|
|
#12
09-13-2007, 10:34 AM
|
|||
|
|||
Re: Cash game problems
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] This makes no sense. You're inventing a problem that doesn't exist. A $500 stack can't "push around" a $100 stack. It's a fallacy. If I have $100 and you have $500, we're playing with $100 stacks, period. This is exactly the same as it was the first hand of the night. [/ QUOTE ] What are you talking about... It is ABSOLUTELY NOT the same at all. Playing against a deeper stack is in no way the same as playing against an even stack. The big stack has the advantage of being able to be the aggressor in pots without much worry of going busto. I don't conceivably see how you can think these are the same thing, thats the most retarded comment of the week on these forums. [x] original poster asks a good question [x] some better responses could have come from children with down syndrome [/ QUOTE ] it's a cash game!! as long as you have money in your pocket, there is no busto. the guy playing with $500 has no advantage over the guy with $100. anyone can take money out of their pocket at any time if they go broke. anyone is free to leave the table at any time. funny that your post would be so arrogant, and yet so incredibly incorrect. actually no that's not funny at all. 
|
|
#13
09-13-2007, 10:35 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Cash game problems
[ QUOTE ]
first of all the guy with 53 isnt going to just call, he's going to bet out lets say 7 or 8. The guy with tens isnt going to let that stand he needs to find out how his tens are lookng (especially if the player with 53 is an aggressive player) so the player with 10s rases to maybe twenty maybe even 30 he is the bigger stack so he can push the little guy around. There's a problem in itself, but leads to the player who was going to make a move if he goes all in the big stack with 10s has to call. Remember aggressive poker is winning poker [/ QUOTE ] They need to learn how to adjust to smaller stacks. If it bothers them, raise the rebuy to double stack and leave it go at that. The game may get disagreeabley expensive for them...
|
|
#14
09-13-2007, 10:52 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Cash game problems
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] [ QUOTE ] This makes no sense. You're inventing a problem that doesn't exist. A $500 stack can't "push around" a $100 stack. It's a fallacy. If I have $100 and you have $500, we're playing with $100 stacks, period. This is exactly the same as it was the first hand of the night. [/ QUOTE ] What are you talking about... It is ABSOLUTELY NOT the same at all. Playing against a deeper stack is in no way the same as playing against an even stack. The big stack has the advantage of being able to be the aggressor in pots without much worry of going busto. I don't conceivably see how you can think these are the same thing, thats the most retarded comment of the week on these forums. [x] original poster asks a good question [x] some better responses could have come from children with down syndrome [/ QUOTE ] it's a cash game!! as long as you have money in your pocket, there is no busto. the guy playing with $500 has no advantage over the guy with $100. anyone can take money out of their pocket at any time if they go broke. anyone is free to leave the table at any time. funny that your post would be so arrogant, and yet so incredibly incorrect. actually no that's not funny at all. [/ QUOTE ] How the hell can you say that? If a player has 100 on the table, you cannot reload in the middle of the hand to put 500 more on. Stack sizes definately do matter. If you dont think so lets HU ill sit with 1k and you sit with 200. I'm still baffled by this...Anyone else see this my way or am i freaking nuts?
|
|
#15
09-13-2007, 10:56 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Cash game problems
I, too, don't see how a $500 stack can "push around" a $100 stack. Effective stacks are $100. The blinds haven't changed. The $100 is still a full buy-in (although I still think it's too small).
Maybe psychologically the $100 can be "pushed around," but if so, it's good for that person to play this way and learn from it. Unless your players are only going to play in this game and never venture out to another game or a casino? Then, do whatever you want.
|
|
#16
09-13-2007, 11:01 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Cash game problems
[ QUOTE ]
I, too, don't see how a $500 stack can "push around" a $100 stack. Effective stacks are $100. The blinds haven't changed. The $100 is still a full buy-in (although I still think it's too small). Maybe psychologically the $100 can be "pushed around," but if so, it's good for that person to play this way and learn from it. [/ QUOTE ] I don't think it's that simple, when exposing new players to NL (and by new, I mean new to big-bet poker)
|
|
#17
09-13-2007, 11:02 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Cash game problems
[ QUOTE ]
I, too, don't see how a $500 stack can "push around" a $100 stack. Effective stacks are $100. The blinds haven't changed. The $100 is still a full buy-in (although I still think it's too small). Maybe psychologically the $100 can be "pushed around," but if so, it's good for that person to play this way and learn from it. Unless your players are only going to play in this game and never venture out to another game or a casino? Then, do whatever you want. [/ QUOTE ] I guess I'm a donk then. I wouldnt consider 100 a fullstack in 1/2 but w/e. In his home game it is so i guess it dont matter. Wow now i really think im crazy.... Could be the 15 hour session last night + half hour of monkey tilt towards the end where I almost ended up losing [img]/images/graemlins/frown.gif[/img]
|
|
#18
09-13-2007, 11:06 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Cash game problems
It's a full stack if that is the buy in. I agree, as I've said twice, that the buy-in is too low, but it's still a full buy-in in this game.
I agree that the blinds should drop to .5/1 or the buy-in should go up to $200 (at least), but I don't think it should change after that.
|
|
#19
09-13-2007, 11:08 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Cash game problems
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] This makes no sense. You're inventing a problem that doesn't exist. A $500 stack can't "push around" a $100 stack. It's a fallacy. If I have $100 and you have $500, we're playing with $100 stacks, period. This is exactly the same as it was the first hand of the night. [/ QUOTE ] What are you talking about... It is ABSOLUTELY NOT the same at all. Playing against a deeper stack is in no way the same as playing against an even stack. The big stack has the advantage of being able to be the aggressor in pots without much worry of going busto. I don't conceivably see how you can think these are the same thing, thats the most retarded comment of the week on these forums. [x] original poster asks a good question [x] some better responses could have come from children with down syndrome [/ QUOTE ] No, Triant, you're not even 50% correct. I partially agree with you, in that players often mistakenly or emotionally let stack size and current results change their play. Some of that is probably strategically correct, but I think a lot of it is NOT. jeffnc and daryn are correct, in that the size of the stacks SHOULDN'T affect the play significantly. The playable stack is what really matters, or should strategically. However, because most amateurs ARE affected (both the shorter AND the larger stacks), your ideas have some merit in the "real" world of home games. That is a deviation from "standard" strategy, much like you might do against someone easily tiltable, or scared of losing back winnings, or whatever. Your "better answers" barb was pretty far off base, however.
|
|
#20
09-13-2007, 11:08 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Cash game problems
[ QUOTE ]
I don't think it's that simple, when exposing new players to NL (and by new, I mean new to big-bet poker) [/ QUOTE ] If these players are new to big-bet poker, the last thing they need is to be able to buy in for $500 and lose it. (Unless I'm at the table!) Heck, if they are "new," they should appreciate the low buy-in.
|
 |
|
|
Linear Mode
