NL: Why the hate on short buy-ins?

[Dire]

[ QUOTE ]
I don't see how the poker sites raising the min buy-in would kill online poker. The SS'ers could move down a level if they don't want ot risk the new min buy-in. At least get rid of the 20bb'ers. They are the most scummy people and where my hate for the SS is coming from.

[/ QUOTE ]

Short stacking is a means of reducing the skill involved in play. Forcing deep stacks on players means forcing postflop play which means worse players lose their roll much faster. Eg - say somebody's short stacking at $100 for $20. Say they have a hand like 99 - they can easily put the vast majority of the money in preflop. They'll occasionally be 80:20, but usually they'll be a bit better than a coin flip. So they can get a reasonable expectation of something like .6 or an EV of $4.

Now put that player in a $25 game with $20 and 99 again. They can't get anywhere near the vast majority in preflop unless they're already way behind. Postflop, they'll have to actually play and they'll usually have at least 90% of their stack behind them still. He's going to have an extremely hard time getting that .6 equity with his 99 unless he can actually play decently postflop, and if he could play decently postflop - he wouldn't be shortstacking in the first place.

So it's not just the amount of money - it's their ability to play the game. Getting rid of short stacks makes it extremely difficult for the bad players to not rapidly lose their money. I hate short stacks as much as the next guy (and probably a bit more), but I think they're a necessary evil. Get rid of short stacks and you'll see the fish start dying out rapidly and/or just converting to set mining nits.

[Beavis68]

I got news for you pal, most poker players are losers.

[ QUOTE ]
I'd like to settle some of the issues being discussed here, but first, let me explain my background. After reading about short stackers in HSNL I decided to see how effective they were. So, I purchased 8 months of 200NL data from someone who datamines PokerStars. From there, I made a script that ran through and picked out all the short stackers and counted how many hands they had played as short stacks.

Something like 95% of the players did not play more than 400 hands of short stacking. Of the 5% that did do it for more than 400 hands, 95% of those players were long term losers. And the few that did win, the sample size was not large enough to say conclusively that they were winners. Don't get me wrong, it is possible to do it effectively, but it requires a patience and discipline that not many have. And, if you do have it, you're better off playing full stacked because you're going to be a good player.

Also, I should say that short stacking can be better the more aggressive the games. Some of the NL5000 shortstackers do very well, but thats only because the games are intensely aggressive. Even then though, if you can win doing that you're better off buying in full.

Here's the point:
- Most short stackers are losers
- The winners are better off playing full stacked
- If you raise the min buyin, you eliminate all those players that lose money from buying in short. If you truly want to kill online poker, all the poker sites have to do is raise the min buyin.

They may be more annoying to play against, but its just something you have to adapt to. Most are terrible, and telling them to [censored] off is bad for you in the long run.

Regards,
Nichomacheo

[/ QUOTE ]

[Nsight7]

Indeed, most players are losers. Most people who play short-stacked are going to be bigger losers because they really are cowardly. However, we are NOT talkin' about those people. We are discussing if there is a correct way one can play a short-stack.

One point that has been brought up repeatedly is the idea that one can make much more by just buying in for the maximum. This might be true . . . on a per table basis. However, your meta-game might find trouble 10-tabling so sometimes short-stacking a few tables would actually increase marginal utility.

[MicroBob]

[ QUOTE ]
I don't see how the poker sites raising the min buy-in would kill online poker. The SS'ers could move down a level if they don't want ot risk the new min buy-in. At least get rid of the 20bb'ers. They are the most scummy people and where my hate for the SS is coming from.

[/ QUOTE ]


Your posts are making me want to short-stack at all your tables. I'm not kidding.

I'm incredulous that some people apparently really do get this upset about someone not buying-in for as much as someone else.

[ImsaKidd]

[ QUOTE ]


I'm incredulous that some people apparently really do get this upset about someone not buying-in for as much as someone else.

[/ QUOTE ]

Bob, if you're feeling brave:

1: Go to SSNL
2: Thread Title: "I want to start shortstacking"
3: Include reasoning, general examples, maybe some math.
4: Get flamed like you've never been flamed before.

[ImsaKidd]

[ QUOTE ]

1. Short stacking sends your variance through the roof.

[/ QUOTE ]

PLEASE TELL ME TODAY IS OPPOSITE DAY

[Nsight7]

[ QUOTE ]
IMO, real poker is about putting your opponents on a range of hands and forcing them to multiple decisions throughout the hand that could cost them a full stack +. Short stackers wet their pants at the thought of playing postflop with good players b/c they simply don't have the ability. It might be profitable for some players to SS but don't you guys feel disgusted in yourselves, like someone who couldn't hack it in the "real world"--->failures? I mean, instead of dropping down in levels and maybe playing with your caliber of player, you buy in for a worthless amount, play with players way over your head, ruin the games and piss me off.

[/ QUOTE ]

Real poker is whatever poker people play, and that doesn't change if people buy-in short or tall. If you can't take advantage of knowing how someone plays, well then I suppose you aren't really that great of a player in the first place. I think most of your disagreement comes NOT from thinking it ruins the game and more that you simply aren't capable of taking advantage (i.e. it pisses you off).

As for SS'ers feeling disgusted with themselves, let me ask you this: Do you feel disgusted with yourself for exploiting players with full stacks that don't understand pot odds or position, or who overvalue top-pair/top-kicker? Do you feel like a failure? Yeah, I am sure you don't. My answer is the same, I don't mind taking advantage of people that don't know how to adjust to my play.

Ironic that you don't mind takin' advantage of suckers but you dislike others using methods to do so that you find unpalatable.

[E.Z.]

if i am playing 8-10 tables i will short stack (30-35 bb's) because you dont have the time to read your opponent.

It completely turns the odds against the donk that will call with any pair preflop just looking for sets.

If i ever play 3-4 tables or live i will buy in for as much as i can if i see some guys that simply can't get away from certain hands.

a short stack works well lower limits but at the $100 and up i think it puts a bulls eye on your back because the players are more aggressive. most of my 8-10 tables was done back on Party at 25NL and 50NL.

every site is different. alot have a 20 bb min. absolute has 40 i think, and one website (hollywood??) had it at 10 for whatever reason.

[ImsaKidd]

I usually feel disgusted when I make money, dunno bout you guys.

[MicroBob]

I also don't feel like I'm exploiting a limit game when I'm not raising K7o from UTG een if everyone else is.

my VP is 20 or something. Rest of the table is 50 or higher.
I'm just sitting there being tighter than all my opponents and some of these opponents don't like this at all. They call me all kinds of names for being too tight and ruinging the game.


Also, in limit I raise a lot pre-flop which is correct TAG strategy as far as I understand it.
Some players don't like this and tell me I raise too much and should play at a higher limit if I am going to do that.
Sometimes they get so mad that I'm raising that they say they can't play on a table with a player like me so they get up and leave.


I had a hand where I thought I had odds to continue so I kept calling or raising or whatever.
On the river I caught one of the cards I was hoping for and won the hand.
This made my opponent angry. He told me that I was a d-bag for not folding when he thought I should have.
He even said I was in the wrong for raising pre-flop with the cards I had because his pre-flop cards were better.