My BigBet Buy in?

[dux]

I am thinking of playing 25c/50c Pot Limit online. Minimum buy-in $5, maximum buy in $100. What would be a decent amount of money to have on-site to play this game regularly?

Also, would buying in for $100 be important? Or is buying in for $50 suitable?

All replies appreaciated,

duxDeluxe

[Lurker]

If you feel you have the best of it, buy in for the max and rebuy back up to $100 whenever you drop below. When I play in these games, since I can't buy-in to cover all bets, I wanna be able to double up completely in order to have more chips at the table. I want to level the playing field with those that have won more than the max buy-in asap.

-L

[Jeffrey Biship]

Assuming you play with an edge, how much would you feel is a good "starter bankroll" for these games?

$1000? More?

Thanks,

Jeff

[dux]

Interesting thoughts, I think I should be topping up my chips when I start to dip early, I'm begginning to realise a short stack is cannon fodder.

[Lurker]

</font><blockquote><font class="small">In reply to:</font><hr />
I'm beginning to realise a short stack is cannon fodder.

[/ QUOTE ]

Hmm, well kinda. It is true that big stacks have a definite strategic advantage over short ones. And while there is a proper strategy for playing a short stack, I only like to use it when I have no other choice (i.e. in tournaments).

I want to always be at the max buy-in or higher for the following reason: deeper stacks mean there's more room for play after the flop. More play after the flop means more opportunities to outplay the opposition (or vice versa). When I think I'm better than most of the field (esp. the big stacks), I want take advantage of their mistakes and pick up their stacks.

-L

[Guy McSucker]

Why do big stacks have a strategic advantage over short ones?

Big stack against big stack makes for a more interesting game, that's for sure - implied odds soar, playing creatively is profitable, and reading hands becomes vital because if you don't spot that somebody hit a gutshot against your set, your large stack is toast.

But if you have a short stack, you don't worry about implied odds, look for made hands on the flop, and are very happy if your large stacked opponents are playing thinish draws against one another, since they will fail to connect most of the time and you win your part of the pot.

I don't see an advantage for the big stacks in this situation; at least, not an advantage over the short-stacked player.

Guy.

[34TheTruth34]

I'm certainly not a good no-limit/pot-limit player, so take my advice with a grain of salt. But what I like to do is buy into these games for like $10 and play very aggressively so that I either run it up to like $30 or $40 (and the max I can lose is $10). I still play only good starting hands, but I just usually bet or raise at every opportunity, playing very aggressively. The other players who buy in for the same amount ($5-$15) aren't willing to gamble, so you can usually bully them out. This will help you improve your hand reading skills and once you figure out who only bets or raises with the nuts, you will make good money.

Having said all that, if you play this game over the long term and are a good winning no-limit/pot-limit player, then it would make sense to always have the maximum allowable amount of money in front of you at the start of every hand.

[David]

[MHoydilla]

If your going to play everyday and try to grind out a profit I would suggest atleast 10x the max buyin, 50 if you can. Having extra reserves allows you take advantage of all EV plays even the ones where you are a 5/4 fav. or simular small fav. spots for all the chips. With less than 10 buy ins a bad run of cards could kill you even if every time you push your chips in you are atleast a small favorite.