The search function sucks balls...humor me --> Buy-ins

[einbert]

[ QUOTE ]
What adjustments are needed to play with the minimum buy-in? Like if I go buy in for 100$ at Stars 10/20, do I just play my regular game till I run out of chips? If I get over 100$, do I stand up, and sit back down with just 100$?

[/ QUOTE ]

You would play your normal game until you got down to about 2 BB, then you would need to start adjusting your decisions somewhat to account for your stack size.

You don't really have to change your decision making process at all, you just have to account for the difference in pot odds. This will also show why it is actually more profitable to buy in short in limit games. If you have less than a full bet, you will simply be able to draw profitably more often. Being able to make a +EV call rather than having to make a 0 EV fold (since calling would be -EV if you had more money in front of you) means you are increasing your overall EV. You are also able to sometimes play more aggressively on the flop and turn, because your hands will naturally have less reverse implied odds on the turn and river due to your decreased stack size. Of course being able to make an all in bet or call when you would otherwise have to check/fold means you are increasing your overall expected value.


Here is a post by Barry Greenstein on twoplustwo talking about this method of buying in short (he advocates it in his book Ace on the River):
http://forumserver.twoplustwo.com/showth...rue#Post3035334

[ QUOTE ]
If you allowed a break-even player to buy in for one-fourth the normal minimum, he would easily be come a winning player, whether in limit or no-limit. The times that pots would be won because of being all-in would far outweight the times that an opponent could be bet out of a pot.

Try buying in as short as you are allowed. If you are allowed a short buy-in after a full buy-in, do it. If you try it for a while, this thread will become moot.

I gave the exceptions, the most noteworthy being that you are much better than your opponents. This is not the case for most of us, including me. Most of us, even the winners, are only marginally better than the opponents we play against. But with this and other management advice, and advice on how to think through a poker hand, many people who have read my book have become much more significant winners than they previously were.

[/ QUOTE ]
-Barry Greenstein

[einbert]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
This is outdated advice.

It depends on some factors, but in general buying in for the minimum is the optimal strategy in limit poker games. The main exception would be if you are a much better player than your opponents.

[/ QUOTE ]

I think you're wrong about this. For example, how do you make a value bet on the river if you're all in?

[/ QUOTE ]

The idea is that the money made from pots where you get all-in (with a hand you would have to had to fold) is greater than the money you lose from missing out on some turn and river value bets. This includes pots where you draw out when you wouldn't have had the pot odds to see the last cards, in addition to pots where you can call down cheaply because of reduced negative implied odds. By buying in short you will end up winning a lot of pots where you would have simply had to fold your hand had you had a full buy-in.

[cpk]

Thanks for actually making an argument. But I think you're overlooking some things:

1. If I'm all-in on the flop, my opponent can draw to two streets for the price of one.

2. Similarly, people will not fold as often for one bet on the flop, because they know they won't have to pay on the turn or river to see your hand . And in fact it may be correct for them to call in that case. Therefore, your semibluffs on the flop won't work as well.

3. Implied odds are all about being able to make additional bets when your hand gets there, so you've now cut off a wide range of profitable hands by being short-stacked.

4. You will not always get all-in on the flop, but action on the turn or river when you make your hand might put you all in instead. This is annoying, and it costs you money.

5. You will not start off short-stacked enough to enjoy the benefits you claim.

There's a definite strategy to be employed when when you do find yourself short stacked, but I doubt it's something you want to do on purpose. It takes money to make money.