[mrmuzeman]

Just been reading over at PL on a thread they have about this. Im a max buy in man, stands to reason for me. Can go into why if you want if anyones asks why

Basically im just wanting to know if anyone actually has any articles or thinks that buying in short is THE best strategy. Id really be interested as to how it possibly can be better than buying in for the max. I guess if you played looser or something fcuk knows but it doesnt seem to make sense to me that it makes more in the long run buying in short.

Anyone got a link to anything Greenstein says about short stack buyins?

[Doc]

I have some thoughts on this. As does Sklansky. I might even post them sometime, somewhere, when I have time :D

[mrmuzeman]

Cheers for that Doc

Nice to see you post again (sort of ). Feel free to post anything up regarding limit but im talking about no limit really (I only said that cos you mentioned Sklansky).

[aliensyndm]

I can't really see how buying in for less than the max could be better unless it perhaps had a very big impact on the way the other players on the table played against you. Say they would be very cagey against a full buy-in player but go all in with utter shite against someone with a half-stack or something. Still it'd have to be very regular and a very large difference to justify doing it I think.

With maximum buy-in when you have the best hand you can get the most money possible in when you are ahead. Also you can only win as much from the other player as what you have in front of you, the more you have the better you're implied odds are. Buy-in for say 30 BBs and someone raises to 5 BBs pre-flop you can't do things like call with a pocket pair as you don't have the 8/1 ish that you need.

Also with a short stack you can't really make bluffs as effectively as you are likely to not have enough chips to be able to make the play. Going all in for 80 BBs is a different story to someone going all in for 20 BBs. Although it kinda relates back to what I was saying before.......if people are constantly calling the 20BBs with marginal hands when they shouldn't and you keep winning these then perhaps you could argue a case for it, hmmmm.

Also even on pretty simple things like AA preflop. If possible I want to get my whole stack in preflop, if my whole stack is only 30 BBs or something then fuck that ! Although it's not as if that kinda thing happens very often to be fair.

Also alot depends on the game you are playing in. If you are playing at low to medium level NL hold 'em on the net then I really can't see a great case for playing a short stack as people join and leave the table constantly and any advantage in playing a shorter stack with certain players would soon be non existent as they come and leave. Perhaps in a live game where people are more likely to be playing for a good long session. Some players may play sloppy against a short stack and only pay attention when the other player can bust them.


Also I suppose you have to remember what the actual advantages of having a deep stack are. In tournaments it's pretty obvious really. You can bully the shorter stacks and force them into life or death decisions. Often a shorter stack will wait for a better chance than put his whole tournament on the line with a dodgy hand. If a medium stack sticks in a decent raise with say 88 and you call and the flop comes KQ9 if you bet and make him put his whole tournament on the line is he gonna call when the board has three overcards ?
Often you can bet whether you have it or not for this reason.
Even if you do lose.....you can afford a few loses but a short stack cannot and is out the tournament.
You can handle the blinds better and afford to see more cards whereas the shorter stacks are running out of chips. You always get the maximum win out of the winning hands. The short stack with only 2000 chips only wins 2000 chips when he wins his hand but you always get the maximum amount if you have the other person covered. OK you can also lose more too but often in tournaments the big stacks will just bully the small stacks and not get involved with each other. There is also quite a large psychological advantage with a big stack which is no bad thing. There's no real bluffing possibilites with a short stack.

That's a brief explanation but obviously quite a few of the advantages of a deep stack in a tournament do not apply to cash games. You aren't worrying about rising blinds or knocking people out or the like.
The object in poker is to win money, not to win pots. If it was to win pots then a huge stack would be an obvious advantage as you just play every single hand and you would win the most pots, doesn't work that way though. You win money in cash games by winning the most in the pots you do win and losing the least in the ones you lose or by getting off them before that even happens. In tournaments you win money by winning the tournament or getting a place.

I'd like to hear someone post up some reasons why they would want to buy in for a smush amount. Does anyone here think it's a good idea ?

[Jezza]

Im a max buy in man as well obv. Infact I love poker more it the deeper it is . However of course there are advantages to playing short stack as well as advantages to playing a bigger stack.....

Probably the big advantage in having a short stack in a cash game is that the bigger stacked players will call you all in much lighter than they would other players. If a big stack opens to 20 in a 2/4 game on the button with 66 and the short stack moves in for 60 total from the blinds then there is a big chance he will be called by the opener - despite the fact he is either crushed or has a coinflip. Theres no way he would call a reraise all in for 400 total preflop 99% of the time but he will call the shortie....Thus the shortstack can get his money in as a big favourite easier than the large stack. It also removes all tough decisions from the short stack. There is no need for handreading skills playing short really, well only minimal ones. You can just play your cards. You wont be able to be put to tough decisions by the good players, nor will you be able to be priced out of draws probably. If you are at all worried that you are being outplayed at poker in a cash game then this is a very easy way to neutralise that disadvantage.

Of course I completely disagree with playing short in online hold em NL. If you are a winning player at your table you will make more money buying in for as much as you can instead of buying short. However that is a discussion for a different post and I think whats outlined above are probably the major advantages for short players.

Jez

[TheHomeofPoker]

Originally Posted by Jezza

Probably the big advantage in having a short stack in a cash game is that the bigger stacked players will call you all in much lighter than they would other players. If a big stack opens to 20 in a 2/4 game on the button with 66 and the short stack moves in for 60 total from the blinds then there is a big chance he will be called by the opener - despite the fact he is either crushed or has a coinflip. Theres no way he would call a reraise all in for 400 total preflop 99% of the time but he will call the shortie....Thus the shortstack can get his money in as a big favourite easier than the large stack. It also removes all tough decisions from the short stack. There is no need for handreading skills playing short really, well only minimal ones. You can just play your cards. You wont be able to be put to tough decisions by the good players, nor will you be able to be priced out of draws probably. If you are at all worried that you are being outplayed at poker in a cash game then this is a very easy way to neutralise that disadvantage.

Of course I completely disagree with playing short in online hold em NL. If you are a winning player at your table you will make more money buying in for as much as you can instead of buying short. However that is a discussion for a different post and I think whats outlined above are probably the major advantages for short players.

Jez

Jezza is right, although you often find that these short stack pushers are pushing with a lot less than beatable hands, and I will certainly call bets of the size Jezza suggests just for the reason that I'm probably in good or 50/50 shape.

However there is no reason I think for a good player to be buying in short, you are trying to maximise your earnings, not minimize them.