Tourney Why start at 25/50 rather than 5/10? (2 Viewers)

[ChaosRock]

That's only because of your blind progression. Change 80/160 to 75/150 and now you are at 6 levels T5 3 levels T25.

For sure!! I can always change the blinds to fit whatever we want the outcome to be!

That's why I have to compare apples to apples...

I posted my opinion on the issue based on my experience playing both T5s and T25s and some numbers to back up that experience... At the end it's not a huge difference... I personally prefer to play T25s much more than T5s because of the awkwardness of the blinds and color-ups... I like to structure with 50/33/50/33% progression...

 

[Sal Bandini]

Agreed, but still more inefficient.


And since it's a common discussion theme around here, here's my breakdown for T25-T100-T500-T2000 set:

12x T25
12 x T100
9 x T500
2 x T2000
------------
35 chips = T10000

When the T1000 chip is replaced by a T2000, the importance of T500 chips is dramatically increased. All color-ups should be performed with T2000 chips.

Since we're making custom denoms (T2000) let's take this exercise one step further.

Start with T5 but instead of T25 make a T20. Now you only need 8 T5 and 8 T20. Then use T100 and T500.

Now you can really confuse your players.

 

[Sal Bandini]

For sure!! I can always change the blinds to fit whatever we want the outcome to be!

That's why I have to compare apples to apples...

I posted my opinion on the issue based on my experience playing both T5s and T25s and some numbers to back up that experience... At the end it's not a huge difference... I personally prefer to play T25s much more than T5s because of the awkwardness of the blinds and color-ups... I like to structure with 50/33/50/33% progression...

I don't agree about changing the blinds to whatever outcome you want. I think you should structure your blinds to whatever denominations you are using, that's why I think the 80/160 should not be in that structure.

 

[BGinGA]

I don't agree about changing the blinds to whatever outcome you want. I think you should structure your blinds to whatever denominations you are using, that's why I think the 80/160 should not be in that structure.

Agree. Chaos, both structures require a 25% increase to work properly. It's just a matter of when it gets inserted. T5 schedule works best if that jump is at 75/150. Still apples-to-apples to me.

 

[ChaosRock]

I don't agree about changing the blinds to whatever outcome you want. I think you should structure your blinds to whatever denominations you are using, that's why I think the 80/160 should not be in that structure.

I was making a general comment based on the comparison between the T5s and T25s... You argue for 75/150... Some people would argue for 25/50 instead of 20/40 or 50/100 instead of 40/80, or all of the above... I am NOT arguing which is the best structure for the T5s! I am just using the SAME blind progression to make the comparison as close as possible... Clear?

 

[Sal Bandini]

I was making a general comment based on the comparison between the T5s and T25s... You argue for 75/150... Some people would argue for 25/50 instead of 20/40 or 50/100 instead of 40/80, or all of the above... I am NOT arguing which is the best structure for the T5s! I am just using the SAME blind progression to make the comparison as close as possible... Clear?

So start with the more efficient blind structure for T5 and then use same numbers for T25 and see if the T25 now becomes more inefficient.

 

[ChaosRock]

I did not start with the structure of the T25s and tried to adapt the T5s to it...

I started with my preferred progression of 50/33/50/33%, minimizing the 25% jumps... Starting at any point, T1, T5, T25, T100 or whatever...

And as BG said, even with the 75/150 the color ups are a bit more awkward than the T25s, to "ME"...

Btw, the fact it's easier to structure T25s with 50/33/50/33% is one of the reasons I like it better...

 

[BGinGA]

yeah i would never use my cash chips as tourney chips unless they were played at face value in the tourney as well.

I've actually done ^this before on several occasions -- $100 entry, T100 in tournament chips using 25c, $1, $5, and $25 chips (12-12-7-2).

Normally when players use smaller denominations (especially T1 or smaller) in a tournament setting, play becomes more loose in general -- because the amounts being wagered seem 'small' in comparison to what they normally would use.

But when those denominations mirror actual cash, players tend to get tighter -- suddenly a T40 call represents real money -- $40 in this case -- and I've found that it definitely affects play.


Somewhat related to why casinos use checks in the first place and not cash -- to distance people from considering their bets as risking real money.

 

[ChaosRock]

To Sal:

 

[BGinGA]

And still more inefficient, imo.....

 

[Sal Bandini]

Fair enough.

Best thing to do IMO is do T25 but ditch the T1000 and replace it with T2000.

Disclaimer: My tourney set is actually T25 T100 T500 T1000, even though I hate the 2x jump. I found it's easier to just conform to what most people want.

 

[jbutler]

Fair enough.

Best thing to do IMO is do T25 but ditch the T1000 and replace it with T2000.

that might be preferable from an efficiency perspective, but people are dumb as hell and asking them to do math with T2K chips is just inviting delays and problems imo.

 

[10centguitar]

i don't run and very, very rarely play tournaments, but of course, as a proper chipaholic, i'm pretty regularly refining my preferred tourney breakdowns for a set that i don't need and will not use. i've always been curious why the vast majority of tournament structures start at the 25/50 blind level and therefore have T25 chips as the lowest denom in play.

most of the tourneys i have played in and enjoyed used a 200BB starting stack, so i'll proceed with that as the norm. from what i can tell, starting with T5 chips would almost always eliminate the need to make the awkward jump between T500 and T1000 chips. even if you run a 30-man tourney starting with T2000 stacks, you'll only need 120 T500 chips in play at the end and therefore there would be no need to go to the next denom.

i would think there's a reason so many more games use T25 as the lowest denom, but i can't figure out why that might be other than that it's what people are accustomed to.

anyone have any thoughts?

Definitely the WSOP, however in the spirit of the series, I think its very cool to have the starting chips represent real money. This assumes of course that your set has the capability.

So many chip enthusiasts have micro cash sets, why not use them for a tourney? Or if you have just a normal cash set, ($1, $5, $25, and $100) use a T1000 tourney schedule and divide by 10 for a $100 BI. If you got rich buddies, do a $1000 buy-in and give $1000 in chips. That way the money is felt.

I have had this out with friends for awhile, so please no one be offended. If you have a high denom tourney set, there is nothing wrong with that.

But if your players just want to feel like ballers, well then let them play cash games and rake the crap out of their ego-driven donk action. Or find cooler buddies.

Meatball: I took first! i was small stack forever, then I doubled up to 1.5 million, and then I squashed the last guy with Ace-high on the wettest board for a final chip stack of almost 2.3 million!

Life Hero: How much did you cash for?

Meatball: $200, but with my buy-in and re-buy I won $100...

I mean seriously, replace your sunglasses and headphones for a wizard outfit, go play D&D and call it a day.

My negativity aside, the only issue someone might gripe about besides the lack of starstruck awe at having a huge denom of chips would be security.
But counting chips at the end of the tourney does wonders.

Or you could just always get another micro set. : )

 

[Bloody Marvelous]

The reason the T10,000 is more efficient is because T100 = 4x T25, whereas T25 = 5x T5. Since the SB is always double the BB, there is never a point where the T5 and T25 chips match up, whereas the T25 and T100 do.

While you run into the same problem with the T100 and T500, players will likely have been eliminated by that point, and there will be more chips per player. Look at the WSOP where everyone starts with 12/12/3/12/3 = 42 chips, and on day 4 everyone's sitting with 100s of chips, and by day 8 everyone's sitting with 1,000s. (Though this is also due to the fact that they use antes in the WSOP, which keeps the lower denomination chips around longer).

That's why starting with 1:4 in chip denominations is more efficient than 1:5. It requires fewer chips of the lowest denominations for the blinds, and that means you don't need to make change as often.

Since we're throwing in schematics, here's a comparison with 50/100 and 75/150 blinds in the T2,000 (which I think is a fairer apples and apples comparison since we're using the same progression of 50/100, 75/150, 100/200 in both schedules).

And just for fun, here's a comparison between a T10,000 home game, and the WSOP Main Event:

 

[Poker Zombie]

I hate it when I'm late to the conversation, especially when it took so many posts to reach Paulo's conclusion. Starting at 25s makes it cheaper to buy chips.

I've run tournaments for 9 years with a 5/10 starting stack using custom slugged chips. Obviously I didn't know what I was doing, andI had never played in a casino at that point, o I just picked 5 as my smallest denom. When It came time to buy CPC chips, I needed to trim costs any way I could, except in design, because I wasn't going to regret not going with something I loved. The 5's got cut because they spend most of the night in a box, colored up at a 5-1 ratio.

Not all of my players love the switch. The 5-10 starting blind allowed the calling stations to play more hands before realizing a depletion of chips. Now with 3 sets of chips to put into play, I have lots of options. On ladies' night where play is much looser I start the 5s. All other nights the 25s are the smallest denom as those players are more likely to enter a casino someday, and may appreciate the nicer chips more.

 

[jbutler]

I hate it when I'm late to the conversation, especially when it took so many posts to reach Paulo's conclusion. Starting at 25s makes it cheaper to buy chips.

When It came time to buy CPC chips, I needed to trim costs any way I could...

what starting stacks do you use for both levels that allow for fewer chips starting with T25s?

 

[Chicken Rob]

The advantage in my mind to start with 5/10, is that it probably makes it easier to have 2k chips instead of 1k chips, as that will function more as a "big chip" rather than a workhorse. I find the 500 -> 1k jump annoying personally, but understand why it is used.

Following SalBandini's structure advice above and then replacing 1k chips with 2k chips seems like a win to me.

 

[TexRex]

I answered a question about WHY the 25/50 is more common. Then I answered JButler's question about why 25 required fewer chips than 5 (and while I was at it, compared 1 as well). There is absolutely nothing wrong with starting at 1 or 5, but 25 typically requires fewer chips.

For something like the WSOP, and they did use the 22 chip scenario in the Main Event at least some years, it made little sense to have a lot of money tied up in chips that are coming off the table first. As the blinds go up, people get KO'd, their higher value chips are added to the mix of other chips on the table. Lower value chips are already coming off and being colored up with higher value chips. As a result, the WSOP could purchase way fewer chips than what we might use in our home tournaments. So I wasn't proposing that for a home tournament.

I have used those numbers for home tournaments, but we always have some extra higher value chips available. It's not as hard to play as it might appear, but I'll admit more higher value chips are easier to work with.

Sal asked a question about color ups. When purchasing a chip set, I plan to color up one chip with the next higher value chip, however, that's not really they way we do it. I also cut the number of color up of 500s in half because half the time you could color up with a 1000. If you don't buy the chip set that way, you might not be able to start with say 100s instead of 25s when you want to use higher numbers. But the actual color up is more efficient when you use higher values. I don't use as high a value as BG, but we don't usually color up with the next color either.

 

[BGinGA]

that might be preferable from an efficiency perspective, but people are dumb as hell and asking them to do math with T2K chips is just inviting delays and problems imo.

I'm guessing you've never played in a tournament that used a T2000 as one of the higher denominations. It's really not a problem. Most of the blind levels when it sees heavy use are such that it makes a lot of sense (1000/2000, 1500/3000, 2000/4000, 3000/6000, 4000/8000, etc.).

 

[ChaosRock]

Fair enough.

Best thing to do IMO is do T25 but ditch the T1000 and replace it with T2000.

Disclaimer: My tourney set is actually T25 T100 T500 T1000, even though I hate the 2x jump. I found it's easier to just conform to what most people want.

That's my preferred break down as well (25/100/500/2000/10000)... Butler's point is well taken about people's difficulty with T2000 but they get it eventually... In a league, in just a few games they would be playing easily... And I love the fact I have T20K stacks with two barrels: 12/12/9/7!!!

 

[jbutler]

I'm guessing you've never played in a tournament that used a T2000 as one of the higher denominations. It's really not a problem. Most of the blind levels when it sees heavy use are such that it makes a lot of sense (1000/2000, 1500/3000, 2000/4000, 3000/6000, 4000/8000, etc.).

no but i've heard from those who have, most recently here in this thread. and i've never gone wrong underestimating the abilities of poker players.

 

[BGinGA]

The advantage in my mind to start with 5/10, is that it probably makes it easier to have 2k chips instead of 1k chips, as that will function more as a "big chip" rather than a workhorse. I find the 500 -> 1k jump annoying personally, but understand why it is used.

With a T5 tournament set, you need to have a REALLY large field or REALLY large starting stacks to reach a point where T2000 chips would be used (or even T1000 chips). T500 is usually large enough.

 

[Sal Bandini]

I think color-ups are critical to the discussion, as are re-buys. All of the discussion is how you would have fewer chips in the STARTING stacks of T25 versus T5. Nobody buys chips sets to only cover the starting stacks. So what is practical minimum chip set needed for 10 players T20,000 and then again T2000? You will most likely need more chips to color-up the T20,000.

For re-buys in T20,000 you would need minimum 4 - T5,000. For T2,000 you could get away with 2 - T1,000, which would again be that horrible 2x jump.

 

[BGinGA]

no but i've heard from those who have, most recently here in this thread.

Not so. There were two people who stated they had experienced problems using a T2500 chip (which I abhor and agree causes issues), and two people who had used T2000 chips with no problems. Everyone else who posted an opinion in that thread had never used T2000 chips.

 

[jbutler]

Not so. There were two people who stated they had experienced problems using a T2500 chip (which I abhor and agree causes issues), and two people who had used T2000 chips with no problems. Everyone else who posted an opinion in that thread had never used T2000 chips.

fair enough. you can feel free to group me with those who have never used them and don't wish to.

 

[BGinGA]

You must hate $20 chips, too.

 

[ChaosRock]

I think color-ups are critical to the discussion, as are re-buys. All of the discussion is how you would have fewer chips in the STARTING stacks of T25 versus T5. Nobody buys chips sets to only cover the starting stacks. So what is practical minimum chip set needed for 10 players T20,000 and then again T2000? You will most likely need more chips to color-up the T20,000.

For re-buys in T20,000 you would need minimum 4 - T5,000. For T2,000 you could get away with 2 - T1,000, which would again be that horrible 2x jump.

Right comparison would be T20K with T4K, right? 200BB each? In that case re-buys would be the same 4 chips (4x5K or 4x1K).

Quick calculation of minimum number of chips for T20K and T4K, four re-buys each and color ups with higher denoms: 383 for T20K and 426 for T4K. I'm using 12/12/3/7/2 and 15/13/6/6 break downs... Count goes down to 303 for 8/8/4/6/2 and 357 for 10/10/7/6 also with four re-buys and color ups with higher denom...

 

[jbutler]

You must hate $20 chips, too.

don't hate them, but definitely prefer $25s.

 

[Sal Bandini]

Right comparison would be T20K with T4K, right? 200BB each? In that case re-buys would be the same 4 chips (4x5K or 4x1K).

Quick calculation of minimum number of chips for T20K and T4K, four re-buys each and color ups with higher denoms: 383 for T20K and 426 for T4K. I'm using 12/12/3/7/2 and 15/13/6/6 break downs...

Yeah T4K, not T2K, my bad.

I'm really enjoying this thread. I got nothing done today, although I wasn't motivated to begin with.

 

[ChaosRock]

Yeah T4K, not T2K, my bad.

I'm really enjoying this thread. I got nothing done today, although I wasn't motivated to begin with.

Hahahahaha... Glad you're not blaming us Sal! LOL!!!