Re: STTF SNG->cash thread
 

Re: STTF SNG->cash thread
 

Btw - this came in from Raptor, I guess for a while you couldn't post last night so he PMed it to me:


i dno how 1-2 plays, prolly a lot nittier than some of the bigger games to be honest, more ppl in call down mode than raise, and when they raise they usually strong.. soo.. heres to helping suzzer..

hand 1: u have such a short stack, 74x or whatever, that after u bet turn u sure as hell cant consider folding. they could have a lot of things here, KQ type stuff, KT even, QJ, who knows. ur likely behind but after betting theres no way u can fold. checking turn and deciding is ok too, but i usually get it in no worries.

hand 2: limping is fine from sb, i dont mind it at all and i do it quite frequently against overagg ppl. flop bet is fine, check calling turn is fine, and bet FOLDING river is fine. tbh, i prolly lose more money than you do because i check river, he bets 20, and i make it 65 or so and fold to a shove. lead folding to a raise is ok too though. no worries.

hand 3: reraise amount is fine pf, flop bet is ok id go 22 ish probably. id either check shove turn or bet get it in on turn. probably bet get it in, thats usually a great card for your hand. as played, i dno fold river probably.

hand 4: CALL the flop. you are deep, you dont wanna stack off on this dry of a board. its really hard to get away from aces in this kidna spot in 1-2 because u never know if sum1 will instastack off with QT for 200x. call flop all day, make a raise on turn, and value bet river. as played, if u raise, and he reraises, you are in a terrible spot for someone to make a play on you, and u never have any idea where you are at in the hand. NL cash games, ESPECIALLY deep, are MUCH more about stack protection than hand protection. its a very key thing you must learn moving from tourneys to cash games.

hand 5: u got the button, deepish stacks for 1-2, and a pretty solid hand for deep stack in position. reraise pf to 20. other than that.. call the check raise on the flop, call the turn bet, then make a decision on river. most ppl will NOT follow thru on a 3 barrel in this type of situation, if they miss flush draw, KQ etc because it looks like u are never folding. call turn, make up ur mind on river folding 90% or hit a J or T and ship nuts get his stack.

hand 6:
Quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Preflop I hadn't raised in a while so I felt the need to maintain my laggy image.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

dear god please dont say things like that. the way you maintain a laggy image is by reraising pf instead of calling. not by raising very retardedly speculative hands utg. i much rather have u reraise a button raise to 6 from blinds u make it 20 with T2o than raise T2s utg here. other than that.. flop bet is fine i guess, calling the raise is not though. seeing that u got to the turn, id check shove which it looks like u were trying to do.. as far as river bet, its not bad at all AS LONG AS U CAN FOLD TO THE SHOVE. they are NEVER bluffing when they shove this river at 1-2. ever. bet folding is fine, and it is my preferred line.

most of these hands are pretty standard, it just takes a lot of practice and thought to get it all figured out. keep working on ur game, posting hands etc etc, im sure ull be raping in no time. holla

it wont let me frickin post this for some reason says form i have submitted is not valid. if u can, post this in a quote from me or something so everyone can see it or whatever. be like 'this is what raptor says hes too dumb to figure out how to post it' something like that. anyways, good luck with the NL cash, hope it goes well for you. -David

Re: STTF SNG->cash thread
 

[ QUOTE ]
it wont let me frickin post this for some reason says form i have submitted is not valid.

[/ QUOTE ]

Delete ur cookies.

Re: STTF SNG->cash thread
 

I tried to post around the same time early this morning and got the same thing. Something was wrong with the site.

Re: STTF SNG->cash thread
 

start with the max, 100bbs, if you drop one cent below, reload to full. always when playing cash.

Re: STTF SNG->cash thread
 

I've been told by lacky, and experience confirms this, that I'm a liability with too many BIs. He actually said I should buyin for the minimum, but I don't have the nerve.

Re: STTF SNG->cash thread
 

[ QUOTE ]
start with the max, 100bbs, if you drop one cent below, reload to full. always when playing cash.

[/ QUOTE ]

This is not necessary, especially if you don't play well with a deeper stack. Coming from a sng background, we are very well suited for buying in short.

I've recently switch to FT, where it seems 90% of the players buy in real short. Thankfully, none of them know how to play the short stack. Someone that plays well with a short stack is very annoying.

Re: STTF SNG->cash thread
 

Mcot,

Why?

Re: STTF SNG->cash thread
 

You buyin the full ammount so you can win the most ammount nif you have a big hand against an opp. who will stack off with garbage. If you are the one stacking off with garbage, perhaps read the short stack play section of NLHTAP.

Basically if you find yourself stacking off a lot with crap, buyin short, tighten way up and make it a preflop and flop game only.

Once you get skilled enough to recognize situations buyin full and maximize your profits.

Re: STTF SNG->cash thread
 

[ QUOTE ]

This is not necessary, especially if you don't play well with a deeper stack. Coming from a sng background, we are very well suited for buying in short.

I've recently switch to FT, where it seems 90% of the players buy in real short. Thankfully, none of them know how to play the short stack. Someone that plays well with a short stack is very annoying.

[/ QUOTE ]

Table selection is key. Find tables where there are donkeys with large stacks to take. Why sit and wait for a powerful hand to win 10bb when a donkey will stack off 100bb with the same hand.

Re: STTF SNG->cash thread
 

[ QUOTE ]
I've been told by lacky, and experience confirms this, that I'm a liability with too many BIs. He actually said I should buyin for the minimum, but I don't have the nerve.

[/ QUOTE ]

[img]/images/graemlins/confused.gif[/img] The "nerve"? You mean because of what the other players... who you are there to rape and pillage, remember... might think of you?

It's very reasonable to buy in short as you are learning cash, I did it for a while. Plus you can make a reasonable living never buying in deep if you play enough tables, which is easy to do as a shorty because all your decisions are preflop or on the flop. If you make too much $$ on one table just cash out and join another one.

Then as you make the transition and want to learn to play deeper, you can stay on tables where you win $$ and adjust your strategy, this serves as a hedge of sorts and also naturally leads to the "stack protection" approach that raptor recommends above, since you don't want to blow all your winnings from that table on one stupid hand.

Gradually as you get better, you can then buy in deeper from the start.

Of course you can make more $$ playing deep IF you are a good deep-stacked player. That IF is kinda critical, though.

Re: STTF SNG->cash thread
 

[ QUOTE ]
NL cash games, ESPECIALLY deep, are MUCH more about stack protection than hand protection.

[/ QUOTE ]

As the saying goes, if you learn nothing else in this thread, learn this.

Key insight, well stated. [img]/images/graemlins/cool.gif[/img]

Re: STTF SNG->cash thread
 

I'm with Mcot. I learn more from my mistakes with the larger stack and win more when the donks donk. Also, short-stack and large-stack NL are two different games. I don't see the need to learn to play short-stack unless one is playing above one's BR, which sucks.

Re: STTF SNG->cash thread
 

[ QUOTE ]
I don't see the need to learn to play short-stack unless one is playing above one's BR, which sucks.

[/ QUOTE ]

Well, I did give a few reasons above that you probably missed, but whatever. To each his own. I'm just saying the idea shouldn't be automatically rejected.

Re: STTF SNG->cash thread
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I've been told by lacky, and experience confirms this, that I'm a liability with too many BIs. He actually said I should buyin for the minimum, but I don't have the nerve.

[/ QUOTE ]

[img]/images/graemlins/confused.gif[/img] The "nerve"? You mean because of what the other players... who you are there to rape and pillage, remember... might think of you?

It's very reasonable to buy in short as you are learning cash, I did it for a while. Plus you can make a reasonable living never buying in deep if you play enough tables, which is easy to do as a shorty because all your decisions are preflop or on the flop. If you make too much $$ on one table just cash out and join another one.

Then as you make the transition and want to learn to play deeper, you can stay on tables where you win $$ and adjust your strategy, this serves as a hedge of sorts and also naturally leads to the "stack protection" approach that raptor recommends above, since you don't want to blow all your winnings from that table on one stupid hand.

Gradually as you get better, you can then buy in deeper from the start.

Of course you can make more $$ playing deep IF you are a good deep-stacked player. That IF is kinda critical, though.

[/ QUOTE ]

I'm working on the theory that if I buyin for $120 ($1/$2) I just look like an oblivious donk buying in for the default amount, and not someone going out of their way to shortstack. Of course as the regulars get to know me this effect will diminish.

Re: STTF SNG->cash thread
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I've been told by lacky, and experience confirms this, that I'm a liability with too many BIs. He actually said I should buyin for the minimum, but I don't have the nerve.

[/ QUOTE ]

[img]/images/graemlins/confused.gif[/img] The "nerve"? You mean because of what the other players... who you are there to rape and pillage, remember... might think of you?

It's very reasonable to buy in short as you are learning cash, I did it for a while. Plus you can make a reasonable living never buying in deep if you play enough tables, which is easy to do as a shorty because all your decisions are preflop or on the flop. If you make too much $$ on one table just cash out and join another one.

Then as you make the transition and want to learn to play deeper, you can stay on tables where you win $$ and adjust your strategy, this serves as a hedge of sorts and also naturally leads to the "stack protection" approach that raptor recommends above, since you don't want to blow all your winnings from that table on one stupid hand.

Gradually as you get better, you can then buy in deeper from the start.

Of course you can make more $$ playing deep IF you are a good deep-stacked player. That IF is kinda critical, though.

[/ QUOTE ]

I'm working on the theory that if I buyin for $120 ($1/$2) I just look like an oblivious donk buying in for the default amount, and not someone going out of their way to shortstack. Of course as the regulars get to know me this effect will diminish.

[/ QUOTE ]

Um, 60 big blinds is not short-stacking. In fact it's a nebulous zone where you can find yourself pot-committed pretty easily with hands that you'd prefer the option to get away from, and meanwhile you can't profitably play many implied odds hands or 3-bet preflop because you aren't deep enough. I could argue that it's the worst of both worlds, really.

By short-stacking, I'm talking about buying in for 20 big blinds here.

Re: STTF SNG->cash thread
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I don't see the need to learn to play short-stack unless one is playing above one's BR, which sucks.

[/ QUOTE ]

Well, I did give a few reasons above that you probably missed, but whatever. To each his own. I'm just saying the idea shouldn't be automatically rejected.

[/ QUOTE ]

I actually think your reasons have merit and I wouldn't reject them. I just think that we (SNGers) are good enough at poker in general to play with a deeper stack, when we play within our BR. And by that I mean 1/2 might seem right for a BR of $5K or whatever, but it's not right for a beginning NL player. I would suggest moving down (to the dregs with me if you must). It's really no different than a beginning SNGer playing $55+. There's no need to cost yourself more than you need to as you learn that TPTK is no good and being pot-committed in cash is much different than pot-committed in an SNG - which frankly is what gets us into the most trouble as we switch.

But, your points are valid if one is to play where his BR says he should be able to play. I just think it's an unwise route.

Re: STTF SNG->cash thread
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I've been told by lacky, and experience confirms this, that I'm a liability with too many BIs. He actually said I should buyin for the minimum, but I don't have the nerve.

[/ QUOTE ]

[img]/images/graemlins/confused.gif[/img] The "nerve"? You mean because of what the other players... who you are there to rape and pillage, remember... might think of you?

It's very reasonable to buy in short as you are learning cash, I did it for a while. Plus you can make a reasonable living never buying in deep if you play enough tables, which is easy to do as a shorty because all your decisions are preflop or on the flop. If you make too much $$ on one table just cash out and join another one.

Then as you make the transition and want to learn to play deeper, you can stay on tables where you win $$ and adjust your strategy, this serves as a hedge of sorts and also naturally leads to the "stack protection" approach that raptor recommends above, since you don't want to blow all your winnings from that table on one stupid hand.

Gradually as you get better, you can then buy in deeper from the start.

Of course you can make more $$ playing deep IF you are a good deep-stacked player. That IF is kinda critical, though.

[/ QUOTE ]

I'm working on the theory that if I buyin for $120 ($1/$2) I just look like an oblivious donk buying in for the default amount, and not someone going out of their way to shortstack. Of course as the regulars get to know me this effect will diminish.

[/ QUOTE ]

Um, 60 big blinds is not short-stacking. In fact it's a nebulous zone where you can find yourself pot-committed pretty easily with hands that you'd prefer the option to get away from, and meanwhile you can't profitably play many implied odds hands or 3-bet preflop because you aren't deep enough. I could argue that it's the worst of both worlds, really.

By short-stacking, I'm talking about buying in for 20 big blinds here.

[/ QUOTE ]

Wow. I thought $80 was the min. $40 sure would keep me out of trouble. Man I'd feel like a dick though. (cue exasperation)

Re: STTF SNG->cash thread
 

I have never understood what is dickish about buying in for the minimum.....ofc I don't do it tho, lolz.

Yugoslav

Re: STTF SNG->cash thread
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]

This is not necessary, especially if you don't play well with a deeper stack. Coming from a sng background, we are very well suited for buying in short.

I've recently switch to FT, where it seems 90% of the players buy in real short. Thankfully, none of them know how to play the short stack. Someone that plays well with a short stack is very annoying.

[/ QUOTE ]

Table selection is key. Find tables where there are donkeys with large stacks to take. Why sit and wait for a powerful hand to win 10bb when a donkey will stack off 100bb with the same hand.

[/ QUOTE ]

Man, I was just giving an alternative. I buy in full for that very reason. I understand what you are saying.

But, you just made some definitive statement about always buy-in full and left it at that. There are merits to both strategies and both can very profitable if done right.

Re: STTF SNG->cash thread
 

[ QUOTE ]
Wow. I thought $80 was the min. $40 sure would keep me out of trouble. Man I'd feel like a dick though. (cue exasperation)



[/ QUOTE ]

sigh...it would help when we talk if you gave me some indication when you have no idea what i'm talking about. yes, shortbuying is done at the min, $40 for 1/2. if you get too $100 your not short, and you leave.

edit-people think your a dick, so what! you are a dick, ruining there for fun game to take their money. live with it.

Re: STTF SNG->cash thread
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Wow. I thought $80 was the min. $40 sure would keep me out of trouble. Man I'd feel like a dick though. (cue exasperation)



[/ QUOTE ]

sigh...it would help when we talk if you gave me some indication when you have no idea what i'm talking about. yes, shortbuying is done at the min, $40 for 1/2. if you get too $100 your not short, and you leave.

edit-people think your a dick, so what! you are a dick, ruining there for fun game to take their money. live with it.

[/ QUOTE ]

Hey, everybody here thinks I'm a dick. I've learned to live with it. [img]/images/graemlins/tongue.gif[/img]

Re: STTF SNG->cash thread
 

I reckon if you own a mac you have to an alright guy

Re: STTF SNG->cash thread
 

[ QUOTE ]
I have never understood what is dickish about buying in for the minimum.....ofc I don't do it tho, lolz.

[/ QUOTE ]

I think the reason is that the proper response to the shortstack cuts into a good deal of profitable opportunities to play against other deep stacks. So it just creates a less profitable (and less enjoyable, for some) game, particularly when combined with ratholing.

Re: STTF SNG->cash thread
 

I'm such an idiot. I'm also a liability with too many buy-ins. I'm going to try this short stacking idea. I mean, I know this kind of play backwards and forwards. Probably better than NL cash players at ginormous levels.

Does this mean that if I try shortstacking, that I should playing a level that assumes this is my buy-in? Or should I still be playing a level that assumes a full buy-in for my bankroll?

Re: STTF SNG->cash thread
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Wow. I thought $80 was the min. $40 sure would keep me out of trouble. Man I'd feel like a dick though. (cue exasperation)



[/ QUOTE ]

sigh...it would help when we talk if you gave me some indication when you have no idea what i'm talking about. yes, shortbuying is done at the min, $40 for 1/2. if you get too $100 your not short, and you leave.

edit-people think your a dick, so what! you are a dick, ruining there for fun game to take their money. live with it.

[/ QUOTE ]

Um... how am I supposed to know when I have no idea what I'm talking about? When we talked about it at the USP thing we were talking about 2/4 and 80 is the min. I just forgot when I was playing 1/2 that it went down to 40.

Re: STTF SNG->cash thread
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Wow. I thought $80 was the min. $40 sure would keep me out of trouble. Man I'd feel like a dick though. (cue exasperation)



[/ QUOTE ]

sigh...it would help when we talk if you gave me some indication when you have no idea what i'm talking about. yes, shortbuying is done at the min, $40 for 1/2. if you get too $100 your not short, and you leave.

edit-people think your a dick, so what! you are a dick, ruining there for fun game to take their money. live with it.

[/ QUOTE ]

Um... how am I supposed to know when I have no idea what I'm talking about? When we talked about it at the USP thing we were talking about 2/4 and 80 is the min. I just forgot when I was playing 1/2 that it went down to 40.

[/ QUOTE ]

suz, this shortstacking is our deal. I'm telling you. Can you imagine the anger once players get to know you? They'll be calling your 20BB AK push with A6o all the time cause they hate your guts.

Re: STTF SNG->cash thread
 

[ QUOTE ]

Does this mean that if I try shortstacking, that I should playing a level that assumes this is my buy-in? Or should I still be playing a level that assumes a full buy-in for my bankroll?

[/ QUOTE ]

I'd split the difference somewhat, so maybe 40-50 short stack buyins, as opposed to 25-30 for deep stack, or 100 or so for STTs.

Re: STTF SNG->cash thread
 

Made my first foray into NL cash today after a horrible month or so at SNGs. 4 tabled $200 6 max for 1000 hands. Made 12PTBB/100. Wheeeeee! Might actually get back to making a living at this game if this keeps up.

Re: STTF SNG->cash thread
 

Respond Plz

Folding KK

Re: STTF SNG->cash thread
 

I've been bombing the micro NL forum with posts this week. I'm really happy with the responses I've been getting. It seems that there are a few high limit players that answer questions on all the NL cash forums. There is an incredible amount of information to be learned from 2+2. I read @40 pages of posts in 3 different NL forums yesterday. Wow. I'll bet that the 2+2 forums have created most of the worlds best players. Thanks to pineapple888 and Oarnge for answering a lot of my questions. Learning NL cash seemed hard at first, but it's getting a lot easier.

Re: STTF SNG->cash thread
 

[ QUOTE ]
I'm such an idiot. I'm also a liability with too many buy-ins. I'm going to try this short stacking idea. I mean, I know this kind of play backwards and forwards. Probably better than NL cash players at ginormous levels.

Does this mean that if I try shortstacking, that I should playing a level that assumes this is my buy-in? Or should I still be playing a level that assumes a full buy-in for my bankroll?


[/ QUOTE ]

take this fwiw, but in the 100k hands I played of this, I think about 2/3 the regular bankroll requirement for the level is about right. could probably get by with half, but i'm always consevitive about it. standerd deviation for full buying runs in the 27 to 30 range. for short buying it's in the 17ish range. (all that is from memory, as i don't have my data handy, but if the numbers are screwy, the reletive difference I'm sure of)

Re: STTF SNG->cash thread
 

weird to post this here.

Re: STTF SNG->cash thread
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I'm such an idiot. I'm also a liability with too many buy-ins. I'm going to try this short stacking idea. I mean, I know this kind of play backwards and forwards. Probably better than NL cash players at ginormous levels.

Does this mean that if I try shortstacking, that I should playing a level that assumes this is my buy-in? Or should I still be playing a level that assumes a full buy-in for my bankroll?


[/ QUOTE ]

take this fwiw, but in the 100k hands I played of this, I think about 2/3 the regular bankroll requirement for the level is about right. could probably get by with half, but i'm always consevitive about it. standerd deviation for full buying runs in the 27 to 30 range. for short buying it's in the 17ish range. (all that is from memory, as i don't have my data handy, but if the numbers are screwy, the reletive difference I'm sure of)

[/ QUOTE ]

Just to make what I think lacky is saying concrete, you would need $3000 if you bought in for $100 each time at 100NL, and $1700 if you bought in for $20 each time at 100NL. Correct? [img]/images/graemlins/confused.gif[/img]

Re: STTF SNG->cash thread
 

[ QUOTE ]
Thanks to pineapple888

[/ QUOTE ]

My pleasure. I try to reply to posts from STTF alums whenever I'm over there.

Re: STTF SNG->cash thread
 

Who the hell recommends having a 40 buyin roll at 100nl?

Re: STTF SNG->cash thread
 

[ QUOTE ]
Who the hell recommends having a 40 buyin roll at 100nl?

[/ QUOTE ]

Calm down, son... that's if you are buying in short for $20, so $20x40=$800. Lacky recommends more than that for buying in short (if I'm reading his post correctly), see above.

Re: STTF SNG->cash thread
 

Another reason to like cash: I've won money the last 72 times I've had AA. Try that in STTs. [img]/images/graemlins/tongue.gif[/img]

Re: STTF SNG->cash thread
 

[ QUOTE ]
Another reason to like cash: I've won money the last 72 times I've had AA. Try that in STTs. [img]/images/graemlins/tongue.gif[/img]

[/ QUOTE ]

This sounds impossible.

Re: STTF SNG->cash thread
 

Sorry Pineapple I completely misread something and then screwed up the math too [img]/images/graemlins/frown.gif[/img] I guess my post came off like I was upset, but I was just surprised to see such a high recommendation. 3k is much more reasonable

3k definitely isn't 2/3 of 4k