Tourney Tournament set with non denomination chips (2 Viewers)

[msuroo]

this thread is full of deliberate contentiousness from both sides and is now beyond worthlessness

*Shrug* most of it is in good sport. No one denies that it is possible to play with non-denominated chips, and that some people actually prefer the design aesthetics of non-denominated chips. Tagkanic will never convince everyone else of his argument that "because it is possible, denoms have absolutely no functional value", because it is facially ridiculous. The rest is just banter.

 

[Mr Winberg]

I see the conversation has been moved from “obviously people must have denoms otherwise hosting will be a nightmare” to “hey, whoa, WHOA, it’s just a preference.”

Actually I started there.

And I starter here:

I prefer chips with denoms

...and here:

The reasons I like denoms is [...] Highly subjective

 

[Poker Zombie]

This is a forum where people go for recommendations. To get the best of the best.

When someone says "Oh, the best tournament sety is no denoms", yes there is some contention - lest we allow a new chipper to waste their hard earned money on what 72% of chippers think is a bad idea.

May as well recommend drinking and driving. Sure, it's f*cking stupid, and most would not suggest it, but it can be done. No denoms on a tournament set? Sure, it's f*cking stupid, and most would not suggest it, but it can be done.

 

[upNdown]

lest we allow a new chipper to waste their hard earned money on what 72% of chippers think is a bad idea.

I’ll take the over

 

[JustinInMN]

Like, this says it all. If we bend and stretch and buy extra chips that happen to work for these two regs, we can get around it. But that doesn’t make denoms not useful lol.

So this!

I see the conversation has been moved from “obviously people must have denoms otherwise hosting will be a nightmare” to “hey, whoa, WHOA, it’s just a preference.”

I think you are straw-manning the first argument. I think most of us KNOW it's a preference, and KNOW it's possible to play without denominations. That doesn't mean you get to deny the many good reasons for having a preference for denominated chips. You have decided you find these reasons underwhelming, that's fine, but that doesn't make the rest of us wrong, which is what you seem insistent on proving.

 

[Taghkanic]

Straw man? No, I’m responding to comments like “It's nice to not need to explain the denoms each tourney.” Which makes little sense unless (a) one has new players every session, and (b) players with trouble remembering 4-6 colors even with a key card and the chip values being reinforced by the action every single hand.

Reviewing the whole thread, it’s striking how many people said that having denoms on the chips *does not prevent people from asking.* So it has to be a purely aesthetic preference for those advocating denoms, not a usability one.

 

[JRReynolds6181]

This is the most offensive concept since the “a hot dog is a sandwich” people started up. I’m literally swooning onto my swooning couch.

 

[Mr Winberg]

This is the most offensive concept since the “a hot dog is a sandwich” people started up. I’m literally swooning onto my swooning couch.

It's not. There, I said it!

 

[BGinGA]

Straw man? No, I’m responding to comments like “It's nice to not need to explain the denoms each tourney.” Which makes little sense unless (a) one has new players every session, and (b) players with trouble remembering 4-6 colors even with a key card and the chip values being reinforced by the action every single hand.

Reviewing the whole thread, it’s striking how many people said that having denoms on the chips *does not prevent people from asking.* So it has to be a purely aesthetic preference for those advocating denoms, not a usability one.

Troll post. I refuse to engage.

 

[Poker Zombie]

Nevermind Taghkanic. It's a poll. People pick the best, except Tag. He's the kind of guy that will look at 2 politicians and say "Candidate A has a lot of views I agree with, and Candidate B has a view I could live with if I had to. So I'll pick Candidate B, just to be different", then argue my point is right".

It's not right, but some people just are wired to be trolls.

 

[JRReynolds6181]

I’ll summarize my thoughts directly and briefly: if you sit down to a tournament, and the chips are non-denomination chips, stand up and leave, delete the host’s number from your contacts list, move on with your life, seek therapy for the psychological damage as needed.

 

[Pinball]

I think I got my needed answer

 

[Mr Winberg]

Troll post. I refuse to engage.

I’m responding to comments like “It's nice to not need to explain the denoms each tourney.” Which makes little sense unless (a) one has new players every session,

which is very common

and (b) players with trouble remembering 4-6 colors even with a key card and the chip values being reinforced by the action every single hand.

which as not as common, but still common. My tourneys have about 20 players +/- 5 on any given night, and when I was using undenominated chips there was always at least one who would keep asking.

So to "it makes litte sense", I say:

it’s striking how many people said that having denoms on the chips *does not prevent people from asking.* So it has to be a purely aesthetic preference for those advocating denoms, not a usability one

That conclusion is wrong. You're implying that the amount of people asking is kept constant. I think you know it isn't. If the number of people asking is reduced, then you cannot say "so it has to be purely aesthetic". Also, even if it was the same amount of people asking, the conclusion is still wrong if the total number of queries per night is reduced.

Here, pure common sense is consistent with my experience:

Common sense: The # of people asking is reduced, and for those still asking: the # of queries per person is reduced to 1.

My experience: From having a lot of players ask once per night, and a few players keep asking throughout the night, denominated chips meant that only 1 person has ever asked, and he asked just once. So 1 question after ~15 tourneys! And yes, I responded sarcastically.

Ergo:

So it has to be a purely aesthetic preference

If this was the case, anything wrong with that? For me, the aesthetics is a part of it.

 

[Mr Winberg]

I think I got my needed answer

Yeah, skip the denom

 

[JRReynolds6181]

Yeah, skip the denom

Did you read my post? If you “skip the denom” you will be generating existential crises in your players. Not cool, man.

on a serious note, always have a denom, do not mix sets. So one coordinated set with the same labels, clear denominations on the labels. Always. Thanks.

 

[legonick]

I wouldn't invest "real money" in a non-denom. tourney set.

Non-denom. dice chips, cheap stuff that we've all played with and many have probably started with...does it work? Yes. Will people ask what is worth what? Yes. Put it on your blinds screen for sure. Maybe a print a small "crib sheet" with values for each seat at your table.

But if you are a going to invest money in a nice set, why not have denom.s on the chips? Kill off those questions. A non-denom. "nice set" isn't that nice, LOL.

 

[philhut]

I was playing poker for a few years before the concept of having denominations on chips at home even crossed my mind. This was my first set that played many tourney's and cash games. Went to some denominated paulson pharaoh's after that....now on to other chips but still have the old nexgens., One day I will label them and use them as Roulette chips.....maybe.