davislane
Straight Flush
- Joined
- Jul 12, 2020
- Messages
- 9,999
- Reaction score
- 14,691
Ummmmmm..... words.ES micro limit set.....View attachment 621537
Thinking of relabeling these SBs for the $5 though...
View attachment 621539
Ummmmmm..... words.ES micro limit set.....View attachment 621537
Thinking of relabeling these SBs for the $5 though...
View attachment 621539
If I had been in on the NAGB, I would have done this and relabeled AS $20s as $5s. But at $800/rack...I tip my cap to you. Good game.ES micro limit set.....View attachment 621537
Thinking of relabeling these SBs for the $5 though...
View attachment 621539
Sounds like the title of a thread that needs to be made.If I had been in on the NAGB, I would have
@bluegill your $.25 limit set is insane!! Congratulations!! Kind of makes my idea look stupid! LolES micro limit set.....View attachment 621537
Thinking of relabeling these SBs for the $5 though...
View attachment 621539
See this is what makes PCF so great. You have a set worth well over $10k that you use for a $25 LIMIT game. Makes me shed a tear. Any clown can use dice chips for a $10k buy in game. Granted, there are plenty of folks that can and do both, but I really appreciate this end of the spectrum. Well done and thanks for sharing.ES micro limit set.....View attachment 621537
Thinking of relabeling these SBs for the $5 though...
View attachment 621539
Pushing $4k in my ugly quarter set so far buddy!! Donk life!! LolSee this is what makes PCF so great. You have a set worth well over $10k that you use for a $25 LIMIT game. Makes me shed a tear. Any clown can use dice chips for a $10k buy in game. Granted, there are plenty of folks that can and do both, but I really appreciate this end of the spectrum. Well done and thanks for sharing.
@UnicornFlashES micro limit set.....View attachment 621537
Thinking of relabeling these SBs for the $5 though...
View attachment 621539
I’m glad you’re doing this. I’m toying with:@bluegill your $.25 limit set is insane!! Congratulations!! Kind of makes my idea look stupid! Lol
View attachment 621548
We are just using random racks of Casino Hot Stamp quarters so each person gets a different rack to start! Hopefully it will continue to grow as @Beakertwang would like to use it for $.75/$1.50 limit, sounds like a ton of fun but will take lots of chips. Also planning to design a $5 white MSK plaque for the $5 value chip here.
Also a huge thank you for your help with the impossible rack to finish in this pic! Quite a few dark racks here, really cool to get another bright one finished up! A Day Green rack and I think we are in business!!
I will probably play brown since I can get a complete rebuy and look like I am still on my first rack! Lol
Someone please check my thinking. I'm thinking of doing:
I know it's not a "normal" 900/100 or 900/80/20 breakdown for a 1k-piece set, but my math indicated that this breakdown would cover 8 players for more than 3 full buy-ins per player (25BB) and allow for up to 120 workhorse chips to start. So it leans more towards workhorse/betting chips, and less towards value/rebuy, but it still covers more than 3 buy-ins per player. While an individual player might be in for more than 3 rebuys, when would a full table ever need 3 bullets each? And if EVERY player were in for 3 bullets, the stakes of the game should probably go up...which can easily be handled by a non-denom set.
- a 960/30/10 breakdown
- non-denominated betting (x), value (20x), and rebuy (100x) chips
- 2-chip/4-chip setup
tl;dr a 960/30/10 non-denom breakdown would be perfectly playable (even if not standard) for a single table 8-handed game, right?
@Nanook Thank you for your detailed answer! I want to be clear about what I'm thinking so I'll lay it out below to make sure! And I have read the advice thread.
This is how I would spread this hypothetical $4/$8 game, with a 2-chip structure, with this set:
I agree that having more betting chips, and perhaps more 20x chips would be ideal, but I think it's quite playable. But since this is my first limit set, I open to feedback! And to be clear is it a "that'll work, but it's not perfect" bad idea, or "that's an awful idea run for the hills" bad idea?
- The betting chip would always be 1/4 of the big bet, determined before the game begins
- Each betting chip would be $2 ($1920)
- Each 20x chip would be worth $40 ($1200)
- Each 100x chip would be worth $200 ($2000)
- Total bank would be $5,120 - $640 per player at $4/$8 stakes, which seems like plenty, imo
- 8 players buy-in for $200+ (25BB+) - one rack of chips each, with 8 barrels ($320) remaining for bigger buy ins/top ups
- 20x get put in play after all betting chips are out - used for rebuys/change making with big stacks
- ditto for 100x chips
@BGinGA regarding my post(s) above, would a non-denom 960/30/10 breakdown (x/20x/100x) be functional for a single 8-handed table, using a 2-chip structure?
I've read what you've said (as well as others) and I appreciate your tens of thousands of hours of experience. I maybe have 50 hours of live limit experience. But it was mostly in a $2/4 game played with $2 chips (and a few $1 chips for small blinds, chopped pots, and tipping.) It always seemed fine to me. I accept that casinos and players alike believe that more chips equal bigger games. I accept that people believe this, but since I'm not influenced by that, I still question how true that is. But that's not my point.- What you are describing will work, but it is not the best idea for a few reasons. #1 is as I described above and for the reasons laid out above a 4/8 limit game should be played with $1 chips and not $2 chips ie a 4 chip structure and not a 2 chip structure.
This idea was borrowed from another thread - the 20x chip represents a barrel and the 100x chip is a rack when making change...those chips would never actually be in play. They’re just value storage and would only have to be “calculated” at cash out.I certainly wouldn't use chip values for weird amounts that no-one is used to like $40 and $200.
1st point here is that it is not that you want bigger pots, you want more fun for the weaker players and so do the Card Rooms. Weaker players keep coming back for more this way..........But it was mostly in a $2/4 game played with $2 chips (and a few $1 chips for small blinds, chopped pots, and tipping.) It always seemed fine to me. I accept that casinos and players alike believe that more chips equal bigger games. I accept that people believe this, but since I'm not influenced by that, I still question how true that is.
a 1 or 2 chip structure is not more fun just like a tough game is not more fun than a wild and crazy game.But that's not my point.
My point, or my question, is if a one chip or two chip structure might be better for home games, where you have players who aren't good at dealing, much less experienced with dealing or playing limit games. I do plan on trying to host a limit game this year, with (presumably) non-limit playing players. And I'm trying to figure out the best way to do it. And I feel like if I give them fifty cent chips and tell them they'll have to use four of them for a min bet, I'm going to get blank stares.
your right, nlhe players are mostly very anti limit. I believe that it mostly comes from ignorance and also because the only game they have ever seen on TV is nl.It will be a chore to get NLHE players to give limit games a shot and my concern is that 3 chip and 4 chip structures will seem confusing and unnecessary and not lend credibility to the idea that limit is cool. But I'm sure part of that is my skepticism regarding 3 and 4 chip structures.
This is not something to be concerned about. The only games that happens in is split pot games like O8 & stud 8. If you are playing mixed games then you really should either a) know the games well and deal yourself or b) hire a dealer that knows what they are doing. Otherwise just stick to limit hold-em as it is way less confusing.That and I can't imagine most of the guys I play with trying to award a quartered pot with 102 chips in it.
I introduced Limit to my NL players. From a betting perspective, they adapted very quickly. We had 3 tables going, all with different structures (2/4, 3/6 and 4/8). There were no issues. Their strategy may have been off, but they didn't have less fun.I've read what you've said (as well as others) and I appreciate your tens of thousands of hours of experience. I maybe have 50 hours of live limit experience. But it was mostly in a $2/4 game played with $2 chips (and a few $1 chips for small blinds, chopped pots, and tipping.) It always seemed fine to me. I accept that casinos and players alike believe that more chips equal bigger games. I accept that people believe this, but since I'm not influenced by that, I still question how true that is. But that's not my point.
My point, or my question, is if a one chip or two chip structure might be better for home games, where you have players who aren't good at dealing, much less experienced with dealing or playing limit games. I do plan on trying to host a limit game this year, with (presumably) non-limit playing players. And I'm trying to figure out the best way to do it. And I feel like if I give them fifty cent chips and tell them they'll have to use four of them for a min bet, I'm going to get blank stares.
It will be a chore to get NLHE players to give limit games a shot and my concern is that 3 chip and 4 chip structures will seem confusing and unnecessary and not lend credibility to the idea that limit is cool. But I'm sure part of that is my skepticism regarding 3 and 4 chip structures. That and I can't imagine most of the guys I play with trying to award a quartered pot with 102 chips in it.
I've read what you've said (as well as others) and I appreciate your tens of thousands of hours of experience. I maybe have 50 hours of live limit experience. But it was mostly in a $2/4 game played with $2 chips (and a few $1 chips for small blinds, chopped pots, and tipping.) It always seemed fine to me. I accept that casinos and players alike believe that more chips equal bigger games. I accept that people believe this, but since I'm not influenced by that, I still question how true that is. But that's not my point.
My point, or my question, is if a one chip or two chip structure might be better for home games, where you have players who aren't good at dealing, much less experienced with dealing or playing limit games. I do plan on trying to host a limit game this year, with (presumably) non-limit playing players. And I'm trying to figure out the best way to do it. And I feel like if I give them fifty cent chips and tell them they'll have to use four of them for a min bet, I'm going to get blank stares.
It will be a chore to get NLHE players to give limit games a shot and my concern is that 3 chip and 4 chip structures will seem confusing and unnecessary and not lend credibility to the idea that limit is cool. But I'm sure part of that is my skepticism regarding 3 and 4 chip structures. That and I can't imagine most of the guys I play with trying to award a quartered pot with 102 chips in it.
I appreciate all your answers except stick to limit holdem. I wouldn't even try to convince my NLHE guys to play limit holdem. I'm not saying LHE is no fun, but it's been said.I just feel like playing limit is the only way to get them to ply mixed games without taking all their money.1st point here is that it is not that you want bigger pots, you want more fun for the weaker players and so do the Card Rooms. Weaker players keep coming back for more this way
a 1 or 2 chip structure is not more fun just like a tough game is not more fun than a wild and crazy game.
Players catch on quickly to the betting pattern in limit and your players will too. There is a reason they do it the way they do.
Average home game players do not make good dealers. When I host a game I either get a dealer to deal for tips or deal myself and use a dealer button just like they do in a card room.
your right, nlhe players are mostly very anti limit. I believe that it mostly comes from ignorance and also because the only game they have ever seen on TV is nl.
This is not something to be concerned about. The only games that happens in is split pot games like O8 & stud 8. If you are playing mixed games then you really should either a) know the games well and deal yourself or b) hire a dealer that knows what they are doing. Otherwise just stick to limit hold-em as it is way less confusing.
I get your point though and the answer lies in not having everyone deal. Most players are bad players and worse dealers.
How many players? Which chip structure are you using 2/4, 3/6, 4/8? Take the last number of the structure and multiply it by 4 then by 3 that will represent all streets capped and give you the total number of chips that can be expended in a hand. So depending 48, 72 or 96. Again number of players makes a difference but your set could really only accommodate 9 players with each getting a rack. It’ll work but this situation can occur and you’ll be making change to the loser of the pot.So to my previous question - would my proposed 960/30/10 non-denominated set be playable?
@upNdown @Rhodeman77 @Poker Zombie
2/4 structure, max 8 players, preferred 6-7 players. Set would be for mixed & circus games.How many players? Which chip structure are you using 2/4, 3/6, 4/8? Take the last number of the structure and multiply it by 4 then by 3 that will represent all streets capped and give you the total number of chips that can be expended in a hand. So depending 48, 72 or 96. Again number of players makes a difference but your set could really only accommodate 9 players with each getting a rack. It’ll work but this situation can occur and you’ll be making change to the loser of the pot.
You could feasibly do a 1chip/2chip structure too if it came to that. Your blinds would just be 1 chip. It's just not as splashy that way2/4 structure, max 8 players, preferred 6-7 players. Set would be for mixed & circus games.
960 betting chips allows for up to:
With the 30 "value" chips (one 20x chip = one barrel), and 10 "rebuy" chips (one 100x chip = one rack) being used for rebuys, add-ons and change-making with the big stacks.
- 8 players - 120 workhorse chips per player
- 7 - 136 chips/per
- 6 - 160/per
Not necessarily. 2/4 can be Done with a rack per person. 3/6 is stretching a rack per person and 4/8 I would want at least 2 minimum or your gonna be making a lot of changeOkay, I've been lurking this thread a little and you guys are saying you actually need around 3000 chips to make a limit game more than "work"?