NL: Why the hate on short buy-ins?

[questions]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
wow, im really surprised so many people think shortstackers are 'bad for the game.' my ideal scenario is sitting with a full stack and having 5 shortstackers surrounding me. yum.

[/ QUOTE ]

When I see a table with a bunch of shortstacks I will join it without a second thought. Almost all of them are simply giving away money. It amazes me that winning players actually want to chase away these cash cows.

[/ QUOTE ]

Exactly. I see the same people playing short, pushing all-in over and over, losing, rebuying short, wash, rinse repeat, giving money away. I'm fine with that.

Short stacks help build big pots which is good for the game.

[AJackson]

After seeing all the hate for shortstackers in the high limit forum I decided to try it.

I found that many full stack players countered me poorly. I mainly focused on three bet shoving blind stealers with a 30%+ attempt to steal blinds. I don't know if it was lack of respect for short stackers in general or perhaps they were just pissed at my move and wanted to make me pay, but they would call with all sorts of hands likely to be dominated.

After 25K hands my win rate settled in at around 2ptBB/100. After my experiment I decided it wasn't worth it. Jumping on and off of tables made it difficult to get many hands in so I was averaging around 250 hands/hour so my hourly was the same as my normal limits. Add on the huge swings and that I really don't enjoy upsetting people and it was an easy decision to quit.

Now at my level, NL100/NL200, shortstackers really are pretty horrible, so I don't mind them. I won't sit at a table with more than one or two, but other than that they are welcome to come in and three bet/shove with their KJo.

[terrellk11]

What level did you do those 25k hands at?

[jkoff]

It's not so much hate as disgust. Short buy ins are cowardly. They are an admission that the player is incapable of play before after the flop. Denying his opponents the odds to play beyond the flop, he essentially turns poker into a game of blackjack. It's annoying to play a short stack. I sit down to play poker, preflop, flop, turn and river. Johnny shortstack plays one street poker. And I adjust to him. But it's dull adjusting to him. And shortstack play is not a 'strategy'. It's strategy free poker. In closing, the hate probably comes in when a short stack doubles and leaves the table immediately after, afraid to play real poker.

[Dennisa]

[ QUOTE ]
It's not so much hate as disgust. Short buy ins are cowardly. They are an admission that the player is incapable of play before after the flop. Denying his opponents the odds to play beyond the flop, he essentially turns poker into a game of blackjack. It's annoying to play a short stack. I sit down to play poker, preflop, flop, turn and river. Johnny shortstack plays one street poker. And I adjust to him. But it's dull adjusting to him. And shortstack play is not a 'strategy'. It's strategy free poker. In closing, the hate probably comes in when a short stack doubles and leaves the table immediately after, afraid to play real poker.

[/ QUOTE ]

Poker is about winning money. Why should I change the way I am use to playing? Most of my play is at Los Angeles B&M card rooms. NL 100 is $2/$3 blinds. NL 200 is $3/$5 blinds. I have played many hours with these buy ins. I'm now going to play online with the same type of buy in to hone my B&M game.

[HSB]

[ QUOTE ]
I get so much joy out of hearing the "real" NL players whine about short-stackers. It makes me want to play it more.

[/ QUOTE ]

Why don't you just learn how to play? You'd make more money.

[dogmeat]

Interesting to read that my stack size, if small, ruins your games, your fun, and makes me an idiot. Guess I better stop playing for a living now - since I haven't had a job since Sept. '02 and must not know what I am doing.

Guess I'll sell my cars, and the house, [censored] - I really thought poker was about playing my hand/mood/table presence against the other players and their stacks, regardless of how much I or they have in front of them.

In tournaments, maybe they could make a rule that if you get down to half the average size stack, you have to quit.

Maybe in cash games they can make a rule that if you get to double the average buy-in you have to quit - because really, those guys that have big stacks and keep raising and stealing the small pots are ruining the game.

How about every game has a buy in of 50bb and whenever you get below that, you automatically rebuy to 50bb, and if you win a pot, your stack is automatically readjusted down to 50bb with the extra going to your online bankroll? Whould that make you happy,or would it make you realize how silly your argument is?

Or,

You could accept that every game, every person, every day, is different, and you have to adjust your play to win.

Lets see how many of you whinners are here in another year..............

Dogmeat [img]/images/graemlins/spade.gif[/img]

[Dire]

lol.. making a living short stacking? That's the funniest [censored] I've read. [img]/images/graemlins/laugh.gif[/img]

[Nsight7]

If you are short stacking loose $200 games and have enough tables open, you could definitely make a living off of it. I don't see what is funny about it?

[dogmeat]

[ QUOTE ]
lol.. making a living short stacking? That's the funniest [censored] I've read. [img]/images/graemlins/laugh.gif[/img]

[/ QUOTE ]

I never said I short-stack exclusively, but I certainly don't worry if my stack is short. Besides, I probably make more per hour in just rb/bonus than 80% of the whinners in this thread. It doesn't matter, I'm happy with my income.Again, lets talk in another year.

Dogmeat [img]/images/graemlins/spade.gif[/img]