[bogey1]

[ QUOTE ]

I don't really like anything that's going on here. Sorry. [img]/images/graemlins/frown.gif[/img]

[/ QUOTE ]

*shrug*, that's fine. Just my .02. I think trying to figure out complicated or deep strategies involving short stacks at small stakes is looking for something that just doesn't exist. You can run some trickery with limp/re-raise or shoving over weak players, but not much.

Assigning hand ranges is great...but very hard to do on the fly and small stakes donks can be erratic. I've seem them start wild, then go tight for what seems no reason and vice versa. I tried running lots of SNGPT hand ranges on hands, and it's useful for long term training, but for on the spot you've got to pick something and SC numbers are quick and mathematically correct (outside the bubble situation I mention below).

Most players are way to loose or way to too tight at the smaller stakes. In both cases, they're making significant errors against plain SC play.

That's not to say SC is optimal. The deeper you are the less optimal it is. Bubble factors depend as well. Inside or way outside the bubble, SC is pretty useful. Right on the bubble you can't rely on it because cEV and $EV aren't the same.

I've got 25% ROI over nearly 1000 games at the $35 level. I'm sure there's better players, but I'm pretty happy with what using SC has done for me at the short stack stages.