[Sodom]

I do not think this statements are true. What’s happen is that big stacks bully’s have to watch up for another dimension, namely short stack players who might destroy there game plan, and that is not necessary bad.

It actually ad a dimension. If a big stackers could raise preflop before with there speculative big potential hands, and hope to hit for big rewards, they now have to consider also the dimension that this plan might be cracked by a short stackers who effectively will destroy there implied odds. And I will not have any problem to be that player who destroy your odds. That is what poker are all about.

So when I limp UTG as a shortstacker, the bully have to be in doubt what I have. The bully want to raise, but it is dangerous. He might also limp, which of course can be to my disadvantage, or maybe also advantage. So of course, the postflop play will still be an opportunity, it is mainly up to the big stack. If he raise, then it might be a push after him. If he really wants to play postflop, he have the choice to also limp. So the argument regarding post-flop play is not especially valid. The big difference is as I said, that the big bully can’t any longer be sure he can continue as before. New dimension is added.

Of course you don't like that if you are the kind of player who by routine raise preflop with a lot of hands. But it will sharpen your ability to correct evaluate different situations. What it is all about, is the money. Your dream is of course to have lot of bad players with big stacks, and then take them postflop. But poker is not that easy. Just accept that you have to face tougher opponents with both short and big stacks. If you really want to play against only other big stacks, well, then you should have tables for that, but I am not sure you get the fishes you want there.