is $200 a decent buy in amount

[jingber05]

for a $25 min table or is it 2 little?

 

[paddywhack]

for a $25 min table or is it 2 little?

What an odd first post???

It's definitely enough for the first hand, so sure.....

 

[kewljason]

for a $25 min table or is it 2 little?

Holy mackeral, A new poster! No introduction? Please let me be the first to offer you a grand and glorious "welcome". :laugh:

 

[jingber05]

Holy mackeral, A new poster! No introduction? Please let me be the first to offer you a grand and glorious "welcome". :laugh:

thank you but is it enough for a 6 deck 25 dollar min?

 

[swamper]

Doesn't seem like enough of a buy in to me.

 

[kewljason]

thank you but is it enough for a 6 deck 25 dollar min?

Sure. Read the board. Apparently you can have multiple 5 figure winning sessions stemming from an BR of absolute zero.

http://www.blackjackinfo.com/bb/showthread.php?t=21762

 

[Midwestern]

thank you but is it enough for a 6 deck 25 dollar min?

unfortunately no my friend, $200 is no where near enough for 25 dollar minimum. $200 is only eight bets, so a quick back of the envelope math shows that if over the course of an hour (flat betting $25) you play 100 hands and the dealer wins 54 and you win 46, you will be busted out.

heres I calculate a proper buy-in for ONE HOUR of play:

to calculate your potential wins/losses per hour, take the minimum bet*11

this means that on a $25 dollar table, proper playing will leave you, On average, somewhere between +275 or -275 per hour.

meaning that if you are going to withstand any kind of normal variation in your chip stack without a short stack cramping your style, you want at least 2x of (minbet*11)


$200 buy in is just about right for a 5 dollar minimum.

 

[kewljason]

unfortunately no my friend, $200 is no where near enough for 25 dollar minimum. $200 is only eight bets, so a quick back of the envelope math shows that if over the course of an hour (flat betting $25) you play 100 hands and the dealer wins 54 and you win 46, you will be busted out.

heres I calculate a proper buy-in for ONE HOUR of play:

to calculate your potential wins/losses per hour, take the minimum bet*11

this means that on a $25 dollar table, proper playing will leave you, On average, somewhere between +275 or -275 per hour.

meaning that if you are going to withstand any kind of normal variation in your chip stack without a short stack cramping your style, you want at least 2x of (minbet*11)


$200 buy in is just about right for a 5 dollar minimum.

Who says you have to play an hour? You can always buy in for more ya know. I buy in for $100 on a $25 table.

 

[swamper]

Who says you have to play an hour? You can always buy in for more ya know. I buy in for $100 on a $25 table.

One of the benifits of small buy-ins is that you establish a "loser" image as you will most likely have to buy-in multiple times. At times I have even had the pit feeling bad for me because I keep buying in only to come out ahead with my max bets out in the end. I rarely play for an hour.

 

[jingber05]

Who says you have to play an hour? You can always buy in for more ya know. I buy in for $100 on a $25 table.

but if 200 is my whole amount for the day..then would i be able to still buy in? or is buying in for the 10 min better?

 

[Midwestern]

Who says you have to play an hour? You can always buy in for more ya know. I buy in for $100 on a $25 table.

Agree-- and I often do the same thing. But i got the impression that the OP was asking for a good number of chips on table + Cash in pocket.

i.e. session bankroll it would be unwise to sit down at a $25 table hoping to play accurately having only come to the casino with 200.

 

[Midwestern]

but if 200 is my whole amount for the day..then would i be able to still buy in? or is buying in for the 10 min better?

ok so i definitely understood your question right. $200 is definitely not enough to play properly at $25 stakes, maybe even the $10 stakes. if $200 is your whole amount for the day, you want to play a 5$ table..... that is, if you want to play "properly". playing a $25 dollar table you would be effectively "gambling" no matter how good you are at counting cards!

 

[The Chaperone]

It's not enough for a $5 table. It might not even be enough for one hand. Even if your SuperMax bet is like $70, you can't even split and then double after split lol.

 

[Midwestern]

It's not enough for a $5 table. It might not even be enough for one hand. Even if your SuperMax bet is like $70, you can't even split and then double after split lol.

this man speaks the truth

 

[HockeXpert]

You can always buy in for more ya know. I buy in for $100 on a $25 table.

I personally don't like to have a reason to buy in frequently for 2 reasons, 1. it slows the game down and b. many pc's are lazy and don't like to have to keep walking over to the table or have their chit chats interrupted.

I certainly don't buy in for $1,000 at a $5 table but I do have preset buy in amounts based on how I plan on playing so that usually the only additional buy ins are for the multiple split/double hands or really crappy variance. I don't have a magic formula to determine the amounts I buy in for. I have learned from the school of hard knocks over the years and make adjustments as needed to reduce my buy ins while buying in for amounts typical for the units/table limits I am playing.

To the OP, buying in for $200 at a $25 table is too little imo. What are you going to do after you lose a few hands of $25-$50 and the count calls for a $150 bet? Are you going to put your remaining green in and slide another hundred or two cash in?:laugh: I've never seen a ploppy do that!

 

[blackjackomaha]

I personally don't like to have a reason to buy in frequently for 2 reasons, 1. it slows the game down and b. many pc's are lazy and don't like to have to keep walking over to the table or have their chit chats interrupted.

I certainly don't buy in for $1,000 at a $5 table but I do have preset buy in amounts based on how I plan on playing so that usually the only additional buy ins are for the multiple split/double hands or really crappy variance. I don't have a magic formula to determine the amounts I buy in for. I have learned from the school of hard knocks over the years and make adjustments as needed to reduce my buy ins while buying in for amounts typical for the units/table limits I am playing.

To the OP, buying in for $200 at a $25 table is too little imo. What are you going to do after you lose a few hands of $25-$50 and the count calls for a $150 bet? Are you going to put your remaining green in and slide another hundred or two cash in?:laugh: I've never seen a ploppy do that!

There are plops that'll buy in more if they "think" they'll get lucky. I generally buy in for 20 units, and if I need more, just spit out some ploppy lines and you're golden. Especially if you're ratholing, "buying in" more can be to your advantage.

 

[Ferretnparrot]

200 isnt a good amount unless you plan to only play 25/hnd.

If you are goign to raise your bet at some time in the future mid-shoe, you likely wont have enough cash to do that, and riasing your bet while buying in for more money is a bit akward.

Id buy in for 500 or 600, and I would Re-buy in later for like 1k-1.5k

 

[Gamblor]

I personally don't like to have a reason to buy in frequently for 2 reasons, 1. it slows the game down and b. many pc's are lazy and don't like to have to keep walking over to the table or have their chit chats interrupted.

I certainly don't buy in for $1,000 at a $5 table but I do have preset buy in amounts based on how I plan on playing so that usually the only additional buy ins are for the multiple split/double hands or really crappy variance. I don't have a magic formula to determine the amounts I buy in for. I have learned from the school of hard knocks over the years and make adjustments as needed to reduce my buy ins while buying in for amounts typical for the units/table limits I am playing.

To the OP, buying in for $200 at a $25 table is too little imo. What are you going to do after you lose a few hands of $25-$50 and the count calls for a $150 bet? Are you going to put your remaining green in and slide another hundred or two cash in?:laugh: I've never seen a ploppy do that!

Agreed that there are some disadvantages about small buy ins as you mentioned, but there are some benefits. You can make a big jump "all in" bet without looking too suspicious when the situation warrants As you say, no magic formula though.

 

[FLASH1296]

It is good camouflage to always buy in for small amounts.

That way you forge the image of a constant loser who is afraid to risk
much money — contrary to the image of the brazen young Card counter.

Basically it boils down to this. When a player buys in for a lot,
the Pit Critters make a mental note that you are prepared to bet
an amount sufficient for them to possibly sweat your action.

When I say small amounts, I mean 10 + units.

Over 20 units is not a good idea.

Note: odd amounts (in 50's and 20's) is even smarter camo'

 

[aslan]

I used to buy in at $25 tables with $200. I have since upped the ante. If perchance the count immediately heads into positive territory, you may find yourself having to buy more chips for no "obvious" reason (to bet max bet). If you buy in with $300 to $500, it will look more like you intended to bet high from the get-go. As someone said, it is awkward to buy more chips to raise your bet. Once you start betting high, of course, you may have to buy more chips unless you get on a winning roll from the start.

I love the feigned and sometimes not feigned looks of the pit staff, and other players, as you buy in more and more chips due to losing with max bet out. Some pit staff are happy to see you turn it around, figuring you were in over your head; other pit staff will look disappointed that they "had you" and you got lucky and slipped out of the trap. Human nature. Ain't it grand! :grin: