a lot of 1 denom, a smaller quantity of value chips, and maybe a smattering of ante chips in case my mixed games require them.

The constraints I'm working with are:

• Should be enough for 6-max games. Doesn't need to go any higher than that (I'm planning custom ceramics, so I can get more made if I need to)
• Flexible to play at any limit stakes - that suggests non-denominational chips

Thematically, I have a technical/video-gamey thing going on. I'm sketching ideas on replacing the denomination, which would lock me into set stakes, with a small bet coefficient :wideeyed:

Ante / 0.5x
Bet / 1x
Value / 20x

Key here being the actual coefficient (e.g. "1x") is printed on the chip.

Obvious issues here:

• Players will still think it's money and try to bet "$1" instead of 1x the SB (e.g. in a $1/2 game, probably not an issue - in a $0.25/0.50 game, could be an issue)
• 20x the SB seems okay for a value chip, but 25x is also a contender. The thought is one barrel of betting chips always colors up to one value chip for buyins and making change

It's a fully custom ceramic, so it's not like I'm trying to hunt down the right Paulson or relabel a bunch of CCs or anything, but as I'm refining these concepts I want to come up with the most successful design possible given the constraints. Thanks for your help!

 

[arch3r]

I'd pass on the coefficient idea. It'll probably wind up being more confusing than helpful. People will just remember the sakes since it's only really one denomination you are playing for the night. And IMHO, 20x for the other chip is a good rule of thumb for a limit set.

 

[Darson]

 

[churlbut18]

If anything, print “1” and “20” on the chips to represent the intended value, but leave off the $ so it represents a unit, not a value, but definitely do NOT print the “x” itself...

 

[Darthhoodie]

I wish I had that clock for my office.

 

[ChaosRock]

I can kind of guess the response before I post this, but I want the critique anyway just to be sure.

I've done the research on limit sets. I like the thought of a lot of 1 denom, a smaller quantity of value chips, and maybe a smattering of ante chips in case my mixed games require them.

The constraints I'm working with are:

• Should be enough for 6-max games. Doesn't need to go any higher than that (I'm planning custom ceramics, so I can get more made if I need to)
• Flexible to play at any limit stakes - that suggests non-denominational chips

Thematically, I have a technical/video-gamey thing going on. I'm sketching ideas on replacing the denomination, which would lock me into set stakes, with a small bet coefficient:wideeyed:

Ante / 0.5x
Bet / 1x
Value / 20x

Key here being the actual coefficient (e.g. "1x") is printed on the chip.

Obvious issues here:

• Players will still think it's money and try to bet "$1" instead of 1x the SB (e.g. in a $1/2 game, probably not an issue - in a $0.25/0.50 game, could be an issue)
• 20x the SB seems okay for a value chip, but 25x is also a contender. The thought is one barrel of betting chips always colors up to one value chip for buyins and making change

It's a fully custom ceramic, so it's not like I'm trying to hunt down the right Paulson or relabel a bunch of CCs or anything, but as I'm refining these concepts I want to come up with the most successful design possible given the constraints. Thanks for your help!

How many chips per small bet/big bet do you usually use? And how big of a set are you considering buying?

 

[Forty4]

If they are limit do you even need any factor on them? Also don’t think the 1/2 chip is needed as you could just make the “value” of chip X and then you just need to decide if it’s a two chip through four chip game (i.e. 2/4, 3/6, 4/8). No point in going up because it’s easier to change the “value” of the chip. Unless you want a monster set to handle a 10/20.

 

[JustinInMN]

Honestly, I don't hate the original idea for this. I will call them algebra chips .

If you were to do this, I would suggest a couple things on execution.

1) You want to avoid confusion on denominations, so AVOID STANDARD COLORS AT ALL COSTS!.

2) Also to this end, I would also avoid using the figure "1" on your bet chips, just a simple "x." Stick with "20x" for your value store.

For an ante chip you could do "x/2" or simply decide on another figure "a" so that 2:1 ante:chip ratio isn't permanent. You may find 3:1, 4:1 or 5:2 more suitable at certain stakes.

But these efficively would be NCV chips which have some risk in cash games. (Chips uncashed on dollar night reappearing on two dollar night, this could even happen on accident. Similar to using the same set for tournament and cash, but to a smaller degree.)

But if you to this. That's how I would work it.

 

[fieldsy]

I can kind of guess the response before I post this, but I want the critique anyway just to be sure.

I've done the research on limit sets. I like the thought of a lot of 1 denom, a smaller quantity of value chips, and maybe a smattering of ante chips in case my mixed games require them.

The constraints I'm working with are:

• Should be enough for 6-max games. Doesn't need to go any higher than that (I'm planning custom ceramics, so I can get more made if I need to)
• Flexible to play at any limit stakes - that suggests non-denominational chips

Thematically, I have a technical/video-gamey thing going on. I'm sketching ideas on replacing the denomination, which would lock me into set stakes, with a small bet coefficient:wideeyed:

Ante / 0.5x
Bet / 1x
Value / 20x

Key here being the actual coefficient (e.g. "1x") is printed on the chip.

Obvious issues here:

• Players will still think it's money and try to bet "$1" instead of 1x the SB (e.g. in a $1/2 game, probably not an issue - in a $0.25/0.50 game, could be an issue)
• 20x the SB seems okay for a value chip, but 25x is also a contender. The thought is one barrel of betting chips always colors up to one value chip for buyins and making change

It's a fully custom ceramic, so it's not like I'm trying to hunt down the right Paulson or relabel a bunch of CCs or anything, but as I'm refining these concepts I want to come up with the most successful design possible given the constraints. Thanks for your help!

People who are smarter than me will certainly disagree, but I'm not a fan of non-denominated chips. If you're committed to using them, I would just use your design and select your chip colors rather than have any numeral at all on the chips. I just think it will be too confusing in a cash game to have a number and a multiple. If you just use colors, then you can assign your values at gametime as you think makes sense. If you don't like that idea, maybe you could print the chip "1 Bet" or "1 Small Bet" with a bigger "10 bets" chip for change or something. Just a thought since the "1 bet," "2 bets" terminology is often used in limit games. You might need a few "half bet" chips for small blinds if you're playing limit games with blinds.

In terms of quantity, I like to have 80-100 chips per player in games where 1 chip = half of the small bet. That seems like a lot, but it's only 20-25 big bets. It's definitely not necessary, I don't mean to imply that it is. Again, personal preference here, but if it were me and I knew I was building a limit set I would just focus on 1s, 25c chips if that really fits your stakes, and some 5s. If you really need to cover any game from $0.10-0.20 to $20-40 maybe you need the flexibility of nondenominated chips, but I don't think most people really host games that divergent in size.

One last thought is that I advise caution with the "I can always order more" plan on chips within the same denomination, because I've seen too much variation among different production runs. You might think it won't bother you if your third and fourth rack of reds are a different shade than your first and second racks were, and maybe you're lucky enough that it won't. But it totally bugs me, so I err on the side of ordering more than I expect to need of any given denomination.

 

[Joe Harris]

I've thought about doing this exact same thing. The thing is, you don't really need the x. You can do the exact same without it and have a better quality set. It will be less confusing and have better resale value.

As @churlbut18 mentions, use the chips to represent units instead of value. The key point here is that in limit games, you are already betting in units instead of value. Why set your players up for confusion with a formal variable they have never needed before? Do you really want to explain it 5 times every time you bust out the limit set?

 

[BGinGA]

I'd pass on the coefficient idea. It'll probably wind up being more confusing than helpful. People will just remember the stakes since it's only really one denomination you are playing for the night. And IMHO, 20x for the other chip is a good rule of thumb for a limit set.

^^ Totally this, on both issues. And if adding any kind of identifier, go with this:

on your bet chips, just a simple "x." Stick with "20x" for your value store.

But I don't think it's needed. Better to just make 'em pretty and assign a value on game night. Also allows flexibility to have that high-value chip be worth 10x, 25x, or 100x as circumstances dictate, instead of needlessly locking it down during chip production.

I also think having a small number of non-descript ante chips is a good idea for games that use them. For normal blinds games, just go with a 2-chip/4-chip configuration, using a single chip for the small blind. For a six-max game, I'd go with 100 x antes, 600 x workhorse, and 100 x high-value chips, or 800 chips total at a minimum.

 

[allforcharity]

I think non-denominated chips are your best bet here.

 

[JustinInMN]

I think non-denominated chips are your best bet here.

You are probably right. The case for doing the 20x store chip is because it's simple to color down for a barrel, but I can see where @BGinGA is coming from here. Then it just may not make sense to mark any and just go non denom.

But then that's the problem I would have going non denom means there is some banking risk changing values between games, which is why PCFers generally argue for denominations and separate tournament sets.

I think it's an interesting concept, but I wouldn't do this personally for the many reasons laid out.

 

[TheOctagon]

Amazing responses! Thanks for your input.

How many chips per small bet/big bet do you usually use? And how big of a set are you considering buying?

Last time we played anything limit it was 1 chip per small bet, no ante and I used a 3 denom ASM 312 blank set which worked. Would prefer to have a more pure limit set.

If they are limit do you even need any factor on them? Also don’t think the 1/2 chip is needed as you could just make the “value” of chip X and then you just need to decide if it’s a two chip through four chip game (i.e. 2/4, 3/6, 4/8). No point in going up because it’s easier to change the “value” of the chip. Unless you want a monster set to handle a 10/20.

That makes perfect sense and is a great point in favor of a NCV design. It doesn't handle ante, but I'm comfortable having a smaller quantity of ante chips on hand for those kinds of games.

Just a thought since the "1 bet," "2 bets" terminology is often used in limit games. You might need a few "half bet" chips for small blinds if you're playing limit games with blinds.

If you really need to cover any game from $0.10-0.20 to $20-40 maybe you need the flexibility of nondenominated chips, but I don't think most people really host games that divergent in size.

With you on all points though I'd rather go NCV because I have two separate groups of attitudes regarding cash games, sometimes even in the same night. After the tourney wraps, we kind of gauge the appetite for destruction and pick our cash stakes. Sometimes that's $1s, sometimes it's dimes.

But I don't think it's needed. Better to just make 'em pretty and assign a value on game night. Also allows flexibility to have that high-value chip be worth 10x, 25x, or 100x as circumstances dictate, instead of needlessly locking it down during chip production.

I also think having a small number of non-descript ante chips is a good idea for games that use them. For normal blinds games, just go with a 2-chip/4-chip configuration, using a single chip for the small blind. For a six-max game, I'd go with 100 x antes, 600 x workhorse, and 100 x high-value chips, or 800 chips total at a minimum.

This nails it. That's exactly the breakdown I had in mind. Plus, I kind of like the design of my ante chip the best, but it would be outrageous as a workhorse. Just a nice splash of brightness in a few pots here and there.

You guys really helped me narrow it down. Thanks for your replies!

 

[moose]

Go nondenominational and then get one of these to show values. Nondenominational on the left and value chip on the right.

https://spinettisgaming.com/products/chip-display-acrylic-tree-for-8-poker-chips

 

[TheOctagon]

Go nondenominational and then get one of these to show values. Nondenominational on the left and value chip on the right.

https://spinettisgaming.com/products/chip-display-acrylic-tree-for-8-poker-chips

Whoa! That's a really cool idea.

 

[glom]

I picked this up from @abby99:

"We avoid the need for a third denomination by using a dealer ante equal to the small bet, and the bring-in equal to 1/2 the small bet. If the small bet isn't divisible by 2, then the bring-in can be 1/3 or 2/3 of the small bet. Unless you're playing a 1-chip/2-chip game, you don't need a third denomination. This can and does work."

If you do the above, and play with a 2/4 or 3/6 structure, you're all set. Using a 2/4 structure would be using the base chip as $1 and the value chip for $20 for a $2/$4 limit game. Small blind is 1 chip, big blind is 2 chips.

You could then label the 2 non denominated chips:
chip
stack

where you can trade 1 stack chip for 20 chip chips.

this gives more flexibility.

I have a non denominated limit set, and 2 chips. They have no labels, and I play 2/4 or 3/6 structures with them. people adjust quickly. I use the button ante to avoid the need of an ante chip, and to speed up the game.

 

[TheOctagon]

@glom I considered the button ante. I'm not convinced that would speed things up with my crew, but it might be a good solution and worth a try if it works out.

 

[glom]

@glom I considered the button ante. I'm not convinced that would speed things up with my crew, but it might be a good solution and worth a try if it works out.

Even if it doesn’t speed things up (but it will) there’s no confusion of who didn’t ante and it simplifies the chips required.

 

[BGinGA]

This topic is one of those that will be debated forever.

How many quarters?

 

[glom]

People who play limit poker, for real, don’t count the pot in dollars, they just count the betsgoing in. Playing with folks like this only requires a single denom work horse chip. People used to playing primarily big bet need a small adjustment period to get used to playing without denoms on the chips and just counting the number of bets.