Bankroll for shortstacking? - Page 2

mixmastermattyk · #11 10-26-2007, 11:31 PM

1 buyin

OrrLives · #12 10-27-2007, 04:51 AM

[ QUOTE ]
standard deviation for shortstackers is low, but winrate is too, so bankroll requirements turn out to be pretty similar to full-stackers. also, ban.

[/ QUOTE ]

According to Slotbloom, winrates can be pretty high if you know what you are doing.

Also, not ban as shortstacking is a legit strategy just not one you might like.

OrrLives · #13 10-27-2007, 04:54 AM

[ QUOTE ]
I usually start playing with 40 BB and have had many 1000 - 1500 BB downswings. I play levels PLO400-PLO1000 6max. My ptBB/100 is around 3. VP%IP = 32, PFR =17.

[/ QUOTE ]

If you are short stacking, your VPIP is WAY too high and your ptBB is way too low (according to Slotbloom).

OrrLives · #14 10-27-2007, 04:55 AM

[ QUOTE ]
standard deviation for shortstackers is low, but winrate is too, so bankroll requirements turn out to be pretty similar to full-stackers. also, ban.

[/ QUOTE ]

winrate does not have to be low.

OrrLives · #15 10-27-2007, 04:56 AM

[ QUOTE ]
asking a question about the proper way to shortstack should result in an insta-ban...

[/ QUOTE ]

Explain why.

OrrLives · #16 10-27-2007, 04:57 AM

[ QUOTE ]
It should also be noted that since most players short-stacking aren't winners, bankroll questions are often immaterial since they assume a positive expectation.

[/ QUOTE ]

You have proof of this claim?

Have you read Slotbloom?

OrrLives · #17 10-27-2007, 05:43 AM

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
asking a question about the proper way to shortstack should result in an insta-ban...

[/ QUOTE ]
You are a huge elitist

[/ QUOTE ]

TY for the support. It is hilarious to me that people don't consider shortstacking a legit strategy. LOL at all of you 'proper' players.

chucky · #18 10-27-2007, 05:45 AM

Aggressive players tend to dislike shortstackers because deep players (100 bb+) prefer to raise with a broad range of hands and have the freedom to play the flop, turn, and river a variety of ways. Shortstackers will counteract these players by reraising KKxx and AAxx mostly and try to deny deeper players the ability to play a wide range on hands past the flop. Shortstackers do cost themselves money in the long run because even if they double up in a hand, they have missed out on profit because they were not 100 bb deep. Additionally, some shortstackers are unable to transition to medium stack play. Some of these players will leave tables rather than continuing to play. Therefore, we have the term "ratholers".

OrrLives · #19 10-27-2007, 05:57 AM

[ QUOTE ]
Aggressive players tend to dislike shortstackers because deep players (100 bb+) prefer to raise with a broad range of hands and have the freedom to play the flop, turn, and river a variety of ways. Shortstackers will counteract these players by reraising KKxx and AAxx mostly and try to deny deeper players the ability to play a wide range on hands past the flop. Shortstackers do cost themselves money in the long run because even if they double up in a hand, they have missed out on profit because they were not 100 bb deep. Additionally, some shortstackers are unable to transition to medium stack play. Some of these players will leave tables rather than continuing to play. Therefore, we have the term "ratholers".

[/ QUOTE ]

First of all, my original post had nothing to do with the 'ethics' of hit-and-running, but rather what is a reasonable bankroll for such a strategy. I could care less of the 'ethics' of this strategy.

I understand that 'ratholing' is frustrating to 'proper' players who buy-in for the max (100BB), but this is a legit strategy. I hear players like Ribbo (in his videos) laughing at players for having ~30BB at a table, but he is completely missing the point. Short-stacking is an almost 100% unexploitable strategy (if done properly) that will allow players to build up a bankroll at small risk. Of course, many short-stackers have no idea how to properly use short-stack strategy. Personally, it has allowed me to move up limits MUCH faster than I would have otherwise.

If one plans to move up limits and become a 'great' player, it is crucial that he develops good deep-stack skills. But to say short-stacking threads should result in an insta-ban is completely laughable... it is embarrassing actually.

pete fabrizio · #20 10-27-2007, 07:14 AM

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
standard deviation for shortstackers is low, but winrate is too, so bankroll requirements turn out to be pretty similar to full-stackers. also, ban.

[/ QUOTE ]

winrate does not have to be low.

[/ QUOTE ]

this is simply not true, and though I don't care what he thinks, I doubt slotboom would claim otherwise. i've seen the data, and no shortstacker beats any game online for more than 2-3 ptbb for any sustained period of time.