[yeltzen]

I'm starting to come around on this idea. Last night I was getting my ass kicked and ended up down to about 1/2 of my original (full) buy-in. I was able to double-up pretty easily playing the short stack, and everything snowballed big time from there (which is why I was focusing so hard on the CT tourney). I should have been into this idea from the start, since I'm generally a pretty awful post-flop player.

Anyways, for those of you that do this, how short do you typically buy-in? 50BBs? 40BBs? 30BBs?

[ky70]

My biggest objection to doing it is the potential to "limit" my winnings if I'm involved in a big pot with a big hand. Of course you also limit your loses if you're on the wrong side of a big pot, but if that's your concern you should probably be playing limit hold 'em.

[yeltzen]

Originally Posted by ky70

My biggest objection to doing it is the potential to "limit" my winnings if I'm involved in a big pot with a big hand. Of course you also limit your loses if you're on the wrong side of a big pot, but if that's your concern you should probably be playing limit hold 'em.

I do agree with this, but my biggest problem is that I tend to bleed chips away with non-moster hands because I get lost on the turn and river.

As an example, I'll raise in middle position or something with AQs, get called by someone on the button, and the flop will come Qh 7s 9c. So, I'll make a 3/4 or pot-sized bet and get called. Now, unless the turn in a Q, I'm a bit lost after this. I think I have the best hand. I think the other guy is probably on a draw. But I don't really know. So, I'll tend to just make another bet on the turn because I don't know what else to do (assuming the turn isn't something like the Th).

With a short stack, this hand would probably be easier, since I wouldn't have much money left after the flop bet, and my choice is to push or check/fold.

I will lose out if I have a monster, but I think that the non-monster hands are so much more common than the monster hands (obviously), that the benefits of playing short would outweigh the benefits of playing deep for a player of my caliber.

[Wick125]

When I first started playing .5/1 NL on P* I bought in "short" for 40-50 BB to limit my losses on certain hands. Once I got more comfortable with post-flop play I started increasing the amoung of my buy-in. I think it is good to buy in short if you are unsure of your post-flop play, but once you are comfortable you really need the full buy-in to open up your game and profit capabilities.

[jalsing]

I tend to do this as well, at least live. If we're playing .50/1.00 and everyone's buying in for $100, I generally buy in for $50-$60. To me that's a comfortable range, I don't like to put myself in a mode where I'll play looser because I have a bigger stack. I'm looking for a decent hand and hoping to double through one of the looser big stacks. You still have plenty of room to gamble a bit, and still have fold equity to protect vulnerable hands. I just don't see the need to have so much on the table relative to the blinds. Late in the game where there's more money on the table, I can understand, but not initial buy in. If I find myself treading around $50 still after a few people have been stacked, I might top off to the max just to keep up.

[A-Ro]

The bottom line is it comes down to discipline. If you don't trust your post flop play then you should only by in for 50 BB's. Once your post flop play improves and you are disciplined enough to stick to your game planm, then you can buy in for 80-100 BB's to maximize your winnings.

[smoore]

If I buy in short I find myself playing too tightly. Like 20/8 tightly. I seem to do much better when I can play 30/10 or so, I think because I'm a fairly tight player the other "savvy" (they aren't really) players only give me action if I have enough money to make it worth their while.

[deuces empty]

I generally buy in for 50BBs for my first buy in. If the game is beatable and I lose my stack to donkey play, I'll buy in 100BBs because I know I can double that up easy.

[yeltzen]

Originally Posted by deuces empty

I generally buy in for 50BBs for my first buy in. If the game is beatable and I lose my stack to donkey play, I'll buy in 100BBs because I know I can double that up easy.

So you're saying you use the Martingale buy-in strategy?

[TheMightyJim2k]

buy-in for 40bb. simple math

4xbb pf raise called in 3 places. (36bb left)

12xbb in pot- bet pot (24bb left) called in 1 spot

36xbb in pot- shove (0bb left) if called in one spot

84xbb in final pot. you were able to slow down draws on the flop and turn, not get lost on the river, and if someone makes a donkey play you can shove ont he flop.

BONUS of shortstack play!!!! this is a secret that noone knows! (sarcasm)

if you buy-in short people think you suck or are losing. especially if you buy in for $21.12 at a $50 table. When you shove on the flop or turn you will get calls from people who think you are a donkey just making a stupid move. They'll call you down with weak hands because your small stack has capped their loss. You actually get much much more action when you are ahead. But this is a secret so don't tell anyone.....