A confession

[Sponger15SB]

I really suck at playing deeper stacks than like 70bb, so today at a $25nl table I got up to $70 and even though there was a guy on my right who had a $140 stack and had a 80vpip/20pfr I left the table because it seemed unlikely that if we got involded in a massive pot I would win the hand.

[sourbeaver]

I guess you're gonna have to read up, sponger /images/graemlins/wink.gif
I don't have an uncanny mastery of deep stacks myself.

[Burno]

Bump.

You deserve more embarassment for this. Against bad players a big stack is not difficult to play, period. You are missing out on loads of opportunities and a bunch of money by fleeing when your stack gets large. I'd understand if you were leaving at 5 buy-ins on the 200 tables but there is really no excuse for packing up from the 25's just because you get a stack. After all, these are the worst players party has.

[Kaz The Original]

If you're short on the bankroll, I fully understand.
If it's a matter of playing ability, this is one of the best positions to be in, and nothing short of wild horses tares me away from a chotch with a huge stack.

[TheWorstPlayer]

I'll do this when I am running bad because a string of up and down sessions really tilts me. But normally, I think you are giving up at least 50% of your potential profit doing this. You could have made $106. /images/graemlins/tongue.gif

[sourbeaver]

I once got Wayfare-wacked for saying I liked the idea of cashing out at 50NL when my stack got to 80.

After further experimentation, I can safely say that playing the big stack is more profitable (for me).