Starting Chip Counts
Okay, as some of you know I organize tourneys on a fairly regular basis. Lately, I’ve had some of my regular players complaining about starting chip counts. I always try to make room for lots of play and blinds are not really an issue. The problem is regards to the actual chip count.
I was wondering if you prefer starting with higher dollar amount or a smaller one in chips. I have been using a $100 as the starting amount because I thought was neat how represented the actual dollars in my last larger tourney. It seems some just like the “delusion†of have $1,000+ in chips front of them.
I was wondering if you prefer starting with higher dollar amount or a smaller one in chips. I have been using a $100 as the starting amount because I thought was neat how represented the actual dollars in my last larger tourney. It seems some just like the “delusion†of have $1,000+ in chips front of them.
Comments
I think people are just lulled into the enormous chip amounts seen on TV which are created since (as you have attempted to do yourself) the initial stacks at the largest tournaments are often equal to the buy-ins. This is traditional more than anything. There's no special reason for the initial stack to be equal to the numerical amount of the buy-in.
There is nothing I can think of other than psychological factors* and availability of poker chips that says that one scaling of chip amounts is better or worse than another.**
ScottyZ
*That is, someone may think $10 is a puny bet when the initial stacks are $100, but that $1,000 is an enormous bet when the initial stack sizes are $10,000. Obviously, these are exactly the same thing in tournament reality.
**Okay, okay. The scaling should also not be done so that the game will be mathemetically challenging. Initial round blinds of 0.00000125/0.0000025, or 7.5 billion/15 billion are probably best avoided.
It could become 'the new black'.
People are funny :banghead: