NLHTP#17 The Advantage to Being Short Stacked & Calling PF AI Raises

[wallenborn]

The Advantage to Being Short Stacked

In a tournament, having to play short-stacked is an obvious handicap. In cash games tough, the usual objections to playing with a short stack are largely myths.

[img]/images/graemlins/diamond.gif[/img] You can't hurt your opponent, but your opponent can hurt you. This is completely true and completely irrelevant.
[img]/images/graemlins/diamond.gif[/img] With a short stack you can't push anyone off a hand. This is true and relevant. And it goes both ways: you can't bluff, but you can't be bluffed either.

Short stacked play has a few distinct advantages.

[img]/images/graemlins/club.gif[/img] Deep stacks often play loosely against each other, so when you enter the pot, you will usually face weaker hands.
[img]/images/graemlins/club.gif[/img] After you're all-in, your opponents will keep betting, often forcing a player to fold who might outdraw you.

Why play deep then?

Bad players lose a lot more money playing deep stacked than they would if they played a short stack. They lose that money primarily to deep stacked good players. Good players have to buy in big to get a shot at that extra profit.

When should you play short?

[img]/images/graemlins/spade.gif[/img] When you move up in stakes
[img]/images/graemlins/spade.gif[/img] When you have just joined the game



Calling Preflop All-in Raises

Preflop All-ins are common in tournaments, where stacks are often small compared to the blinds. They happen in cash games, too, and even if you buy in deep you can occasionally be in a situation where you have to react to another players prefop all-in. The strategy for this is rather simple: it depends on the opponent's pushing range and the pot odds you're getting.

Against a very tight (pushing range JJ+,AK) player your calling range must also be very tight. Even with 2-to-1 pot odds you should call only with TT+,AK. If his all-in bet is large compared to the stacks you should only call with QQ+. If he is looser, you can call with a wider range only if the pot odds are good. Calling a large push with a wide range is only correct against a true maniac.

[ QUOTE ]
Aat 2-to-1, you should call more loosely than the range of hands you expect from the raiser, at 3-to-2, you should call slightly more tightly than the raiser, and at 6-to-5 you should call significantly more tightly.

[/ QUOTE ]

And of course, special circumstances may always change a call to a fold here. Your utility function may be nonlinear, in a tournament for example, or if the all-in represents a large fraction of your bankroll.

[LearningCurve]

This reminds me of an interesting thing I watched yesterday while trying to find a table on PS. There were two different tables there at the same time where a big stack (200+ bb's) was pushing aipf for one hand after another. An opponent would raise 4xbb and the villains would 3-bet push. When they were first to act, they'd just open push. Generally the stacks that were calling were short anyhow, but it was fun to watch for a little bit. I was rather surprised to see how little the big stacks actually lost vs. the smaller stacks who were looking to gamble. Guess the table in the book would apply though either way, although in this case it was the 30-60 bb guys who were deciding when to call.

[wallenborn]

[ QUOTE ]
An opponent would raise 4xbb and the villains would 3-bet push.

[/ QUOTE ]

One of the drawbacks of playing short stacked is that you cannot gamble anymore. You can't enter a pot cheaply on a draw, because your stack denies you implied odds even if you hit. And if you raise, you must do so with a hand that can go all-in.

A short-stack player good enough to understand this and disciplined enough to execute it, is probably good enough to play a deep stack, too. But especially at the lower levels, many short-stacks are just scared and try to play the same game as the deep stacks, only with smaller guns.

[LearningCurve]

[ QUOTE ]

One of the drawbacks of playing short stacked is that you cannot gamble anymore. You can't enter a pot cheaply on a draw, because your stack denies you implied odds even if you hit. And if you raise, you must do so with a hand that can go all-in.

[/ QUOTE ]

QFT

I learned this the hard way when I first starting playing. I was more concerned with minimizing my losses than maximizing my gains while I learned. However, I was locked out of most any pot already raised by someone else and when I was the pre-flop raiser, I couldn't understand why virtually no one would fold to my post flop pushes. [img]/images/graemlins/tongue.gif[/img]

It's funny now looking back on it...

[Red_Diamond]

Case came up today. I'm on BB and I have AKo. Folds around to a donkey who buy's in short all the time but pushes all in on any pair. Sure enough, late position he pushes all in (20 BBs worth).

SB thinks about it, then folds. I insta-call with AKo expecting a coinflip. I really don't want to see KK or AA but I know odds are slim. I was hoping for AQ but he turns up AJ and I still win.

Now, as I made the call, I was picturing him on a small pair. But as I hit the call I didn't think this was a wise idea. Technically vs a pair I'm an underdog. Sure it's close, but I'm an underdog. 1.5 BBs is already in so there is a small overlay, but then I have to pay rake ontop of that. If I win the ~40$ pot, I'm paying back more than the overlay.

I haven't looked at this in detail, but because of the dominated ace range, I could be over-thinking too much in this spot.

[xxrod17xx]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]

One of the drawbacks of playing short stacked is that you cannot gamble anymore. You can't enter a pot cheaply on a draw, because your stack denies you implied odds even if you hit. And if you raise, you must do so with a hand that can go all-in.

[/ QUOTE ]
QFT

I learned this the hard way when I first starting playing. I was more concerned with minimizing my losses than maximizing my gains while I learned. However, I was locked out of most any pot already raised by someone else and when I was the pre-flop raiser, I couldn't understand why virtually no one would fold to my post flop pushes. [img]/images/graemlins/tongue.gif[/img]

It's funny now looking back on it...

[/ QUOTE ]

Yea Learning it's the same deal with me. I read this book and listened to a few things that Barry Greenstien said about playing a short stack and I figured that I would give it a try and attempt to build a bankroll from playing short at 10NL (I buy in $5 typically). I lost 4 buy ins right away because I didnt fully understand just how TIGHT you have to play. I am now up about 4 buy ins and making 9ptBB/100 hands (small sample btw). My VP$IP 11%, I am really only playing premium hands.

Another point that I don't think was made yet is that when you play the short stack you can not use all the different types of preflop raising that was discussed in the earlier chapters of the book. You should only be raising preflop for value.

(I also might be a little too passive preflop. I am raising preflop only 5% of the hands I get. I have been getting a lot of small pairs and suited aces in late position in limped pots so I figured I would try and flop a big hand and get paid off. What do you guys think about limping preflop when playing the shortstack?)

[Jurrr]

$5 at NL10 isn't really that short IMHO.

[ottsville]

[ QUOTE ]
$5 at NL10 isn't really that short IMHO.

[/ QUOTE ]

Which brings up another question.... At stars, .02/.05 and .05/.1 blinds are both $10 max buy in. Is there any advantage to playing 200bb stacks over 100bb stacks here or is the play equally as poor that it doesn't matter?

[Jurrr]

I dunno, but I'd probably play 100BB as AFAIK the higher levels are that. Better to train at the stack deepness you will advance at.

[Etric]

I'm going to be a professional short stack poker player because I can't even beat 50NL anymore w/ a full stack.