NL: Why the hate on short buy-ins?

[MicroBob]

I've come close to that before.

Bought in for $80 (I think) on a 2/4 Max $200 game online.
Left with $1200.
Woot!!

I wanted to walk when my stack was at $560 or something so I was in my last orbit.
Get KQs or something and see a board of KKQJ2 and stack someone with KJ.

[Dennisa]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I got the feeling that some of the players at the online tables either didn't like or didn't respect me for buying in short. (I assume here you have read the short stack discussion in Miller/Sklansky NLHE.)

The respet problem usually ends the first time I go AI. I can understand why they might be irritated. For a good tall stack player trying to max his BB/hr rate, a short stack buy-in must look like a half empty seat at a full table. It also puts a crimp in their implied odds strategy.

It is a perfectly legal strategy and part of the game. Objecting to it is like makeing a "No ckeck and raise" rule, it diminishes the complexity of the game.

Use it or don't use it, whichever is best for you.

[/ QUOTE ]

Short stackers are scum.

I am more of amateur player than a pro, so when I play poker its mostly for fun. But when I play NL, I want to play all three streets, and short-stacking douche bags take that away from the game.

Here's a clue for you, if you aren't buying in full, it's because you suck. Just take $40 bucks to a $50 game and learn to play poker instead of trying to ruin the game for every one.

Here's something else to think about, every live place I have every played, does not allow you to buy-in for less than 60BB's, so all you are doing is preventing yourself from developing as a player.

[/ QUOTE ]

Every live place I play in currently only allows a maximum of 20BB-60BB for 3/5 NL and below. If I play online I am going to play identical to my live play especially if I am trying to use online as a simulation of live play.

[Dennisa]

[ QUOTE ]
Huh?
Live places usually have a minimum that's less than 60BB's don't they?


[/ QUOTE ]

California and specifically Los Angeles is ONLY short stack NL poker.

1/2 NL has $40-$50 Max buy ins. (Bike,Commerce, Hustler, HG, HP)

2/3 NL has $100 Min/Max buy ins. Rebuys of $150 if felted. (Bike, Commerce, HG, HP)
2/5 NL at Hustler and HG is a 100 Min/ 300 Max game.

3/5 NL at Bike/ Commerce / HP is a $200 Max game. Rebuy up to $300 if you are below $100. LA has more NL games running 7/24 then Vegas and probably a few other locations combines.

[Beavis68]

I get so much joy out of hearing the "real" NL players whine about short-stackers. It makes me want to play it more.

[demon102]

I got no problem with short stakers it can be kinda annoying but its not big deal, my problem is if they hit n run, thats just not kool. If u did that in a home game u would not be invited back and everyone would think ur a prick.

[Dilznoofus]

[ QUOTE ]
I get so much joy out of hearing the "real" NL players whine about short-stackers. It makes me want to play it more.

[/ QUOTE ]

We're "whining" because they are bad for the game, not because they hurt our egos or because we can't adjust. In fact, it's often best not to adjust to the short stacks if there are other larger stacks at the table. They will make money off of us, but we will make more off the weaker deep stacked players by not drastically changing our preflop strategies, even if they can be easily exploited by the pushbots.

You shortstackers seem to think you're not doing any harm buying in for 20BB. Well how would you like it if there were no min buyin and someone came to the table rebuying repeatedly for 5BB? Would that not be bad for the game, especially if there were two or three of them at the table? If so, does that not indicate that there is some point at which buying in super short is bad for the game?

I think we all could live with a 40BB minimum, but the sites won't do it so you guys get to continue to be parasites.

[trader01]

I wonder sometimes why these short stackers don't just take their chips and go to a lower limit table - the players are worse (which makes things easier), and if all you're doing is waiting for a premium hand to push all in, wouldn't it be better to pay lower blinds while you wait? Seems kinda dumb to play short stack against better players on higher limit tables, and it doesn't do much to develop your poker skill... I can't recall ever seeing a short stacker make any real money on the tables I play...

[monkeyman]

[ QUOTE ]
I wonder sometimes why these short stackers don't just take their chips and go to a lower limit table - the players are worse (which makes things easier), and if all you're doing is waiting for a premium hand to push all in, wouldn't it be better to pay lower blinds while you wait? Seems kinda dumb to play short stack against better players on higher limit tables, and it doesn't do much to develop your poker skill... I can't recall ever seeing a short stacker make any real money on the tables I play...

[/ QUOTE ]

you won't get the calls with the rag hands as often at the lower limit tables. i just do it for fun, usually at the end of the night after grinding it out playing "proper" poker. i can assure you, if done correctly, you will profit in the long run.

[Phytopath]

I seriously fail to see how this is bad for the game, that logic is total BS. Why do you think so many live games cap the Buyins so low? Because it is actually good for the game.

[WP_RakeBoss]

speaking of short stacks....where has DaCombes been at the $200 and $400 on world poker. i had nice stats vs him

i see your poits on hating short stacks at 6max but....
on 10 max i see a bigger problem.

the full buy in "set-monger" plays all pocket pairs and is a puss with any other hand. he has 2 goals, hit sets or fold and keep pots low with AK, KK, AA so he doesnt donk it all off.