Re: the main problem with shortstackers that no one seems to mention
[ QUOTE ]
That's just silly. Firstly, the advantage goes to whoever adapts best to the presence of the shortstacker, which is inherently unfair because it is based on whoever is skilled at poker. Secondly, you can't call it unfair, it's just like the retarded argument on facebook that wearing sunglasses at the poker table is unfair because it gives them an advantage. It's not unfair because you can do it as well - so if you're in a situation where you're sandwiched between a full-stack and a shortstack, you're always allowed to get up from your seat and wait for a better one. If game conditions mean you're not in a profitable spot, you get up, and it's bad play from you if you continue to sit in that bad spot.
[/ QUOTE ]
i actually do get up if i'm sandwiched between a couple of tight shortstack and a decent full stack, but most people don't. i think you're being a tiny bit too dismissive of the idea that there is at least some unfairness here. let's say i get 4 shortstacking friends together and we intentionally take over a 6-max table with one deep stack, placing me immediately to his left, intending to take advantage of our superior position and sharing the profits after. even if we don't share cards or softplay each other or anything, i still think this would be kind of sketchy, bordering on collusion. and, although relevant, i don't think the fact that he can stand up relieves that sketchiness entirely.
|