Playing with a short stack

I was playing shorthanded in an online (holdem) game, and came across a player who would always play with less than 50BB. If they went much higher than that, they got up and came back with 40BB. Some people consider this unethical, and I don't want to start a debate on that. (Some people consider check-raising unethical, too.) In order for some behavior to be unethical, though, it must first put other players at a disadvantage. What I'm wondering is, what sort of big-bet game is it advantageous to have a short stack? I'm thinking that in games where there are many people with large stacks seeing the flop, you could maybe buy in for the minimum. Or maybe in a game with two or three legitimate maniacs, it would be a way of controlling your variance, allowing you to play in a profitable game that would otherwise be too dangerous. (Or maybe some do so in a game where you know you're out classed but feel like playing anyway). Are there any game conditions where you get an actual advantage from having a shorter stack?

[Jimbo]

I believe Oz said that if you never had more than 1 small bet in front of you at one time you would have a sizeable advantage.

[Greg (FossilMan)]

It is a big advantage to the player who knows how to be patient and selective preflop, but who is likely to get outplayed significantly postflop. By being short, they just wait for a good starting hand and get in all in early.

Also, if your bankroll isn't big enough for the real buyin, you can buyin short and still enjoy an edge if the field is playing relatively weak "hot-and-cold" starting hands.

Later, Greg Raymer (FossilMan)

Personally, I never sit at a table online with less than the max buy-in. I could see how sitting with a short stack could be an a personal advantage to some players (for the reasons that you mentioned, i.e. stakes that they are not comfortable with, etc.), but I don't think that players with small stacks have any inherent advantages over the bigger ones. In fact, I think that ther reverse is true. The bigger stacks have more options than those with few chips. And as we all know, every edge counts in big bet poker.
Let me also add that I think small stacks are at a greater disadvantage in pot limit than in no limit. This is because it can be much difficult to isolate pre-flop in PL, and when playing volitile hand like TT and JJ (great NL short stack all-in hands, IMO) you may easily find 3 or more players after the flop. Obviously, this is less than ideal with high/middle pairs and not enough chips to protect your hand.

-Marlow
/forums/images/icons/spade.gif /forums/images/icons/diamond.gif /forums/images/icons/club.gif /forums/images/icons/heart.gif

[Zeno]

It is my opinion that any "advantage" gained by playing short stacked is outweighed by all the disadvantages. Any advantage you gain would be in hightly selective situations and playing style (i.e. Greg's post) and even then you are limiting the amount that you can win.

As an overall strategy it is shortsighted and an ill conceived notion. It severly restricts your playing style and options in games where this is of premium value!

The disadvantages are too numerous to even list and I have not the time to start one.

-Zeno

[Zeno]

Greg, you stated: "It is a big advantage to the player who knows how to be patient and selective preflop, but who is likely to get outplayed significantly postflop."

I have trouble with the latter part of your statement. If you are having trouble being outplayed postflop should you not learn the proper tactics of postflop play instead of trying a strategy of avoidance? And if this strategy is employed by players they will "never" grow or develop as a poker player, so in the long term this is a self defeating strategy. Am I missing something?

The second part of your post I agree with, however; I have doubts about the first part.

-Zeno

[Greg (FossilMan)]

What you should do to increase your EV tomorrow, and what you should do to increase your EV today, are not always the same thing.

When I first played live PLH in Oceanside, I was a 3-6 limit player. I would buy in for $100 minimum in the 3,5 blind game. I would wait patiently for a good starting hand and frequently get all the money in preflop. If I lost, I would quit or buyin another $100. If I won, I would typically have enough money that I had to play postflop as well as preflop. Sometimes, I got outplayed postflop and lost it all back. Other times, I didn't get outplayed, and won more. And learned in the process.

Later, Greg Raymer (FossilMan)