Beginner's series: Playing the big stack effectively

[vulturesrow]

Hey all,

Since I view this forum as more of the beginner forum, I thought Id post some discussion type questions vice specific hands since we get a lot of those. So here is my first one. Note I am posting them as a person who genuinely still absorbing NL and not making any claim to expert play. [img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img]

So my first question tonight how should you change up your game when you are the big stack at the table. I know the theory pretty well in a tournament. I think that obviously this is not going to be the same for a ring game. My initial thoughts are that hands like TPTK can be played a bit more strongly. This is about as far as I have gotten heh.

I believe this is a very important topic to consider for those of us who play the small blind / limited buyin tables. Through semi-intelligent play we oftern find ourselves sitting with the big stack. I just feel that I am not maximizing the edge that having the big stack should provide.

Chris

[umdpoker]

good question. i hate playing big stacks right now whenever another big stack is at table. bump.

[turnipmonster]

the first thing to lose from tournament theory is the idea that a big stack can somehow bully a small stack in a cash game. in a cash game, "bullying" a small stack is referred to as "giving them your chips" or "doubling them up". in some parts of missisippi it is also known as "pissing away money".

big stack play really gets interesting when you are playing other big stacks. playing small stacks with a big stack is not so interesting, because it's the same as playing a stack of equal size, right?

--turnipmonster

[ML4L]

Hey vultures,

It's all about implied odds. If there is another fairly deep stack at the table, he is getting the odds to play speculative hands against you, and you are getting odds to play speculative hands against him. So, keep that in mind and try to avoid situations where you end up having to back an OK hand out of position with your stack. An overpair, for example, especially if your opponent knows that's what you have. At the same time, deep money will afford you the opportunity to play small pairs, etc., because the implied odds will be there.

So, if anything, I would play a hand like TPTK less strongly. With short stacks, that's usually enough to get my money in. With a deeper stack, you have to make sure that you don't get trapped, while still maximizing your profit. Not easy... [img]/images/graemlins/grin.gif[/img]

ML4L

[JrJordan]

Great idea vulture, I'd love to contribute my two cents.

Regarding a big stack, there is certainly a much larger advantage in tournament play than in a ring game. The opponenet always has the option to rebuy, so intimidation is a lot harder to come by. When playing the big stack against the avg size (50 BB for Party), I keep my play relatively the same. I may be a bit more aggressive, hoping I have a table image as a good player because of my stack, but not much different than this. The big stack becomes much more important, however, when playing against another deep stack. Small pocket pairs can be played for a bigger raise due to increased implied odds. Same goes for a posssible draw on the turn or river. Deeper stacks give much greater flexibility in your actions.

[JrJordan]

Good comment about TPTK. It sucks to back your stack with a mediocre holding on the 50 BB Party tables. With deeper stacks, it seems much easier to get away from. TPTK is rarely a winner when the opponenet calls a 150 BB all in bet, rather than a 50.

[SlyAK]

[ QUOTE ]
TPTK is rarely a winner when the opponenet calls a 150 BB all in bet, rather than a 50.

[/ QUOTE ]

Good point.... I play prima where there are 100 BB stacks, and if I get it all in w/ TPTK against a reasonable player it is a loser 90% of the time. However, at 50 BB's or less I would be glad to get the money in with TPTK. I do this against shorter stacks at prima all the time and usually my hand is good.

Sly

[SkippingGoat]

By the same token small pocket pairs (66-22) become dangerous to play, especially in early position, against a big stack because losing set over set can be so devastating. Because of this Reuben and Ciaffone adsvise mucking small pp's in EP.

[SpiderMnkE]

What if you just limp and bail if a big stack gets deeply involved. You can still take out some smaller stacks with a small set right? And how many big stacks are there usually. I think at this limit it is typically me, one other deep stack.. and a bunch of small stacks that keep rebuying after committing their chips with TPNK.

[schwza]

[ QUOTE ]
I just feel that I am not maximizing the edge that having the big stack should provide.


[/ QUOTE ]

if there is an edge, it is a psychological one. i personally would love to play in my normal party 50 BB game where everyone else had been forced to buy-in with 500 BB. they would be valuing hands like Axs, which would be good strategy against each other, but would be bad strategy against me.

i started a thread called something like "small stack = advantage?" a few months ago that generated some interesting discussion. most posters disagreed that it was an advantage but some of the more respected posters said that it was. i'd link to it, but i don't know how [img]/images/graemlins/frown.gif[/img].