Two Plus Two Newer Archives  

Go Back   Two Plus Two Newer Archives > PL/NL Texas Hold'em > Micro Stakes

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #11  
Old 08-21-2007, 11:58 AM
threads13 threads13 is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: thread13.com
Posts: 2,681
Default Re: PNL Study Group Day 2: Stack Sizes

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]

Also, to take this one step further, what sort of adjustments would you make in a slightly loose game with a 50BB stack size. Is there any way to exploit these players other than playing tight ABC poker with more value betting? Do you find these types of games tend to have some more FE than I am giving them credit for?

[/ QUOTE ]

well if they're loose it sounds like your fold equity is not what you should rely on. however, you can loosen up your own "value betting" range. for example, if your normal nut tight strategy involved playing only premium top pair hands, you might add a few more like KJs or whatever to your range if these guys will call with weak top pairs and second pairs all the way down.

[/ QUOTE ]

I see, so my top pair hands are going to go up in value.

Do you agree with the basic idea that stealing becomes a bit more difficult(at least post flop) when you have shorter stacks?
Reply With Quote
  #12  
Old 08-21-2007, 12:01 PM
Sunny Mehta Sunny Mehta is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: coaching poker and writing \"Professional No-Limit Hold\'em\" for Two Plus Two Publishing with Matt Flynn and Ed Miller
Posts: 1,124
Default Re: PNL Study Group Day 2: Stack Sizes

[ QUOTE ]


Do you agree with the basic idea that stealing becomes a bit more difficult(at least post flop) when you have shorter stacks?

[/ QUOTE ]


as a general premise, yes. but in practice, it really does depend. if you have enough stack for a c-bet, in certain games that's all the stealing you need.
Reply With Quote
  #13  
Old 08-21-2007, 12:07 PM
threads13 threads13 is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: thread13.com
Posts: 2,681
Default Re: PNL Study Group Day 2: Stack Sizes

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]


Do you agree with the basic idea that stealing becomes a bit more difficult(at least post flop) when you have shorter stacks?

[/ QUOTE ]


as a general premise, yes. but in practice, it really does depend. if you have enough stack for a c-bet, in certain games that's all the stealing you need.

[/ QUOTE ]

Just wanting to make sure I am thinking about things in the correct way. Thanks!
Reply With Quote
  #14  
Old 08-21-2007, 12:16 PM
checkmate36 checkmate36 is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: This is not a gambling website
Posts: 2,957
Default Re: PNL Study Group Day 2: Stack Sizes

As far as bankroll management goes, if I decide to sit with a 50BB stack, would it be ok to jump up to the next highest game?
Reply With Quote
  #15  
Old 08-21-2007, 12:30 PM
Sunny Mehta Sunny Mehta is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: coaching poker and writing \"Professional No-Limit Hold\'em\" for Two Plus Two Publishing with Matt Flynn and Ed Miller
Posts: 1,124
Default Re: PNL Study Group Day 2: Stack Sizes

[ QUOTE ]
As far as bankroll management goes, if I decide to sit with a 50BB stack, would it be ok to jump up to the next highest game?

[/ QUOTE ]

hm, bankroll management discussion is tricky. here are my thoughts, but I'll give fair warning that this is just an inkling and has not been mathematically verified.

Playing a 50bb stack size will have more variance in terms of comparing exact dollar amounts, because you are essentially playing "big pots" very often with a 50bb stack. However, playing a 50bb stack relative to the blind level will have less variance.

For example, say you have $100. If you play the $100 as a 50bb stack in a $1-$2 game, your variance will be higher than if you play the $100 as a 200bb stack in a $.25-$.50 game. However, playing a $100 stack in a $1-$2 game will still be lower variance than playing a larger stack in a $1-$2 game.
Reply With Quote
  #16  
Old 08-21-2007, 12:41 PM
CmnDwnWrkn CmnDwnWrkn is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 686
Default Re: PNL Study Group Day 2: Stack Sizes

What are the advantages/disadvantages to playing with different stack sizes? People often advise to buy-in for 100BB (usually the max online), but they often don't explain why. People who shortstack are usually dismissed as being "donks". What are some reasons to consider playing with a shorter stack, and how should your play change as a result?
Reply With Quote
  #17  
Old 08-21-2007, 12:50 PM
cokkblock cokkblock is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 48
Default Re: PNL Study Group Day 2: Stack Sizes

I think the point of buying in for the maximum is to maximize value with your hands. So let's say you're playing 100NL in a HU pot and you have the nuts: you have the chance to get a full value of $100 for your hand rather than a shortstacked value of < $100.

On the other hand, the advantage of shortstacking is that you're minimizing risk. So in doing so, you're either moving up to a new level, or you're simply not that good and you're playing with scared money. And I think that's why you're viewed upon as a donk. You're simply not that good to comfortably play at those stakes.
Reply With Quote
  #18  
Old 08-21-2007, 12:55 PM
Sunny Mehta Sunny Mehta is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: coaching poker and writing \"Professional No-Limit Hold\'em\" for Two Plus Two Publishing with Matt Flynn and Ed Miller
Posts: 1,124
Default Re: PNL Study Group Day 2: Stack Sizes

[ QUOTE ]
What are the advantages/disadvantages to playing with different stack sizes? People often advise to buy-in for 100BB (usually the max online), but they often don't explain why. People who shortstack are usually dismissed as being "donks". What are some reasons to consider playing with a shorter stack, and how should your play change as a result?

[/ QUOTE ]

broad topic, but I'll give a few thoughts. when you have the biggest stack at the table, you have the advantage of being able to win anyone's stack on any hand. but you can also lose it too! so having the biggest stack is good if you play better than all your opponents, and of course have the appropriate bankroll etc for your stakes.

more generally, stack size influences the style of play. with a smaller stack, you necessarily will have less money to play the turn and river, so you adjust your strategy accordingly to play less hands that require implied odds, etc.

also, certan game types can make playing certain stack sizes profitable. playing in a passive game where no one "puts you to the test" can be great for playing a deep stack - particularly if you yourself can use your stack to apply pressure.

playing in a revved up aggressive game where players play loose preflop but are good smart postflop players can benefit a shorter stack because you exploit their weakness of playing too loose. I remember a few years ago when I was building my bankroll I'd often buy in short into really good bigger games. A lot of players I know built their bankroll like that. It's a great way of not only playing in a profitable situation, but also watching and learning from good postflop players, getting experience with higher chip denominations, feeling comfortable in a different setting, etc.


PS - I gotta run right now guys, but I'll be back later.
Reply With Quote
  #19  
Old 08-21-2007, 01:29 PM
Octopus Octopus is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: nitsville
Posts: 992
Default Re: PNL Study Group Day 2: Stack Sizes

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
As far as bankroll management goes, if I decide to sit with a 50BB stack, would it be ok to jump up to the next highest game?

[/ QUOTE ]

For example, say you have $100. If you play the $100 as a 50bb stack in a $1-$2 game, your variance will be higher than if you play the $100 as a 200bb stack in a $.25-$.50 game. However, playing a $100 stack in a $1-$2 game will still be lower variance than playing a larger stack in a $1-$2 game.

[/ QUOTE ]

I have looked at this some and I you are exactly right. My experience, and the experience of several others, is that playing super short (20BBs or so) is about half as volatile (IN TEMRS OF BLINDS) as playing a 100BB stack. A 50BB stack is actaully closer to a 100BB stack in terms of variance, but it is still less volatile.

If you are looking at bankroll requirements, though, the correct way to think about this is terms of dollars (or if you like in terms of buy-ins), not in terms of blinds. In that context, playing $100 at a .5/1 table will be half as volatile (in dollars) as plying $100 at a 2/5 table. If these two strategies had the same win rate (in dollars), then you would need a commensurately bigger stack to have the same risk of ruin playing the short stack strategy. (If one had a higher dollar win rate, then that would be in play as well.) I do not have a huge amount of data on playing with a 50BB stack, but similar logic would apply. Playing up a level but with half the stack would likely be higher volatility and higher win rate (in dollars), but it is not at all clear to me how those two would interact. Whether your win rate in a given game with 50bb vs 100BB stacks is higher or lower depends on much. EDIT: See Sunny's post immediately above. [img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img]
Reply With Quote
  #20  
Old 08-21-2007, 07:07 PM
Triggerle Triggerle is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: What\'s a matter with you, rock?
Posts: 1,439
Default Re: PNL Study Group Day 2: Stack Sizes

The stack sizes chapter is really straightforward so there's not much to discuss. I wrote down a few words on short stacking opponents anyway:

General thoughts
A situation we are faced with quite often is short stack opponents. At our levels theses are very rarely good players. Most are in fact extremely bad players. Their motivation for short stacking is often that they don't want to lose too much money (here's a hint: not playing at all will lose you even less money) or that they don't have a sufficient roll to buy in full.

In any case, even when we are faced with extremely bad players we need to adjust properly. I we make -EV plays even the fact that our opponent is bad won't help us.

Pre-flop
The first adjustment we need to make pre-flop is that we need to take quite a few hands out of our range if we are against a short stack. Suited connectors and low pocket pairs, hands that rely on implied odds, often become unplayable against shorties. We can still raise them when we open the pot but we must be aware that instead of a semi-bluff our hand is now almost a complete bluff. If Mr. Short is unlikely to fold on the flop it is usually better to just fold pre-flop.

This is even more true for calling a raise with pocket pairs. Here's an example that is maybe a bit extreme because our hand has at least some showdown value even unimproved. I chose it this way to maybe get disagreeing views:

SB: $61.30
Hero (BB): $68.85
UTG: $16.50
MP: $53.55
CO: $41.95
BTN: $20.00

Preflop: Hero is dealt 8[img]/images/graemlins/spade.gif[/img] 8[img]/images/graemlins/heart.gif[/img] (6 Players)
3 folds, <font color="red">BTN raises to $1.75</font>, SB folds, Hero folds

Since the short stack was an unimaginative player but would almost certainly cbet the flop we would automatically be in a commitment situation without knowing anything about our opponent's hand. We can't play for set value because he is too short.

Post-flop
Stack sizes also influence our post-flop play. If we raise a good hand pre-flop and only a short stack calls us it can frequently be wrong to cbet if we miss. This is because we would put so much money in the pot by cbetting that we cross the commitment threshold. This is a very common leak even among otherwise solid aggressive players.

Another example where stack sizes come into play is if we flop a very good but vulnerable hand and we have a short stack and a big stack in the hand. Before betting we should look at the remaining stack of the shortie. If we bet more than half of his remaining stack then if he comes over the top we can't 3bet because the rules don't let you re-raise if the previous raise was too small due to an all-in. This could be a disaster on drawy boards if the other big stack comes along because he now gets odds to draw and we can't re-raise him.

There's no need to be afraid of bad shortstacks. We just have to adapt properly. This can mean to surrender pots to them that we would normally not so readily surrender. The good thing is that since we still cover them we will eventually get all of the surrendered pots back along with the rest of his stack sooner or later.
Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 07:47 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions Inc.