The search function sucks balls...humor me --> Buy-ins

[hfrog355]

Yeah, try using that thing to find anything remotely relevant to what you're looking for.

Anyway, I'm looking for information about proper amounts to buy in. I'm really interested in how much players deem appropriate to buy in for games like 1-2 and 2-5 NL hold 'em as well as games like 4-8 and 6-12 limit. Also, I'm really interested in learning more about stud Hi. How much would you need to buy in for like a 5-10 or 10-20 stud game?

Any preferences at all regarding buy-ins would be appreciated. Thanks.

[soko]

try:

+words +im +searching +for -re:

helps alot.

[soko]

In No Limit standard cap on the buy in is usually 100 big blinds, buying in for less is a preference because you will wind up going all in more often, buying in for more could be dangerous if you're not careful about what implied odds you offer your opponents.

In limit you can buy in for whatever, there is no difference buying in 100 big blinds or 25 big blinds, but you should try and keep at least 12 big blinds at all times so you dont want up going all in wishing you could raise more.

[CaryDarling]

I by pass their search function and just google it. I usally end up finding the 2+2 threads I need there.

[einbert]

[ QUOTE ]
In limit you can buy in for whatever, there is no difference buying in 100 big blinds or 25 big blinds, but you should try and keep at least 12 big blinds at all times so you dont want up going all in wishing you could raise more.

[/ QUOTE ]
This is outdated advice.

It depends on some factors, but in general buying in for the minimum is the optimal strategy in limit poker games. The main exception would be if you are a much better player than your opponents.

[Scary_Tiger]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
In limit you can buy in for whatever, there is no difference buying in 100 big blinds or 25 big blinds, but you should try and keep at least 12 big blinds at all times so you dont want up going all in wishing you could raise more.

[/ QUOTE ]
This is outdated advice.

It depends on some factors, but in general buying in for the minimum is the optimal strategy in limit poker games. The main exception would be if you are a much better player than your opponents.

[/ QUOTE ]

What adjustments are needed to play with the minimum buy-in? Like if I go buy in for 100$ at Stars 10/20, do I just play my regular game till I run out of chips? If I get over 100$, do I stand up, and sit back down with just 100$?

[einbert]

[ QUOTE ]
What adjustments are needed to play with the minimum buy-in? Like if I go buy in for 100$ at Stars 10/20, do I just play my regular game till I run out of chips? If I get over 100$, do I stand up, and sit back down with just 100$?

[/ QUOTE ]

You would play your normal game until you got down to about 2 BB, then you would need to start adjusting your decisions somewhat to account for your stack size.

You don't really have to change your decision making process at all, you just have to account for the difference in pot odds. This will also show why it is actually more profitable to buy in short in limit games. If you have less than a full bet, you will simply be able to draw profitably more often. Being able to make a +EV call rather than having to make a 0 EV fold (since calling would be -EV if you had more money in front of you) means you are increasing your overall EV. You are also able to sometimes play more aggressively on the flop and turn, because your hands will naturally have less reverse implied odds on the turn and river due to your decreased stack size. Of course being able to make an all in bet or call when you would otherwise have to check/fold means you are increasing your overall expected value.


Here is a post by Barry Greenstein on twoplustwo talking about this method of buying in short (he advocates it in his book Ace on the River):
http://forumserver.twoplustwo.com/showth...rue#Post3035334

[ QUOTE ]
If you allowed a break-even player to buy in for one-fourth the normal minimum, he would easily be come a winning player, whether in limit or no-limit. The times that pots would be won because of being all-in would far outweight the times that an opponent could be bet out of a pot.

Try buying in as short as you are allowed. If you are allowed a short buy-in after a full buy-in, do it. If you try it for a while, this thread will become moot.

I gave the exceptions, the most noteworthy being that you are much better than your opponents. This is not the case for most of us, including me. Most of us, even the winners, are only marginally better than the opponents we play against. But with this and other management advice, and advice on how to think through a poker hand, many people who have read my book have become much more significant winners than they previously were.

[/ QUOTE ]
-Barry Greenstein

[cpk]

[ QUOTE ]
This is outdated advice.

It depends on some factors, but in general buying in for the minimum is the optimal strategy in limit poker games. The main exception would be if you are a much better player than your opponents.

[/ QUOTE ]

I think you're wrong about this. For example, how do you make a value bet on the river if you're all in?

[tom10167]

I LOVE when people give different advice with ABSOLUTELY NO REASON.

++++EV

[The_Bankroll]

I think the general standard is 100BB for a NL game, 25 Big Bets for a limit game. I don't know much about Stud, but since there are 5 betting rounds instead of 4 like hold 'em, I think i'd wanna buy in for a bit more, like 30-35