I was looking at the tables on FT earlier tonight and a few pros and high stakes players were playing a 500/1000 capped full ring game. There was almost two full games going. The cap was 30K. I find it strange that all these big name players would effectively choose to play a short stack game for 30bbs. I'm not saying there isn't any skill in short stack poker, but I thought shorter stacks took away a lot of play options (multi-street bluffing, certain 3 betting strategies, being able to play certain scs/pps, etc). Can someone explain the appeal of this game to good high stakers (other than "they don't want to lose a lot of money on one hand), when short stackers are regularly mocked on this forum as well as at the tables? The non-capped games only have 2-3 players.

The game was NLHE. Notables at the games included Gus Hansen, John Juanda, durrr, OMGClayAiken.

same reason why any mid to high stake game runs.
the guy(s) who suck wanted to play it.

i watched a bit of that, seems like they just wanted to gambol a lot

It sounds like they were there for some rando. Although, I remember someone (Cole?) commenting on Juanda being one of the weaker players in a particular lineup.

there's a big difference between short-stacking regular tables and playing at a capped table.

What is the major difference? The only difference I see is that there is nobody else at the table that has way more to play with in one hand than you at a capped table, but realistically your effective stack is only as big as your opponent's in any given hand anyway, so where's the practical difference?

example:

you are on the button, got AA and 17BB left,

action to you - utg raise to 4BB, fold to CO that calls and you shove for 13bb more

now utg and CO both have 100BB stacks and let's say utg has a hand that he would call with for 13BB in a 21.5BB pot but doesn't want a call from CO that would induce further betting on later streets

with a 17BB starting stack he would just shove and wouldn't care

so that's the difference

Quote:
short stackers are regularly mocked on this forum as well as at the tables?

there's a big difference between short-stacking regular tables and playing at a capped table.

Because short stackers are regularly mocked on this forum as well as at the tables, what does that mean?

There is a herd mentality on this site, number 1. The herd is not always right.

Games have min max buys in so short stacking is allowed. It is a strategy (short stack) that people use and it works.

Many people will look at a short stack and fold to a raise or a bet and say "you don't have enough there to make it worth while." Short stack says thanks and takes the pot.

Don't denigrate a short stack so quickly.

I don't see why people would care if a short stack is at a table. I'd rather a low stack or two on a table than no money at all in their seats. It's not like they're exploiting any system. And as far as I know, they just have to play tighter than big stacks, which I wouldn't mind. Of course not to say they would play tighter. But they know they can't put the moves on as much if someone doesn't fear their stacks as much.

I guess somebody(s) wanted to play a high stakes 30BB game and the other(s) thought they had an edge on them in that format though they('d) probably prefer to play deeper.

It's not exactly like shortstacking because shortstacking is playing a shortstack while others play deeper stacks thus allowing the shortstack to exploit the deep stacks as the deep stacks try to play against each other. Here everyone has 30BB's so yea.

I'm sure the people who think they have a good edge deeper would rather play deeper but I guess one or more of the supposed weaker players wants to play this structure.

plus the short stacks at regular tables usually rathole, which is kind of annoying as well.