single Chip strutcure limit games. I concede the previous debate.

[steamboatin]

That is exactly what I said about six months ago in the previous debate. I was wrong also.

[SenecaJim]

you just made my point. It's a low limit game, period. gonna be loose. That was not a bad beat story. That guy was gonna leave and i talked him to staying another round til the blind got to him.

You probably play much higher stakes than me, at 5-10 live that is not a bad beat, that's just another day in the shop.I love those guys. Players will whine how they just can't win at 5-10, they need higher stakes ( aka. better players ? ) fine man, get out of a weak player's seat and let him in.

[MrDannimal]

Just as important (if not more so) is what the options are in the room/area.

Detroit/Windsor 5/10 is played with reds, and is loose/action filled (usually. There is the occational tight table, but it's rare).

Why? Because the only other options are 3/6 or 10/20 (3/6 isn't even an option at Motor City). There's no game that generates "big" pots with smaller chips to compare it to, so the 5/10 plays "normal".

I actually discussed this with a dealer the other night while waiting for my 5/10 game to start up. They've just added $20 chips for the 20/40, 40/80 (and I suppose the big pot limit/no-limit games) games, and I mentioned that it seemed like a bad idea for the 20/40 game because it would kill action to cut the # of chips by 4, though I also noted it made sense for the dealers because it's much easier to deal with pots (some of the 20/40 pots are just a hassle to manuver and/or stack).

If you put a 4/8 with $1 or $2 chips next to a 5/10 with $5 chips, there's probably no arguing that subconscious nature makes the 4/8 a looser game. On it's own, though, a 5/10 game with red chips isn't tight because of the chips.

[smoore]

[ QUOTE ]
How cute. All these dismissive opinions *and* a thinly-veiled bad beat post.

How about this: say somehow we could construct two very similar 10-20 games; both would be stocked with good, loose, passive players, and the only difference would be that one would play with $5 chips and the other would play with $10 chips. I'd bet that the former would play measurably looser. Would anyone here take the other side of this bet?

--Nate

[/ QUOTE ]

I will take this bet, but I'm going to need 12:1 on my money. I figure 1 out of 11 of 1/2 chip games will play just as loose as the 2/4 chip game.

[steamboatin]

That is what I believed to be true also but I was also basing my posistion upon one location. I hate to break it to you but your sample size is too small.

[MuckerFish]

Steamboatin-
I learned the same lesson as you. I used to play a lot of 5/10 at the Taj, and thought it was a good game. Hah! That rock garden is generally filled with old-timers looking whittle away the hours. It's probably safer for your bankroll to learn live poker in that game than playing 2/4!
Anyone who disagrees with the 'single chip' arguement is too smart for their own good. The masses dont realize that the money may be the same, they want big pots!! Casinos know this, that's why 6/12 and the like are frequently spread on the rail. Show the public action!!
If you ever get the chance, play a pink chip game somewhere, action galore!!

[AKQJ10]

The real question is, is this phenomenon strong enough that we should buy in in white for the $2/4 and $4/8 games? Or will bringing white chips to the table call attention to the phenomenon, which will make people tighten up?

My guess is the latter for the first hour and the former after that, but I'm eager to hear other opinions.

(And yeah, my bankroll's taken a beating, so I will be at $2/4 this weekend.)

[brokedickrooster]

I was playing the Foxwoods 4-8 yesterday and it is plenty loose without using white chips. It wasnt uncommon to see 5 or six to the flop in a reraised pot, including such stellar holdings a 3 5 off, 9 2, and 10 4.

[wslee00]

you know what - I think it's just the fact that most of the multi chip games at the lower limits are in the cali casinos, which are notoriously loose to begin with. Whether the looseness is caused by the players or the chip structures is up for argument, but that's like asking, which came first the chick or the egg...

[AKQJ10]

[ QUOTE ]
you know what - I think it's just the fact that most of the multi chip games at the lower limits are in the cali casinos, which are notoriously loose to begin with.

[/ QUOTE ]

Well, that's a fair point -- it is the California rooms that have the most explicitly multi-chip structures. In my limited experience they also aggressively color "wrong-colored" chips out of the pot.

However, that doesn't apply in the pink-chip game, and there's other anecdotal evidence for the "more chips=looser" hypothesis. Similarly, the $9/18 game replaced other California games and apparently is looser.

Perhaps if Dr. Ferguson ever migrates from game theory and math to poker psychology, he can do some research in this area.... Or Dr. Schoonmaker.

On another subthread, I agree that $4/8 is plenty loose as it is (and $2/4 even more consistently so); maybe with white chips we could get family pots each hand!

I also heard a FW rumor about spreading $10/20 with the $2 fox chips; that could be fun!