[aislephive]

[ QUOTE ]
fwiw, shortstackers have an intrinsic advantage over deepstackers (provided there are at least two of them at the table).

Adjusting ranges won't help you much, most of their edge doesn't come from exploiting your calling range.

[/ QUOTE ]

Yeah definitely. People need to understand that there is no way to play +EV vs a half decent shortstacker, they have an advantage due to always playing with the same effective stacks all the time, where as full stackers who are used to playing with deeper stacks will inevitably be exploited by the short stackers when they do things like shove over our button raise after we isolate a 50 vpip donk.

Using common sense you can minimize how -EV you are vs ratholers, but you'll have to give up a lot of EV in how you play against bigger stacks if you want to be +EV vs ratholers, and it's just not worth it.

But as for OnYourBike's claim that shortstacking is more profitable, that's amusing. I've datamined heavily for the past 6 months, and among the biggest winners at each limit are 99% full stackers. Among the breakeven or 1ptbb winners/losers, however, are all our favorite ratholers.

Shortstacking could very well be more profitable for a weak player who is bad at handreading and all that real poker stuff. But is shortstacking more profitable for people who aren't morons? Nah.