I bought in full, lost a lot of my stack.

Also, I'm not a super strong believer in the theory that "win-rates are significantly slashed by playing shortstacked".

When I lose a full $200 buyin, it's VERY rare that it's all lost in one hand. It's almost always me calling a $10 raise, then folding the flop. I lose small portions over many hands.

If that's the case, then the only benefit of playing deep-stacked against other deep stacks (inducing larger, all-in mistakes) isn't there. I feel like the value of my opponent's mistakes are not significantly larger if it's deep-stack vs. deep-stack as opposed to deep-stack vs. short-stack.

More info on my plan for limping pre flop:

If a tight player raised, I would fold. If someone raised and there were a lot of callers, I'd call to setmine. If there were many limpers behind me, this would be ideal and I'd setmine.

Once the LAG raises me though, I figure 88 is too strong to fold and obviously I can't set mine (not nearly deep enough). I could flat, with the plan of continuing postflop often even when overcards come. But that will lead to very tough decisions very often. I thought limp/raising would lead to tough spots less often since I could narrow his range better.

I can 5 bet shove and narrow someone's range to AA but that doesn't make it good.

I guess I would open shove this flop considering the pot size in relation to your stack.
Then again I probably wouldn't come over the top utg with 88 then get scared away by a AKQ.

Leading out utg looks pretty strong here imo the only issue is you stack size which is meager and pathetic manage that bitch better ....

None the less when he checks behind that's your green light on the turn...

take it down ..

youll be back around 70bb or you can be weak and not crush souls ...your sitting at 30bb son ship ittttt



but at my game
aks-aqs-aj is getting 4 bet and aa-kk-qq is getting it in pre.

You should re-evaluate that sentiment.

When your opponent makes a mistake deep stack vs deep stack, their mistakes are MUCH more costly than when you're short. The simplest example is when you manage to get all in and win. With a short stack like you have here their mistake costs them $100, while if you'd bought in full their mistake would cost them $200. That's a HUGE difference.

The time when it's OK to play shorter is when there are a bunch of weak players at the table and 1 or 2 that are significantly better than you are. Then you want to be deep enough to cover the fish, and no deeper. You can exploit their mistakes while minimizing your disadvantage against the better players. Although this is kind of a rare situation.

I Ok well your thought process for this hand explains WHY staying short stacked is a big mistake (assuming you have a skill advantage). You are justifying going broke for 50bb on a akq flop. This is so grossly marginal even assuming you get his tt jj 99 range to fold. You are putting yourself in this spot because your spr is so low and fold equity even lower. You may risk less $$ in any given hand but you now have to commit to any decent hand in stupid spots, actually increasing variance

Sent from my SPH-D710 using 2+2 Forums

of course your win rate is reduced when playing short stacked

when betting for just pure value makes up something like 90% of your profit, you definitely want to be covering everyone at the table.

also why are you bleeding chips away by calling lots of 10 raises pre? sounds way too passive

Aaaand this too

Sent from my SPH-D710 using 2+2 Forums

Yes but OP is stating that he did not have the skill edge thus making his short stack play ideal.