Basic LHE question

[HotPockets]

So, I've recently started to take up LHE. I was primarily a NL player but I've gotten a little bored with it. My question is in regards to buyins in LHE. I hear all the time that 300bb's is the general consensus when it comes to being rolled for a specific game in LHE. How come I never hear how much you should generally buy into a game for? In NL obviously, I'd always buy in for the max. Is there a general rule in LHE? I usually buy in for 30bb whether i play online or live. Is this overkill? too conservative? Any thoughts would be appreciated.

[raze]

Anything around 25-50bb is pretty standard. It doesn't really matter as long as there's no chance you will get all-in.

Also, if raises are uncapped HU, make sure you have weaker opponents covered in case they decide to put in 18 raises with the third nuts [img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img]

[MediaPA]

The buy in for LHE really isn't that important. Ideally you'd like to have enough on the table to cap every street at all times. So that's 12 BB. Constant reloading sucks so increase that by 2 or more and you are good to go. Most places if action is heads up there is no cap. This is why it can be advantageous to have a bigger stack on the table.

Again people feel free to correct me.

[Small Fry]

Unless it is unlimited raising if heads up then 12x big bet is the most you can play in a hand in a bet 3 raise capped game. 4 raises then the most is 15x big bet. So as long as you have that in front of you you have the max for any hand.

I've played thousands of hands of Limit online (5/10 - 1/2) and never saw a hand get capped on every street. But I hear it does happen. As does the possibility of dozens of raises going in on the river in heads up play.

Online, since you can reload any time with no interuptions sit with whatever you want. Live, where reloading can cause delays, I'd recommend starting with at least 20x big bet. Personally I always start live with 25x big bet. If you like to splash around alot then maybe start with a little more.

[Kurn, son of Mogh]

I usually buy-in for 25 big bets, but really 20-40 is OK. The key is reload if you go below, say, 8 big bets, so you can get max value when you make a strong hand and get action.

[bapazian]

When playing live i usually just buy in for 1 rack up till like 8/16 which i may buy 2 (400$). I always have enough to buy in for more than one rack but I don't like to hurt my table image by buying in double what everyone else did at the table.

[pzhon]

[ QUOTE ]
Anything around 25-50bb is pretty standard. It doesn't really matter as long as there's no chance you will get all-in.

Also, if raises are uncapped HU, make sure you have weaker opponents covered in case they decide to put in 18 raises with the third nuts [img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img]

[/ QUOTE ]

Yes, this isn't discussed much because the difference between having 12 BB and having 12000 BB is negligible in theory.

In practice, you might want to prepare for crazy players. If you buy in for a lot, players will tend to pay more attention to you, which is bad, but some clueless players will also tilt. Some unobservant players will assume that you are winning if you buy in for a lot, or that you are losing if you buy in for a little, and it is possible that this will change their play.

Occasionally, the possibility of playing with less than 12 BB is discussed, although usually not very intelligently. It has been called the worst mistake in poker, and people bring up the scenario of a straightflush versus quads as though you will never be on the losing end. In fact, it is actually a slight advantage to have a short stack in LHE, and a clear advantage to have a short stack in 7 card stud and stud8. The rules of poker favor a short stack. You benefit greatly when someone bets out a player who would have won while you are all-in. You can ignore the extra chips everyone else has and play optimally to take their money, while they can't play optimally to take yours. Some people are irrationally set against this, but Barry Greenstein makes some good points about the advantages of having a short stack in limit in his book. In soft LHE games, it is usually clearly right to have 12+ BB rather than a short stack, but in very tough high stakes games, some players will be marginal winners with short stacks, and marginal losers with 12+ BB stacks.

By the way, while playing with a short stack may be a good idea for players who are learning NL, to allow them to go to simplify the game and to go to showdown more frequently, I recommend against playing limit with a short stack when you are starting out. Having to worry about running out of money complicates the game.

Also, in a game between 2+2 posters, it is common to buy in for your entire available balance on the site even in a $0.50-$1 game. It's just for fun.

[mikeca]

Twenty-five big bets is what is usually recommended, but most players in casino’s buy in for less than this. I play mostly 3/6. I usually buy in for 2 racks, which is 33.3 BB. I get a lot of funny looks, and one floor guy has told me I’m buying for too much. I am certainly not the only player that buys in for 2 racks though. I have seen a number of others and I saw a young kid buy in for 3 racks once. Most players buy in for one rack or less, so buying in for one rack would be less conspicuous. One rack is only 16BB, so if you want to keep 12BB on the table at all times, you may be buying in again quickly unless you win your first hand.

The only real issue with buying for 2 racks is the table space your chip stack occupies. If you get hot and get up by 2 racks, you now have 4 racks of chips on the table, which takes up a lot of space and you will need to color up to keep the stack manageable.

[PrimogenitoX]

Just buy in for a rack and place a big chip on the table to cover everyone and for the rare case that you run out of normal chips this will allow you to keep raising...