For those who dislike shortstacks...

Shortstack · 22-08-2007 04:07PM #1

Ipoker now has 'Full Stack' tables as an option up to $3/$6 which only allow Max buy in.

Macspower · 22-08-2007 04:20PM

saw this last night.... great idea..... didn't see any on 1/2 but they were on 50/1 alright

Mr.Plough · 22-08-2007 04:21PM

you can get fully stacked with bullets now mac. -ev for you

Macspower · 22-08-2007 04:25PM

Mr.Plough wrote:

you can get fully stacked with bullets now mac. -ev for you

LOL... bullets are ok this month... it's KK I'm having the problems with now.......

wonder will fish still play on em......

LuckyLloyd · 22-08-2007 04:30PM

This post has been deleted.

eoghan104 · 22-08-2007 04:30PM

Macspower wrote:

saw this last night.... great idea..... didn't see any on 1/2 but they were on 50/1 alright

Do you not think that these tables will tend to have better players at them?

eoghan104 · 22-08-2007 04:32PM

LuckyLloyd wrote:

I always find the attitude on this forum (and 2+2) to shortstacks to be quite funny. At the lower levels they are like free money cause they have no idea how to play a shortstack properly. So what's the problem??

surley there isnt a "proper way" to play shortstacks in a cash game? You just shouldnt buy in short right??

LuckyLloyd · 22-08-2007 04:36PM

This post has been deleted.

eoghan104 · 22-08-2007 04:39PM

LuckyLloyd wrote:

This is what is lol about the forums. For some players, they absolutely should be buying in for the minimum. Somebody who plays a lot of SnG's or tournaments and has a good idea of when to shove would prolly make more money in the short - term shortstacking cash games. Couple that with the current "hate" factor against those that shortstack by those that are regs and buy - in for the max - leading them to spite call and be utterly reluctant to adjust their ranges against shortstackers; I think it is a perfectly valid strategy.

I would tend to agree with you but just from what I read here it seems its gay to short stack? I used to do it a good bit in Omaha and had good results. I would just buy in for half the max rather than the minimum though.

Macspower · 22-08-2007 04:42PM

eoghan104 wrote:

surley there isnt a "proper way" to play shortstacks in a cash game? You just shouldnt buy in short right??

I agree completely....... however short stacks can be such a pain in the hole....... You raise to say 4bb's in position with AQ and he goes all in for 20bb's you call and he turns over his muckey KJ and hits and leaves immediately... can't see the value in them thats all.... You never get to outplay them on later streets etc etc....

Then there is the pro short stacker who once recognised is not a problem to play with only he is taking a seat where there could be a fish sitting.... these guys play only big pairs and make only 1 move all in generally over a raise and are sitting at multitables doing the same... thankfull there are not that many of them but they do exist and must be making money or they wouldn't be doing it I guess.....

I just hate them so much....... but I hate big stacks more :rolleyes:

Mac

LuckyLloyd · 22-08-2007 04:43PM

This post has been deleted.

StraddleFor6 · 22-08-2007 04:43PM

eoghan104 wrote:

I would tend to agree with you but just from what I read here it seems its gay to short stack? I used to do it a good bit in Omaha and had good results. I would just buy in for half the max rather than the minimum though.

So you won't shortstack anymore, despite good results, because its "gay"?

Killme00 · 22-08-2007 04:43PM

I agree with Lloyd on this one. I love playing shortstack in HE, its like free money. Playing live in the fifty game so many people buy in for the minimum time after time and slowly lose buyin after buyin.

I really really dislike it in Omaha though, you just cant protect your hand and cant extract additional value when you are miles ahead.

cooker3 · 22-08-2007 04:45PM

Macspower wrote:

I agree completely....... however short stacks can be such a pain in the hole....... You raise to say 4bb's in position with AQ and he goes all in for 20bb's you call and he turns over his muckey KJ and hits and leaves immediately... can't see the value in them thats all....

What about the 62% of time you take their 20bb
I love those type of players! Nice easy free money

LuckyLloyd · 22-08-2007 04:46PM

This post has been deleted.

Captain Tom · 22-08-2007 04:47PM

LuckyLloyd wrote:

So??? If it's plus EV and allows you to stick to your strengths and avoid situations where you are less comfortable why shouldn't you? If you wish to win money playing the game then you should do whatever gives you the surest way to achieve that.

Lloyd and BCB finally agree on something.

eoghan104 · 22-08-2007 04:49PM

StraddleFor6 wrote:

So you won't shortstack anymore, despite good results, because its "gay"?

Obviousley calling it gay was tongue in cheek. I dont do it anymore because i am broke due to online roullette but thats a whole new thread! I just dont play on the internet anymore. If I did I would more than likley use this strategy.

CaptainNemo · 22-08-2007 04:49PM

Killme00 wrote:

I agree with Lloyd on this one. I love playing shortstack in HE, its like free money. Playing live in the fifty game so many people buy in for the minimum time after time and slowly lose buyin after buyin.

I really really dislike it in Omaha though, you just cant protect your hand and cant extract additional value when you are miles ahead.

I was reading about this as an Omaha strategy, the idea is that there is usually so much dead money in the pot that although you may only win 60% of the time you get all in with a short stack you only need it to be 40% to be profitable. The acknowledged downside is the inability to get full value when you hit a great situation like set over set or quads over full, etc.

LuckyLloyd · 22-08-2007 04:50PM

This post has been deleted.

LuckyLloyd · 22-08-2007 04:51PM

This post has been deleted.

gosplan · 22-08-2007 04:52PM

I frequently find that poor players will double you up a lot easier with shortstacks.

That said I am talking about poor players at lower levels.

Essentially if I buy in for 25 in a 50 game I find it a lot easier to get to 50 then I do to get from 50 to 75 if I buy in for the full amount.

That said, it sucks if you get on the good end of a set vrs set or something like that.

jimmii · 22-08-2007 04:54PM

I love playing the short stackers most of them are doing it because they aren't good enough to play with a full stack and think any Ace is good and any pair is good.

Macspower · 22-08-2007 05:04PM

LuckyLloyd wrote:

This is the lol part. So the really awful shortstackers you find at the lower levels frequently get their money in bad against you because they are idiots. And in the longterm you will turn a profit off their awful play. And that is a bad thing? Why?

And what about the times they call raises pre - flop and manage to fold at some point when more than half their stack has been invested??

How will it be a better proposition for you to play at full stacked tables of good regulars??

My argument is prob not correct but they really are annoying.......

Often the case you money is not in good...... SS limps and you make a button raise of 4bb's + 1 and when it's folded back to him he pushes and you find you KQ or J10 up against any A....

I have yet to try these full stack tables but if they are very nitty I won't be playing them.....

Shorties do provide great value if they don't hit and run... nothing like a SS who has doubled up twice and now has a stack that he can't play.......

Nice to have the option ....

ollyk1 · 22-08-2007 05:06PM

As you know I'm not familiar with the internet cash scene but there are a few live players, with the patience of Job, who seem to play relatively short and get their money in good against spewy big stacks.

If they had really strong long run discipline they could probably lock in a few euros per hour profit. Everyone else loves it when they stacked and go on tilt though!!

A lot of the live short stackers are just brutal and scared money - the joy of the live game is that it's obvious before they even sit down.

Edit: Shortstackers are actually great for my game as they tend to force me to be more disciplined and stop leaking chips.

Lafortezza · 22-08-2007 05:22PM

If you find yourself playing deep against a few other bad players, say 200BB or deeper, then you can really open up your hand ranges preflop and after. Therefore you're playing more hands with bigger pots against bad players.
If one 20BB shortstacker sits in he ruins this dynamic since he'll be happy to shove with any pair, AT+, so you now have to tighten up and can't open 67s every time for 3/4BB's since you'll be faced with having to call 20BB's when usually dominated by the Shortstacker.

cardshark202 · 22-08-2007 05:24PM

I think you are missing the point lloyd. Some of these shortstackers are huge nits who just sit there for hours and then shove over raises with like AQ+, TT+. Some of them are ****e and will make terrible shoves/calls. The point is though that they are taking up space where a huge whale could be sitting instead where you can take 1000bbs off him in an hour as opposed to 10bbs in 5 hours. IMSAKIDD is a shortstacker and a forum whore. None of the good poster will respect him one bit. If you frequently shortstack games where you think you have an edge you are an idiot and you probably don't have an edge. You should play lower. If you frequently shortstack games where you don't think you have an edge you are an idiot.
To summarize: shortstaking sucks

cardshark202 · 22-08-2007 05:26PM

Yes shortstackers really ruin the game dynamics too. Well put laf.

BuChan · 22-08-2007 05:27PM

lafortezza wrote:

If you find yourself playing deep against a few other bad players, say 200BB or deeper, then you can really open up your hand ranges preflop and after. Therefore you're playing more hands with bigger pots against bad players.
If one 20BB shortstacker sits in he ruins this dynamic since he'll be happy to shove with any pair, AT+, so you now have to tighten up and can't open 67s every time for 3/4BB's since you'll be faced with having to call 20BB's when usually dominated by the Shortstacker.

great point.

opr · 22-08-2007 05:29PM

Macspower wrote:

Often the case you money is not in good...... SS limps and you make a button raise of 4bb's + 1 and when it's folded back to him he pushes and you find you KQ or J10 up against any A....

I am sorry but again this argument is really bad. Your the one making the mistake imo here as your range for raising should be adjusted to allow for the SS limping.

Opr

opr · 22-08-2007 05:31PM

lafortezza wrote:

If you find yourself playing deep against a few other bad players, say 200BB or deeper, then you can really open up your hand ranges preflop and after. Therefore you're playing more hands with bigger pots against bad players.
If one 20BB shortstacker sits in he ruins this dynamic since he'll be happy to shove with any pair, AT+, so you now have to tighten up and can't open 67s every time for 3/4BB's since you'll be faced with having to call 20BB's when usually dominated by the Shortstacker.

Now this is the problem here. Because i have to adjust my range it hurts the overall dynamics of the game.

Opr

CaptainNemo · 22-08-2007 05:40PM

The reason players who like deep stack play dislike shortstacks is because they mess up their strategy. This means that it's an effective strategy against deep stack players. No one would be getting annoyed if the strategy just flat out sucked.

That said one of my favourite things to do when I have a lot of money in front of me and have raised 4BB with suited connectors is to call the remaining 20BB if a short stack pushes all in. You have 3 favourable results possible:

1) Your hand wins.
2) You double them up, forcing them to play deeper which makes them less comfortable.
3) You double them up, making them leave the table. Seat open for whale!

For those who dislike shortstacks...

Comments