Full Stack Buyin vs Minimum Buy In

[cat923]

I have always bought in with the full buy in.

I see multitabling players buyin with $40 on a $100NLHE table and I have seen some buy in full. Both are playing 10 to 12 tables.

What are the pros and cons of each method?

Thanks for your help,

cat923

[Kojak1984]

Personally I always buy in for the full amount, simply because I'd be more annoyed at not getting the full amount for a great hand than I would about losing the full amount on a bad one (which you would hope to happen less often anyway).

[bcubed72]

What comes to mind:

-Drawing hands "ought" to be less likley to call if they suspect they'll get HU with you 'cause they won't be able to win enough to break even for all the times they miss.

-You'll probably get called PF, or later, by weaker hands (like mid-strength aces), because they know they won't have to decide whether they want to call all the subsequent bets that might get them all-in by the river

-AK should be more profitable--especially against PPs, because if you get it all in PF, you'll get 5, rather than 3, cards to hit.

-PPs would be less profitable aginst overcards for the same reason.

I know I made a bunch of $$ that I otherwis woulda lost, due to fact I was against a shortie. $1/2 NL. There's a weak early raise ($5), a sizable ($15) reraise from a $60 min stack just prior to me. I elect to call with AKo (think I had just over $200). The original raiser folds.

Flop comes AJX rainbow. Checked to me and I slightly underbet the pot for $25. I get check-raised all in for $45 or so.

Now, if he check raised to $45 (technically $50 min), but had me covered, I'd be hard-pressed to call here; if I did, I'd essentially be saying I'm willing to go broke with TPTK. But for $20 more total, I can't fold here. He showed AdQd. Picked up a flush draw on the turn, but ultimately lost to my better kicker.

[aujoz]

nlhe:tap covers this in depth.

deeper stack poker is more complex. complexity = more opportunity mistakes, by all players.

same reason people can comfortably 20-table SNGs, while very few (if any) cash game players do - because the stacks are shorter, more decisions are made pre-flop and thus, there are no flop, turn & river decisions.

[pinarphan]

20 tables at once, you have to be kidding!

[aujoz]

no, i am not kidding.

20-tabling, while certainly unusual, is not unique by any stretch of the imagination.

When I am 12-tabling SNGs on party/empire across two PCs, i often think I could play more tables, but installing a third pc would be rediculous and the games don't load quickly enough for it to be worthwhile.

I think 18-tabling the SNGs at Party/Empire would currently allow you to play in *every single* $109, $55 and $33 that ran.