[bmwguy525]

I would say with your current number of players and the blind schedule, why not go with more chips? I would say I like configuration A better. With only 10 people there's no reason not to!

[CRD]

I concur sir!

Originally Posted by bmwguy525

I would say with your current number of players and the blind schedule, why not go with more chips? I would say I like configuration A better. With only 10 people there's no reason not to!

[MTUCache]

Count me in as one of the "Lots of Chips are Better" guys...

I like the 20x25, 20x100, 1x500 chip setup for T3000 (actually I like it with the 500, as a T2500, but whatever).

I hate those tournaments when you get like four different denoms in your starting stack, and only like 20 chips... Hell, by the time the blinds go by twice you don't even have enough chips to do tricks with! When I see those types of tournaments, where you've only got like a dozen chips, and you're constantly making change, I can't help but wonder what the host was thinking when they set it up.

The more chips on the table, the better... I've yet to run into a situation where a table collapsed or people didn't have room to see the action on the table. In general I'd think that most people like to have mountains of chips in front of them, just because it looks cool.

If and when the stacks of chips do start to get unwieldly, then you can color them up with no problems... but until people start complaining I'd prefer to have as many chips on the table as can fit.


Of course, seeing as how you're buying the chips, and they're probably not cheap, you'll have to make that type of judgement call for yourself.

[danopoker]

Originally Posted by MTUCache

I hate those tournaments when you get like four different denoms in your starting stack, and only like 20 chips... Hell, by the time the blinds go by twice you don't even have enough chips to do tricks with! When I see those types of tournaments, where you've only got like a dozen chips, and you're constantly making change, I can't help but wonder what the host was thinking when they set it up.

I'm one of those hosts who only gives you 26 chips to start with and I'll tell you what I'm thinking: I don't (yet) own a set of 2000+ chips. I've had a few tournaments with over 30 people and when it gets to like 36 or more, virtually every small-denom chip I own is in play at the start. My breakdown for starting stacks is this:

8 x T25
8 x T100
2 x T500
8 x T1000
24 chips T10000

So far no one has asked "Why don't we all start with twice as many chips" because the answer is obvious -- take a look around the room, buddy.

If I had more chips I might do something like the Horseshoe:

12 x T25
12 x T100
3 x T500
7 x T1000
34 chips T10000

... but this would be as far as I'd go. Giving every player 20 greens up front in a NL tournament just seems silly to me -- I don't want people to have to count a mess of chips to answer "how much do you have left?" when a more manageable stack makes counting almost instantaneous and less error-prone. Do you want to play poker, or watch some idiot drop chips one-by-one and count aloud every other time he's in a pot? Also, as players get eliminated people collect large stacks of small-denomination chips anyway.

Since I'm trying to play my game and run the tournament at the same time, the simpler the better. If you're running smaller tournaments, and like big stacks of chips, that's fine. But I'll tell you why you "only" get 26 chips at a Dano Poker event: it works well, and it works if there are 20 people or 35.