Buy-ins

[moleman]

When buying in at a table, either on line or live, should you buy in for the maximum amount allowed? I remember reading in Dan Harrington's book that you should buy in for the minimum, but have heard elsewhere that buying in for the full amount gives you some depth. Thoughts please.

[Sigurd]

Full buy in if you are better postflop than the other players..
If the other players are better than you postflop, you should go with some smaller amount.

[Dazarath]

Well first thing, there's not always a maximum. If you sit in an uncapped game, are you going to bring your life savings?

If you're talking about online, where the buyin is usually 20-100 BBs, there's pros and cons of doing both. Most players want to buy in for the full amount. Your edge is greater with deeper effective stacks so you want to maximize that over any fish at the table (I hope you're table selecting and sitting with fish, rather than a bunch of TAGs). There are people who prefer to go the short-stacking route, because in a game with full stacks, if you have a short-stack you have an advantage. From a full stack's perspective, if they play optimally vs the other full stacks, they are playing sub-optimally vs the short-stack (too loose). If they tighten up and play optimal against the short stack, then they're losing value vs the full stacks. Most people choose to maximize their edge against the full stacks and just deal with the short-stack. But this allows the short-stack to pick up EV in lots of spots. It's also a very robotic method of playing, so even if their BB/100 isn't as high, they can play tons of tables without having to think much and grind out money in that fashion.

[VivaHate]

To be a good short stacker is a skill in itself there aren't many of them around, also the variance is much greater. You learn a lot more about the game buying in full ie position, bluffing, semi bluffing, 3betting light, two barrelling etc etc. As a short stack its generally push or fold once you get to the turn.

[binions]

[ QUOTE ]
When buying in at a table, either on line or live, should you buy in for the maximum amount allowed? I remember reading in Dan Harrington's book that you should buy in for the minimum, but have heard elsewhere that buying in for the full amount gives you some depth. Thoughts please.

[/ QUOTE ]

Barry Greenstein writes in Ace on the River that he normally buys in for the minimum. Reasons for buying in for the minimium:

1. They can't bluff you when you are all in.
2. Gives you a low profile so people don't ask you for loans or to be staked
3. You won't be targeted as a big winner, so others won't be afraid to play with you
4. Easier to limit losses
5. Forces you to play solid since you don't have enough chips to run bluffs with weaker hands
6. Better chance of keeping hit and run artists at the table since they can't get very far ahead when they beat you
7. People tend to play better when they are ahead, and worse when they are stuck. So, you will have money in front of you when you are playing well, and not so much money in front of you when you are playing poorly
8. If on a short bankroll, must protect it. For example, better to use 3 $200 buy ins than 1 $600 buy in if short on funds.

Reasons to buy in for the max:
1. If you are one of the best players, more chips = more tools to work with
2. Foes want to play you if they think they can win a lot
3. Gamblers don't want to play with nits
4. When the game is good, there is a race to get the loose money being thrown around. The better player needs chips to get his share
5. Its difficult for people to know when you are losing
6. You may feel more confident with a big stack
7. You don't have to make the play adjustments needed for short stacks. For example, you can play drawing hands with deep money + good implied odds.

See Ace on the River p. 174-76

[lucky_mf]

[ QUOTE ]
Full buy in if you are better postflop than the other players..
If the other players are better than you postflop, you should go with some smaller amount.

[/ QUOTE ]

It really depends. On some sites the default BI is 200bb, but on most it is 100bb. If you sit with 200bb and most of the other players are also deep you will inevitable end in a lot of pot control situations with good, but not great hands, that you could be much more aggressive with if you were playing 100bb. In NLHE:TAP they talk about a "sweet spot" in terms of the relationship between the bb amount and stack size that will allow a player to maximize his winnings. The "sweet spot" isn't necessarily in excess of 100bb. My "sweet spot" is somewhere around 100bb.

Lucky