|
|
#1
06-14-2006, 08:13 AM
|
|||
|
|||
buying in short to play at higher levels
I ws clearing a bonus at a site that allowed a max 200 BB buy in as opposed to the standard 100 BB buy in at party and was wondering a few things. I am very tired at the moment so i may not be explaining myself the best
Basically, the question is this, assuming a $500 br and a player that is a proven winner at both $25NL and $50NL, which is better? scenario A-Buy in for 100 BBs at $25NL, giving yourself 20 buy ins Scenario B-Buy in for 50 BBs at $50NL, giving yourself still a healthy 20 buy ins. Assuming a winning player, 1)how much edge in PTBBs/100 hands are you giving up by only buying in or 50BBs as opposed to 100? 2)how is variance affected by this? 3)why is the max comonly referred to as the norm buy in online? If it was common for NL games to have no cap, what would it make sense to buy in for (again, assuming a decent edge in that game). In other words where's the cut off point where you decide it's better to buy in for half the BBs at double the stakes? I have a feeling it in large part it has to do with what the others at the table are buying in for. Again, I am about to fall asleep at my desk so I may not be explaing what I'm trying to say clearly. Anything you don't understand what I'm saying just ask. 
|
|
#2
06-14-2006, 08:18 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: buying in short to play at higher levels
If you have an edge then you want to cover every player at the table. The small pots won't play any differently but when the money goes in (again, assuming you have an edge to be the favourite) then you want as much to go in as possible.
|
|
#3
06-14-2006, 08:19 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: buying in short to play at higher levels
is this all assuming that we are agaisnt opponents who have 200bb??
in NL it is extremely advantageous to have the biggest stack so if there was no cap things would be really [censored] up. norm buy in is 100bb. as far as short vs full buy in. this is hugely debated so Im not going to comment on it. If you want to read about it do a search. 
|
|
#4
06-14-2006, 08:47 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: buying in short to play at higher levels
[ QUOTE ]
If you have an edge then you want to cover every player at the table. The small pots won't play any differently but when the money goes in (again, assuming you have an edge to be the favourite) then you want as much to go in as possible. [/ QUOTE ] yes i know but are you giving up more then half your WR by buying in for half the amount of BBs?
|
|
#5
06-14-2006, 08:52 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: buying in short to play at higher levels
you allowing yourself to be bullied.
|
|
#6
06-14-2006, 09:00 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: buying in short to play at higher levels
[ QUOTE ]
is this all assuming that we are agaisnt opponents who have 200bb?? [/ QUOTE ] no, this is assuming a usual table, some buying in for the minimum, some the max, some somewhere in between. Just a typical situation. [ QUOTE ] in NL it is extremely advantageous to have the biggest stack so if there was no cap things would be really [censored] up. [/ QUOTE ] I see no reason why the game would be [censored] up with no cap. I may be entirely wrong though, why do you think this? [ QUOTE ] norm buy in is 100bb. [/ QUOTE ] Yes but isn't this the norm because casinos and most online rooms place it at such? If there was no cap would 100 bbs remain the standard buy in? [ QUOTE ] as far as short vs full buy in. this is hugely debated so Im not going to comment on it. If you want to read about it do a search. [/ QUOTE ] will do. While I'm at it do you or anyone else have link to the discussion? I noticed nothing in the faq other then its recommended to never be playing with more then 5% of yuor bankroll in one table. Also nice pic.
|
|
#7
06-14-2006, 09:09 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: buying in short to play at higher levels
[ QUOTE ]
I see no reason why the game would be [censored] up with no cap. I may be entirely wrong though, why do you think this? [/ QUOTE ] because, without a cap poieple would buy in for several thousands and just push people around. youd still be buying for 100bb and ud be playing a short stack, push or fold strategy. [ QUOTE ] Yes but isn't this the norm because casinos and most online rooms place it at such? If there was no cap would 100 bbs remain the standard buy in? [/ QUOTE ] this is a retarded and completely worthless statment that im not going to bother contemplating or responding to. who [censored] knows? [ QUOTE ] will do. While I'm at it do you or anyone else have link to the discussion? I noticed nothing in the faq other then its recommended to never be playing with more then 5% of yuor bankroll in one table. [/ QUOTE ] no link, sorry. [ QUOTE ] Also nice pic. [/ QUOTE ] i cant take credit for it. however if he wasnt asleep id hope hed lock this thread that i keep responding too.
|
|
#9
06-14-2006, 09:31 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: buying in short to play at higher levels
HAHAHA.
nh.
|
|
#10
06-14-2006, 09:39 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: buying in short to play at higher levels
I for one have found it very helpful to buyin at half the max when trying to move up...yes, you are giving up some value when all the chips go in...but...by the same token...you are also limiting your exposure on the downside as well. I have found this useful when trying to build a bankroll. Also, I have found that most smart players are trigger shy when going against an AGRESSIVE short stack since they know that you are being much more selective in your choice of hands to push it all in with...this opens up more bluffing possibilities especially against those who are multi-tabling...
|
 |
|
|
Linear Mode
