Ratholing and Short Stacking in NL Poker

[MicroBob]

In live play all the NL games in Tunica have uncapped buy-in's.
I guess they are doing this at the Wynn too I think I read.

The 2/5 NL at Horseshoe in Tunica has a $200 min buy-in but most players are sitting with $1k or more. Some with $5k+...even to start.
There are maybe 2 or 3 guys like me who buy-in for around the minimum.

[El Diablo]

questions,

You have $300. I have $1000. How would having $10,000 let me bully you more?

[ImsaKidd]

[ QUOTE ]
questions,

You have $300. I have $1000. How would having $10,000 let me bully you more?

[/ QUOTE ]

You shove all in for 10k, he only has $300 and can't call.

On a more serious note:

I still dont understand your $100 buyin example Eld. If anything the SS'er wants everyone else to be deeper because their edge is larger then.

[MicroBob]

They get to feel like bullies.
and perhaps other players at the table are intimidated by a player who could sit down with such a large-stack.
But I don't see why it should be a problem.

I've seen players sit-down with much larger stacks at uncapped NL than anyone else has and it seems kind of obvious to me they just want to wave their money-ween around and flip a bundled-up wad of $100's into the pot like it means nothing to them.

Just seems more of a psychological ploy I guess.

[El Diablo]

Im,

When we were playing $5k deep and they were $100, the game was often $40 to go with many pots being $100 to see the flop. This was great (though boring as hell I imagine) for shortstacks, and the players playing $5k deep didnt really care about the shortstacks vying for the $100/per sidepot. If you are only playing $1000 deep, you care about that a lot more.

[questions]

[ QUOTE ]
questions,

You have $300. I have $1000. How would having $10,000 let me bully you more?

[/ QUOTE ]

Because when you have something and the short stack shows any aggression, you can well afford to re-raise big or even put him all-in. Maybe that's not bullying, I don't know how you would characterize it, but it's no more or less fair than the fact that short stacks compromise your play strategy.

[El Diablo]

questions,

I still don't understand how having a big stack on the table makes any difference at all there. All I need to put him all-in is more money than him. How does having him covered 2x or 3x or 10x affect my ability to do that? As long as I have money to rebuy, what difference does the size of my stack make in this context?

[ImsaKidd]

[ QUOTE ]
Im,

When we were playing $5k deep and they were $100, the game was often $40 to go with many pots being $100 to see the flop. This was great (though boring as hell I imagine) for shortstacks, and the players playing $5k deep didnt really care about the shortstacks vying for the $100/per sidepot. If you are only playing $1000 deep, you care about that a lot more.

[/ QUOTE ]

The blinds are the same and the SS'er has the same stacksize, but because people have a 500BB stack instead of 100BB it bothers them less? Seems weird to me. You're losing the same amount of value (probably more).

[questions]

[ QUOTE ]
questions,

I still don't understand how having a big stack on the table makes any difference at all there. All I need to put him all-in is more money than him. How does having him covered 2x or 3x or 10x affect my ability to do that? As long as I have money to rebuy, what difference does the size of my stack make in this context?

[/ QUOTE ]

The point I'm trying to make is that there's how people feel about short stacks and the reality. As you've just illustrated, stack size of your opponents has no bearing upon how you can or should play. Thank you for making my point. [img]/images/graemlins/grin.gif[/img] (you're probably already on record as being neutral or even favorable to short stack playing?)

[questions]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Im,

When we were playing $5k deep and they were $100, the game was often $40 to go with many pots being $100 to see the flop. This was great (though boring as hell I imagine) for shortstacks, and the players playing $5k deep didnt really care about the shortstacks vying for the $100/per sidepot. If you are only playing $1000 deep, you care about that a lot more.

[/ QUOTE ]

The blinds are the same and the SS'er has the same stacksize, but because people have a 500BB stack instead of 100BB it bothers them less? Seems weird to me. You're losing the same amount of value (probably more).

[/ QUOTE ]

I also think it's important to recognize the difference between cash games and tournaments.