[Ace-in-Space]

If the buy in is only $100 as most other suggested. The blinds would have to go down, maybe proportionally or something like $1/$2.

I just want to make sure every one is familiar with the maximum raise allow in pot limit, since it is more complicated than no limit where you could just go all in at anytime. Say the blinds are $1/$2 the maximum raise, I believe, is $7 if you are the first one in (calculated by first calling the BB of $2 and raise the now new pot amount of $5 which equals $7.) The minimum raise is $4 in this situation, which is twice the previous amount bet (in this case the BB is $2). Say the first player raise the max of $7 now there is $10 in the pot. If the next player wants to raise the maximum would have to put in $30. The simplest way to look at it is that the maximum raise for the first person is 3 times the pot amount if the previous person put in a pot size bet (with the exception to this 3 times rule is the preflop situation where the small blind is yet to act).

See the following link for more details:

http://www.pokertropolis.com/poker/game ... #pot_limit

I think I would be able to play, although I might have to skip Hagar's game.

 

[BigKahuna]

Good post Ace. Basically you have to calculate the pot size before you raise and that pot size would include your initial call of a previous bet which would then determine how much you can raise. Here is the example from Aces link:

For example, if the pot in the middle is $20 and the first player to act in the round bets $15, and the next player calls $15..... You are allowed a maximum raise of $65.

Here is how that amount is determined:
Pot in the middle $20
First player bets $15
Second player calls $15
Your call $15
Total in pot before your raise = $65
Therefore your raise can be anywhere from $15 - $65 more

The only question I have is whether or not you have to raise twice the previous bet like n0-limit, which in this case it would mean that you have to raise between $30 - $65.

Lastly, my preference would be to play higher limit games with cash value chips and larger starting stacks. My personal opinion is the 1,000 starting chips we have come accustomed to is a brutal way to play with many people busting out early because of bad stack control and it can leave people broke early in the game. Just my opinion.

 

[Ace-in-Space]

Yes, the minimum bet is the size of the big blind. The minimum raise is twice the previous bet.

Whether chips play at their cash value or not in theory make no difference. My pet peeve is that the current rebuy level is too low. I would like to allow rebuys sooner (i.e., at a higher remaining level) so players could protect their stack when they have a good hand. Otherwise short stacked players will be force to all in.

In my game I allow an optional half rebuy when you are down to less than 50% of the full buy in, and a full rebuy when you have less than 25% of the full buy in.

 

[BigKahuna]

I like that re-buy structure and may use it in my next game.

The other thought I had is what about a buy-in structure that rewards you for doing well with your initial buy-in. For example a $50 / $100 buy-in game. Everyone buys in initially for $50, and if you can do well with that stack through the night then great. But, if you bust or need to rebuy, then the amount goes up to $100 buy-in and you of course get $100 worth of chips. It would put you back on par with some bigger stacks but at a haftier price. My other thought is that it would take the initial sting out of the $100 buy-in concept.

Just a thought.

 

[Hagar]

There are some schools of thought (for a "limited" buy-in NL game) that allow a player to buy-in up to the maximum chip stack on the table.

I'm sure it works and I'm sure your "double re-buy" would work as well, but I like the fact that you have to earn your stack in our game - you can't show up with a bunch of money and just buy the game.

The game that BYOC grew from allowed people the option to "double buy" to start the game and limited to "single buys" for any re-buys and that seemed to work out OK.

(This is straying off topic a bit....)

 

[Quads]

it would take the initial sting out of the $100 buy-in concept.

How much to people take to a card room to play cards? $40? $80 dollars? What if you have to rebuy? Do you get a different amount of chips for surviving longer on your initial buy in?

My thought on the rebuy is this: I'm perfectly winning and able to allow players to rebuy / refill / get more chisp, whenever they wish. The problem with that is everyone else at the table bitches about people having or being able to buy this BIG stack and muscle the table around. But it's nothing different than a card room. I can sit down at a $6/12 table, buy in for 2 racks, play a hand and buy in for 2 more racks.

Perhaps in my home game I'll make it 50% (like Ace pointed out).

I personally want to play f'n some cards. Much like that of a card room. (minus the rake). Someone else vcan figure out all this weird $25 dollar 18.5% rebuy what ever the hell home grown ratio stuff.

 

[Dodger]

Chip stacks are not nearly as important in limit poker like the 6/12 reference in you post Quads. I have no problem with allowing players to refill to the maximum buy-in, as long as we go to the host is a banker not a dealer that has been mentioned in other posts. It would create to much work for the host, probably doubling the "re-buys" during the course of a game, if they were pulling double duty.
All three cardroom NL games I have played in allowed players to refill their stacks to the maximum buy-in at any point.

 

[BigKahuna]

Quads,

Have no idea what your post was about because I did not know which topics you were addressing besides liking the idea by Ace.

I will also just keep it simple but thought I would get some ideas about other buy-in structures. Also, will you continue to play with the 1,000 starting chips (.10 on the $1) when you go to $100 buy-in games or will you switch to cash play.

 

[Quads]

My post was in regard to getting some new "system" for rebuys which I would steer far far away from. If someone wants to rebuy, get your cash out, and the bank will give you chips. That's it.

As far as the chips, it depends on the game. Inflated chip stacks with the appropriate blinds are the same as playing anything else. (much like Ace said) However, my hope is that with my additional chips that are scheduled, I'll be able to play either way and spread two tables.

At the end of the day, it's just math.
Future games on my part will be higher buy ins so a $100 dollar chip is either going to be $10 or $25 bucks cash money. Depending on the buy in. Untimatly, my chips will support either, but I don't think in the real world, it makes any difference in the game, providing the blinds are appropriate.

 

[Hagar]

The thing that would make it hard to allow a "refill" at any level is the fact that we normally play with "non cash" values. Partial "refills" at the $25 games wold be very impractical. ("I need $350 in chips to get back to level." That'll be $8.75.) Not to mention the pressure it puts on the banker - so many more transactions. And Dodger is right that it would disrupt the game a lot more if "refills"are allowed even if the bank is not the dealer.

Half rebuys would work at the $30 and up levels (as far as "ease of cash handling") but disruptions would still be more than normal.

I'd suggest that if you're going to allow "refills" (stacking back up to the original buy-in) at any time (like the NL games in casinos do), that you go with the "real cash" games that BK is proposing. At least there is not a conversion problem with this method.

 

[Ace-in-Space]

I think everyone agrees that we cannot operate like cardrooms which allow you to refill to the initial buy in at any time. However, here are my suggestions:

For the $25 buy in games (say for $1000 in chips):

Option to rebuy partially at $10 for $400 in chips when you have less than $600 in chips.
Option to rebuy fully at $25 for $1000 in chips when you have less than $300 in chips (this part is unchanged from the normal game).

For $30, $40, $50, $100 games:

Option for a half rebuy when you have less than 50% of the full rebuy in chips.
Option for a full rebuy when you have less than 25% of the full rebuy in chips.

I concur with Hagar regarding no double rebuys (his reason is that you can't buy into a big stack, you have to earn it) as long as when you get a full rebuy you have enough ammo vis a vis the blind structure (i.e., our normal game of $1000 in chips with $10/$25 blinds you can defend a good hand after you get a full rebuy).

 

[Guest]

Hey Quads,

This might be a good time to take advantage of the chip rack and money drops on your tables you just got. This may help manage a better transaction for rebuys and addons. The initial buyins could be bagged as usual but all other transaction on the felt with witnesses. An error I'm sure would be spotted, plus you could drop the money. If the rack gets light, time, refil rack.

Just an idea :idea: