A pretty straightforward question, would you prefer the games to be $2/$4 instead of $2/$5? I'm guessing the origin of a non 1-unit/2-unit blind scheme was simply to remove a large amount of low denomination chips from the table. Assuming a typical $200-$500 or $200-$1,000 buy-in spread, do you think the games would play differently, for better or for worse?

I've played in places with 2/4 and 3/6 (this is NL) and they both suck. It's a terrible idea imo due to having to make change continously.

I thought they made it 2/5 nl so there's no confusion with 2/4 limit.

If they gave everyone a necessary amount of $1 chips (probably 40 due to tipping), I wonder if you'd still dislike it as much.

Certainly a possibility.

I would hate having all those 1$ chips at the table. Plus I feel like more people would raise to 18$ and 22$. I think the 5 works much better.

I played both 2/4 and 2/5 and they both played fine "chip-wise".

But i think recreational player prefer 2/5 for the same reason their prefer to play with 20bb@NL100 instead of 100bb@NL25.

The 2/5 game should play faster, if played right this should be a red chip game, the 2/4 game would allow players to bet $22, $26 all slowing the game down, dealer would have to be making change all night.

And the proposed solution of giving every player $40 in white doesn't help. Sure it would help if players all acted rationally but they don't. Its very common for me to watch a player in a $1-$2 game who has plenty of white chips continue to not use them to make his bets correct....so I keep making change. Then after he has amassed a huge pile whites he will use them all in one hand.

It would be horrible like $1/3 is horrible. Change always needs to be made.

This is a terrible idea. There is no reason to have more than the absolute minimum number of white chips in play for a $500 game. Would anyone want to be sitting with $40 in white chips unless they are playing 2/4 fixed limit? A $4 Big blind would maximize the amount of change that dealers have to make...basically they would be breaking down a red chip for every player on every limped hand. The only effect of this change would be to slow down the game.

Human beings are funny animals. For whatever reason, people playing NL games hate $1 chips. Occassionally, I will play in a 1/2 NL game and will ask players to get $20-$30 in white chips so the game can move smoothly, and no one ever does it. They say, "I hate white chips!" Which just is stupid because the game is $1/$2 NL is it not.

Trying to explain to them that we can get an extra 5 or 6 hands per hour is just an argument they don't even bother to try to understand. They just don't care or think about those things. Which is why the casino can bend 1/2NL players over with that rake.

In most casinos, the 1/2NL rake is almost the same (if not the same) as the 2/5NL rake LOL.

I prefer $1/$3 over $1/$2, because this game
use $1 and $5 chips. With $1/$3 when a player tosses out
a $5 chip pre-flop it can only be a call.

There is no confusion and resulting argument. "That's a call sir ..... but I meant to raise" etc.

Not a problem with $2/$4 or $2/$5 ... I guess.

But ... I think players over defend the small blind in the $2/$5 and $1/$3 structures ... they make more mistakes.

A 2/4 NLHE game would be horrible and slow for obvious reasons, like the slowness of the dealer constantly having to break $5 chips.

I, for one, always come to a 1/2 NL game with at least 20 whites. The dealers love me.

OP--

Back in 2005, Foxwoods spread 2-4 NL. It didn't work well: the game played smaller, change was constantly needed, and the players were always annoyed they weren't playing 2-5.

All my best,

--Nate

I may be wrong but how would dealers be tipped and jackpots collected without $1 chips? Would everyone tip $5 a hand -doubtful.

dollar chips still end up being used in a 2/5 game.

If your question was more theoretical, I guess players would just tip only after a very large pot, or after a nice run, or whatever.

I see many reason why the $1 chips are bad ideas and I agree they shouldn't be used for betting purposes. Now for the ones that want to use them can you please give me a reason why you think they are better for the game, it is clear they will slow the game. What advantage do you think they would have? It would let you bet exactly 42% of the pot.

The most headaches at the casinos are always at the 1/2 NL game and the players that move up to 2/5 thinking that they can reinvent the game.

the buy-ins are always based on the big blind. would that mean the max b.i. would be 400 instead of 5 (in most locations) in that case I can see how it can play a little smaller.

its all about the 5/5

5/5/5 ... includes $5 ante!

no

play at Mandalay Bay if you like 2/4 NL.

There is no confusion. Oversized chip rule. The player should learn the rules.

This game has been dead for about 2 years. It MIGHT go once in a great while but for all intents and purposes, it's been dead for awhile. Saw that coming a mile away for most of the reasons stated above.