Then adjust. If its $75 to see a flop tighten your range and 3b/4b jam more often with the top portion of your range and pick up $150+ in dead money.

I like this strat a lot.

I used this extensively buying in for 100bbs in a 200bb cap game and a majority of the time people will not even recognize how tight you are and you can get your money in super good with super ease.

That's not a disadvantage... If people are raising to $50 with their entire range, then Hero should be able to make tons of money playing a $500 stack doing what IR2M said

There are advantages and disadvantages to playing both deep and short. However, in cash games big stacks don't have the advantage of just being able to run over the table like they can in tournaments.

The deeper the effective stacks, the more one can outplay his opponent by manipulating the pot. This is a 2 way street though and if you are underrolled, new to the level, or not experienced playing deep then you will actually be at a disadvantage by playing deep. By contrast, a good short stacked player can make things quite problematic for even the best deep stack players. Of course, there aren't many good short stackers because playing deep tends to be more +EV but there are advantages/disadvantages to both and there are situations where I would most certainly rather be short than deep.

I would buy in for the absolute minimum and short stack this game. Wait for monsters pre flop and plan to get it all in on almost every flop. They might catch on and stop paying you off and you can always switch tables after doubling up if you want. That or top off your doubled up stack to the max and play deeper stacked.

If I sit down at a table that is full of huge stacks I simply buy in shorter and find they are looser deep stacked and will call you down even though you are only playing huge hands. Unless they are really bad I feel more comfortable playing short knowing that their loose tendencies when deep stacked will lead to them getting involved with my QQ+.

I short stacked a couple dozen hours of 1/2 and you would be shocked how often you get snap called by A10 when your only showing up with AA, KK, QQ or AK. I still short stack when I am nervous at a table or when I first buy in since it requires almost no thinking and you can observe the players instead of thinking about your hand.

The problem with shortstacking is the rake -- when you play shorter you pay a bigger % rake, which can eat into your winrate.

If buying in "short" means 100bb that may not apply.

Your only short stacked until the first double up.

What makes shortstacking more profitable in these games is when deep stacks dont adjust properly. They will try to bully you with rags and call speculative hands with no implied odds. At least that was my experience when I used to do it a long time ago. Not sure if people have caught on more or not.

Pretty awful advice regarding ss'ing itt

Sent from my DROID4 using 2+2 Forums

Um, I think his point is the more money you have on the table the less likely it is to go in. i.e. if they ran uncapped 1/3 and you could buy in for 2k how often is the 2k going in??

i've played big games before with people buying in for ridiculous amounts that never go in...however, if you are comfortable putting it on the table there might be a day where it actually comes into play.

just a hypothetical if they capped a 2/5 game at 5k how often would you play a 10k heads up even in a decent lineup?? The answer is not really that often imo. its not to say buying in this deep might not be beneficial it's just a point im making.

another point in this same regard that is very simple is that your bankroll to play 1/2 and buy in for 200 needs to be alot less than buying into 2/5 for 200. the 200 is way more likely to get put in play (assuming you are fairly aggressive.)

Played in the game I posted about last night. I started at the must move game where the stacks were normal for a 2/5 game, between $400 and $700. When I got moved to the main game there were about 4-5 stacks >$2500. I felt like an optimal stack for me would be about $700-$800. Straddles were common and pf raises were usually between $25-35. I feel like I need to stay around $700 so that I can set mine when appropriate. There was just too much value to be had to have to fold PPs to normal opens b/c I'm not deep enough.

I was pretty card dead but left up about $200. I'm going to continue to play when the game looks good but it's usually pretty bad except for peak times Friday and Saturday nights.

If most are that deep and I'm playing in it, more than you think.

Also I'm not sure you realize but that sentence is support of my side of the argument, not yours.

Hint:

I am a winning online microstakes player and am moving into LLSNL.

I've been playing $100 buy-in at 1/2 games to get a feel for live poker without trashing my bankroll before making a stab at trying to win some actual money.

I am winning approx 8bb/hr over first 50hrs, and am getting comfortable with LLSNL (please dont give me sample size crap. I've played over 1M hands online with +winrate).

At this point, my confidence is up, and I'm planning on starting to buy-in full stacked (100-150 bb).

Two questions:

1) Does anyone have significant experience with both short stack play and full stack play to comment on what is going to happen to my winrate (and variance) presuming I play a solid full stacked game?

2) I have been playing a 50bb strategy (ie squeaky tight short-stack strategy with some med/small pp and suited aces mixed in when the price and situation are right). LLSNL players play much wider/looser than online. What is the best way to open up my range in LLSNL?

Live stats are going to be player dependent. Each table will have a totally different dynamic.
It will be much looser than online.
Focus on solid in position play vs deep players.
3bets will have nearly no fold equity
You will hardly ever be able to isolate players.
Value bet because live players will rarely fold draws (even gut shots). NO free cards.
In multiway pots, do not cbet unless you have gained equity on the flop. Villains will call with any pair.
Because of live rake rate, never buy in short.

1. Winrate should go up, a lot. You are missing tons of chances to stack fish for 100bb. Im not really an expert on variance, but if you have 1M+ hands of online play I will assume you have seen swings of 5 to 10 buy ins or more. You will have those in llsnl, but they seem to be less common. I find the games to be less swingy than TAG fest online poker.

2. Position and players. Open your range when you are in position vs. fish. I.e. reg limps in, whale limps, you have K5s on the button, raise. The reg will likely fold or play fit/fold on the flop. Now you have position on a fish and are likely ahead of his range, even though your hand seems raggy. You have lotsn of options. Bluff, value bet, check it down. Open up your button range and look to isolate fish. Thats about it.

I'm moving this to the BR, winrates and finances thread. That's where the SS vs full stack discussion belongs.

As for "What is the best way to open up my range in LLSNL?" that question is way too general for any kind of decent answer. Cliffs are: "forget "light iso," open range in position, but only for value against their worse ranges.

Well Mr. 1M+ hands winner, if sample size is not an issue, why do you need time to get comfortable?

Wouldn't you know all this basic information if you are a 1M+ hands winner?

Again, wouldn't someone with 1M+ hands experience be very capable of making these simple adjustments?

Or are you saying that you're 1M+ hands online was played in such brain dead environment, adjustments simply weren't needed?

Lolz

I'd play another 1 MM + hands

I have a lot of 50bb experience live and online it's not the win rate killer you would think.... People fail to adjust to your stack size which helps and you only really lose out if the first pot or two would have been a double up if you were full stacked other wise you either win a couple and are full stacked anyway or your BR variance is reduced

Sent from my SCH-I545 using 2+2 Forums

This is just poor advice and flawed thinking.

If I'm sitting with 300bb (nm what I bought in for, could be 50bb or in the game for 300bb already), and I get stacked, I can get back to that peak in a single hand, possibly the very next one, if my buyins are 150bb. If I buy in for 50bb, I have to double up twice to even get to 200bb.

No matter how you spin it, shorter stacks lead to higher variance.

If you don't believe it, post some scenarios and leave effective stacks blank, then start analyzing them using 50bb and 100bb effective stacks.

Tons of posters in the past think somehow tightening up to play only QQ+ can reduce variance, but what they fail to understand is that by playing only QQ+, you're forgoing a lot of +EV spots, thus translating to lower win rate.

And if you actually understand how poker variance is calculated, you would know that a key variable in calculating variance is WR.

Another thing you have to consider is that because of the massive open-raises you make live, 100bb is actually basically short already.

Think of it this way: online, you raise 3x, get one caller otb. Pot going into the flop is 7bb after drop, effective stacks are 97bb, so SPR is 14. Live, you raise to 7bb, get two callers. Pot going into the flop is 21bb, ESS is 93. SPR, then, would be a measly 4.

30 hours is entirely irrelevant. Get to 1000 hours and you can START thinking about winrate. I'd say that would be about standard though. The better players probably more like 25-30.

Sorry, I'm on my phone, so I can't move it myself, but please post this in the Winrates, Bankroll and Finances containment thread.

Edit: I'm back at my PC now. Thread re-opened and moved into the appropriate place.

Welcome to the forum, unranked. Please peruse this thread, but the general rule is that winning is a good winrate, but crushing is 10bb/hr+. I really don't think many 1/2 players are making $30/hr. Agreed that the sample size is very low.