ILCD is a gimmick account... Period! It takes some real stamina to keep up an act this good for this long... Well played sir.

Wait. So now the guy topping off is "loose"? I thought he was scared?

Nothing says pro grinder like losing half your stack and grinding it out trying to break even rather than topping it off so you can play effectively. Good lord.

Teach him...

I'm a 1/2 2/5 donk rec player, and ummm I dunno if this is a level or not. Now, I don't top off my stack after I lose 6 bb but I mean I don't sit there and shortstack it up with 30 bb to prove I'm a warrior, to be quite frank that comment is insane.

But it has to be a level.

If we think we're one of the better players at the table (ha, don't we all?) then I'd always buy in for the max and top off pretty much before every single hand (keep ~$100 in chips in your pocket ready to top up). I always keep my stack >= maximum - $5. And I bring 4 BIs to the table.

Put it this way... If you grab 9's and flop mid set on a A95r board, and your lagtard villian raises you, do you want to have 40bbs in your stack, or 100bbs in your stack?

Also there's just less you can do with a small stack... it really is -ev compared to playing a properly sized stack.

Don't be the douche who bothers the dealer after every hand to top off his 3BB he just lost, but if you get down to around 80bbs (preferably after losing a hand), go ahead and top off

Also 100bbs is fine. If you aren't used to playing more than 100bbs my advice is to just not. It's enough that you can play based on implied odds and make plays (not that you should really bluff much at 1/2), but not so much that it dominates the game and your whole session will be about trying to get your mega 200+bb stack in good

everyone in this thread pretty much agrees except for iLCD.

TTHRIC?

Topping off puts a target on you. People disagree because they're insecure about they stack. Or they don't play for a living. Limon suggest short stacking because its better to play with your opponents chips. I look at poker as trading chips. Why do I need to top off if I'm better then all the players. Just wait and the chips always come back.

Remember your playing with fish. No need to top off. If they're stack is yours but they don't know it yet.

Because if their stack is larger than yours you can win less. That should be very obvious.

iLCD is now putting words in Limon's mouth... Nice job Dude!

im not sure what you guys are arguing about but you should always cover the worst player at the table and or the player to your right unless he is very good and the player to your left is very good and deep then it really doesnt matter much (if this is the case change seats immediately).

Welcome.

ILCD - I believe you're letting your insecurity of stack sizes get mixed up with your insecurity of other sizes.

Should I play deep?

The issue is more complex than "If you are good, play as deep as possible." This is very close, but a little wrong.

Deeper games emphasize post flop skill. If you have greater post flop skill than your opponents, you maximize winnings by being as deep as possible at all times. You ensure that you can win the maximum for your big hands. You do not cap the amount that it is possible to win if the right situation comes about.

If you are not so great post flop, but derive your profit from playing super-tight, this might actually not be the case.

A super-nit, deriving most of his profit from JJ+ and AK, could increase his reverse-implied odds by playing deep.

This would only be the case if you were poor post flop (had trouble dumping hands) and your opponents never stack off with only 1 pair while deep, etc.

For this reason, a very nitty, tight player might actually do better buying in for 60BB at 2/5 ($300) than they would buying in for 150BB at 1/2 (also $300). This is not common. It would only be the case for very specific game dynamics where his good hands are capped in the value he can obtain since they are usually only 1 pair hands.

Should I top up?

I see many regulars (not pros, just regulars) who believe that they should keep their first stack on the table for as long as possible no matter how it dwindles. Thus they will not have to dip into their pockets and put more of their own cash on the table. This "makes them work harder" to not waste chips and play well since they can see the immediate consequences of their actions. It is not optimal.

You should ALWAYS work hard to maximize your profits. You should not need to see your stack shrinking to know to tighten up. Similarly, if your stack is large, you cannot loosen up just because of stack size. (you MIGHT be able to loosen up with larger EFFECTIVE stacks but not just your own stack being larger).

The most profitable way to play is to keep the stack size that gives you the largest edge on your opponents while at the same time making the best possible decisions that lead to maximum profit. For most good post flop players, this means topping up.

How to top up

If you are going to top up, stop at the cage before you sit down and grab some $25 chips that you can throw onto your stack when you need. Topping up in the middle of the game with the chip runner or the dealer is awkward and slows the game. I wouldn't bring attention to topping up, since good players will associate it with solid play.

Good post, and yes topping up brings attention to your self.

We are arguing about topping off stacks after losing a pot. I think its a form of tilt. Maybe I used the word scared money incorrect. When in actuality I meant insecure money.

I see players all the time rebuying and topping off. I target these players because they have money and I want it.

I was just trying to tell people to have some heart and work your way back. Unless you took a bad beat and lost half your stack. But if your topping off after losing 20bbs I think its a mistake for your image.

Just my 2 cents.

Pretty sure this logic doesnt make any sense. You also obviously dont have any serious online experience.

Also what do you mean by a "target". If ppl are actively playing outside of their own game in order to outplay you that should be to your advantage. Or am i wrong in this thinking?

When I say "target", that means who I'm trying to play pots with. I target certain players after I feel everyone out. I don't want to play pots with guys who don't take chances and there stack never moves. I want to play against the guys who are topping off and the rebuy guys(lol). While I come up with a plan to bust the superior players. You do that by watching what and how they play hands. It takes a long time to get a situation with those players.

So the easy targets are fish and solid rolled players who play poker and don't nut peddle.

Solid Roll player: is a player who has a job nice life and knows the fundamentals of poker. You don't have to have the nuts to get this players money.

Depends on your roll and if have 20 but ins once u double up you should get up and but back in

if you have 20 "but ins" you should quit poker and get a job as an interior designer...

iCLD, what you've just written is one of the most insanely idiotic things I have ever heard. At no point in your rambling, incoherent response were you even close to anything that could be considered a rational thought. Everyone on this board is now dumber for having read it. I award you no points, and may God have mercy on your soul.

Lol'd