I hosted a home game recently, and some of my friends are less experienced poker players. Two of them remain quite convinced, despite my insistence to the contrary, that allowing players to buy in to a cash game for different amounts allows the deeper stacked players to "bully" the short stacks.

I agreed that the concept of "bullying" short stacks is certainly a factor in a tournament, but insisted that in a cash game format there is no advantage or disadvantage to be had if one player has 100bb and another has, say, 800bb, because the lesser, or "effective" stack is all that matters in hands involving those players. I tried to explain that it doesn't matter if the extra money is already in my stack on the table, or if it's still in my pocket waiting to be brought in if I bust or want to top up -- it amounts to the same difference with respect to hands involving those specific players. I even pointed out that there are certain cases where being the short stack is actually advantageous if the short stacker knows what they're doing. But it's no use, and my friends remain skeptical. What can I say to disabuse them of this myth? (Strangely, it's one that I seem to encounter frequently.)

Tell them that in your example, the player with 800bb is risking 800bb, in order to only win 100bb from the short stackers. You bring to the table what you're willing to lose or win, and people who are willing to risk more can buy in for more.

Don’t try to explain things to rec players

Of course this is true in a casino, but in a home game among friends, there's nothing wrong with trying to help them understand some poker theory.

I've told people that if they're feeling bullied, that it only works if you let yourself feel that way, because you can't lose more than you have on the table, no matter how much anyone else has.

Ask your recs if they think the big stack guy could bully them if he only had 100bb on the table and 700 in his pocket. That is a completely equivalent situation. Big stack guy still has the same amount of money to play with if he only has 100 on the table. If your recs feel like they are disadvantaged because big stack is not worrying about losing a 100 bb pot, that still would be true if he had 700 in his pocket.

Ask them what would happen if one player bought in for 100 BBs and it was all the money he had in the world and a millionaire bought in for 50 BBs.

Who would be able to bully who?

They are 100% correct.
Big stacks bully little stacks in cash games.
It's a common occurence.

I'm amazed how many poker players can't understand this simple reality.

Yes, it happens to some people, but only if they have that mindset and allow themselves to feel bullied. When I shortstack NL, it doesn't affect me, and in fact I have a large strategic advantage over the big stacks.

Yes HtH. But suppose a 3 player pot with 100bb and two 800bb. Yes from the POV of the 100bb player the most they can lose is 100 bb but if a player bluffs 200 bb into another player that can call it the average player views their hand a better than if he weren't risking the larger amount of money.