$90 leaves you with no room to maneuver in 1/2, doesn't allow you to call raises preflop with small PP and suited connectors while having the proper implied odds, and more importantly, doesn't put people "on tilt". Why would people become tilted because you specifically have $90, or tip the chip runner? Makes no sense.

All true.
Actually, playing a short stack at a cash table of deeper stacks can be extremely effective, if you do it right (which most people don't).
But if it does work, and you double up a couple of times, you no longer have a short stack, and you need to be able to change strategy (or get up), which is very hard for a lot of players to do. Which means that you really do need to learn how to play deepstack poker, too, or else limit your sessions tightly.

I will often buy in short (50-60 bb) when I sit down at a new table, in order to get the feel of the table and the other players, before committing the max. (I also enjoy playing shortstack poker as above for a while.) But after several orbits, I want to have at least the max buyin in front of me, preferably more; ideally it's from others' money , if not, then I just buy up to the max (and shift strategy).

All the people advocating short stacking because "you can do well if you do it correctly" and because "deep stacked players have to adjust to short stack strategy when playing against them" ..... how many good, consistent, long term winning short stack players do you know?

I remember sitting at the Taj in AC in 2/5 a few years ago at night and having some rambling, middle aged imbecile at the table pontificating to everyone about the wonders of short stacking. He made sure to let us know as soon as he sat down that he always bought in for $100, played premium hands, and attacked aggressively, and that the other players always called him "with nothing". He also boasted that he'd made "$20,000" already this year playing this way (off the top of my head I think this was in May or June).

This player was gone from the table in an hour and a half, after burning through 3 of his mini buy-ins, one of which was in a limped pot against yours truly, where he "value" shoved AsKs on a board of 8h7h6d, and became dismayed when I turned over 6h5h.

Tell em all to STFU, Op. Personally, whenever I see someone sit with either max BI or that 100bb amount, I peg him as an online player, or at least a competent player, until I see otherwise.

I generally like to buyin about 70-75bb (140-150). This gives me plenty room to play some hands and take a beat or two before I reach in my pocket to top off. I figure I'll likely pick up a pot or two and and be at that magical 100bb soon enough, but 30% of it will be someone else's mone .

Once you get below 40bb, you're generally too short to play effectively and should top off (or consider getting up).

Another thing I do is buy my whole stop/loss for the sesh before sitting*. Then, when I sit I can eyeball stacks and will likely put out an average stack so as not to attract undue attention.

* A bit of a derail, but this has other advantages:
- If I want to toss on another 20 or 30, it's no big deal
- I worry about looking like a fish by re-buying
- If I stack off, I can re-load right away
- No more chips = time to go. No temptations to say "aww, to hell with it" and pull out another hundo (or, horror of horrors, hit the ATM )
- Easier to know my profit/loss for the night. If I buy 250-300 up front and cash out 450, I know right away I had an alright night.

Since most typical players are losers and not very good at poker, what kind of advice would you expect the typical player to give?
If your goal is to win as much money as possible then short stacking gives a GOOD player a HUGE advantage. You won't get real GOOD advice from people that don't have a clue.
You can always add on but you cannot take $$$$ off.
Good luck

i personally buy in for 100 at first. But if i see my table is deepstacked when i get there then i usually buy in more.

I think I develop a snug image buying in short and griding to 100Bb. Then change gears.

I'm going to try buying deep tonight to see what its like.

You aren't really buying in short at 150 with that min max range. If the min max was 60-300 buying in at 100 or less is short. IMO, if you buy in short you have to play way more aggressive because you cant call your way to the river if the bets get big. Ive seen short stacks double up quick by just shoving pf a few times with a few raisers ahead.

Yea it makes some tilt. Even makes some forum tilt, and there is no better way to start off your session then blowing off your first buy-in then getting down to business with your second (full) buy-in.

Besides I'm actually talking about 1-2 PLO.

Pulled this from this post by Pokey... Pretty good stuff. He gives some outstanding reasoning behind not buying in short.

Blew my mind and probably going to take effect in my game very soon.

Good info Webernaut!

If you don't mind, could you post your results after you play your first session deepstacked?

"Everyone" doesn't like you to buy in short because it's harder to win your money when you buy in short. Ignore those trying to get you to buy in above your comfort level. Besides, after you double up a couple times, you won't be short anymore.

Or they'll stack off their short buys multiple times and slither away.

Missing from this discussion is the idea that a great many of us reading it aren't as good as we think we are. That huge postflop advantage from deepstack play honestly probably doesn't apply to most of us.

Almost everybody thinks he's good, including the people we peg as "fish". We're all someone's fish.

I like to have a large stack of chips in front of me so I buy in for the max, simple as that. Some guys prefer shorter stacks and some of them are good at playing them, simple as that. Pros and cons abound in this.