Buy In for Max Always???

[DexterJoe]

In another of my posts I got a couple of comments to buy in for the max allowed. Couple of questions:

1) I read on another post that a lower buy in than the max can reduce your variability. True or no?
2) What happens if I am on a table and I lose one (or a few) hands and I'm 30BB to 60BB under the max - should I automatically reload to get to 100BB? Let's say you take this to the extreme and every time you're below 100BB you re-buy - doesn't this maximize your potential to lose but still leave your upside capped?
3) Let's say I'm playing 10NL and I have $34. Putting aside from the fact that I am short on a bankroll, should I restrict myself to 3 tables instead of 4 and having one or all of them short stacked? Is it always a bad idea to play with less than the full buy in? Should it be a max of some lower number of tables so you can always reload? (back to 2nd question)

[catfish_01]

1) Don't know
2) I rebuy on my tables every time I get to 98 bb's or less. The reason for this is that there are plenty of players at $10 who make big mistakes in bigger pots making your full buy-in well worth it.
3) I would definitely not four-table at $10 with a $34 bankroll. You are risking variability no matter what, but even 3 tables is too much. (I tried this sort of thing at first too.) I would say two-table at most and don't expect good results. Note that a strong bankroll will empower you to make good decisions at your limit instead of weak ones.

[Quester]

[ QUOTE ]
In another of my posts I got a couple of comments to buy in for the max allowed. Couple of questions:

1) I read on another post that a lower buy in than the max can reduce your variability. True or no?
2) What happens if I am on a table and I lose one (or a few) hands and I'm 30BB to 60BB under the max - should I automatically reload to get to 100BB? Let's say you take this to the extreme and every time you're below 100BB you re-buy - doesn't this maximize your potential to lose but still leave your upside capped?
3) Let's say I'm playing 10NL and I have $34. Putting aside from the fact that I am short on a bankroll, should I restrict myself to 3 tables instead of 4 and having one or all of them short stacked? Is it always a bad idea to play with less than the full buy in? Should it be a max of some lower number of tables so you can always reload? (back to 2nd question)

[/ QUOTE ]

1) True. Your swings aren't as large because you can't lose a full 100BB or win a full 100BB. Thus, variance is lower.

2) I would definitely reload if I'm down 30BB. Unless I still cover the people on the table that I want to cover. The benefit to having a full stack is that you cover everyone at the table (up to 100BB), so you get their full stack when you stack them.

3) First, you should never ever EVER play with just 3 buy-ins at a particular limit. Second, it really depends. There are a significant number of benefits to being short stacked. Lower variance is just one reason. But if you are a decent player post-flop, playing with short stacks will probably cut into your hourly rate.

[DexterJoe]

It is disappointing to hit a hand and not take a bigger stack from somoeone. I wonder, though, am I getting more calls on these bigger hands because I am shortstacked?

Thanks for the feedback.

[boycalledroy]

No, you are getting calls because bad players make bad plays. Say you have 60bb instead of 100bb. Preflop raise is to 8bb and you have 77. You have no odds for catching a set. Flop comes 77A, you just lost the chance at gaining 92bb's cos of shortstacking.

[catfish_01]

Being short-stacked does have it's advantages. For instance, at any limit your decision making is made easier. Perhaps at lower limits, bigger stacks might not take you seriously. But the thing is, if you have a bigger stack, you can entice even bigger mistakes by good postflop play. In other words, if you're comfortable making a little profit, it isn't so bad playing short-stacked. But if you ever want to have a good winrate, you will need to buy in full.

[KreellKeiser]

1) True

2) YES... I always rebuy if my stack is down 20% or more from the max buy-in.

3) If you are playing 10NL with $34, don't be surprised when you lose all your money. [censored] happens, and even a winnign player can easily lose 3.5 buy-ins. Move down and build your roll. Seriously, play the penny tables (.01/.02) for now until you have enough to play within your bankroll.

Basically, if you're a winning player, you are losing money without a full stack. To illustrate the point, let's assume that of the times you get all your money in the pot, you win 70% of the hands. If you have a $5 stack, that means you profit an average of $3.50/hand. If you are playing with a full buy-in of $10 you average a profit of $7.00/hand.

[Quester]

[ QUOTE ]
It is disappointing to hit a hand and not take a bigger stack from somoeone. I wonder, though, am I getting more calls on these bigger hands because I am shortstacked?

Thanks for the feedback.

[/ QUOTE ]

Sure, you're running into players who don't understand basic pot odds and think that your range is wider because you are short.

[AliasMrJones]

What this comes down to is what you think your edge vs the rest of the table is. Variance swings both ways. With a smaller stack, you can lose less, but you can also win less.

The bottom line is if you think you have an edge over the rest of the table, you should buy in for the max in order to maximize the amount you can win because of your edge. I always buy in for the max at 50NL and I run a script so I can hit F10 and reload up to 100BB every time I drop below 100BB. This includes when I drop below by $.50 because of taking a blind. If you think you have an edge over the rest of the table, this will maximize your winrate.

The fact that you are questioning whether you should buy in for the max and lessening variance makes me think your are playing above your bankroll and/or comfort zone. You should generally have at least 20 buy-ins for the level you are playing. If you aren't comfortable sitting with a full stack, I would strongly suggest moving down to a lower level. Playing with scared money is not good.

[Fiksdal]

OP

Read this terrific post by Pokey, it has it all. If you read it, and ever again intentionally sit at a table with less than the full buy-in, I will be very surprised.