Immediately buying back in for the minimum after leaving a limit game
 

Hi folks -
Here's the deal: currently on PokerStars, you can leave a limit poker table, then immediately buy back in for the minimum buy-in. [1]

I've gotten a couple of complaints about this behavior, and I can't decide if it's really important or not. So I'd like to get your all's opinions.

If you select option three (Players doing this can get an unfair advantage), please provide at least a semblance of an argument why.

Best regards,
Lee Jones

PokerStars Poker Room Manager

[1] Not at big-bet games.

Re: Immediately buying back in for the minimum after leaving a limit game
 

Hi Lee,

I was one of the players who emailed you about this. I think its great that you posted this poll, Stars support is so far and away the best on the net.

Re: Immediately buying back in for the minimum after leaving a limit game
 

I don't really see anything wrong with it.

It's always been a rule in No Limit, which to be honest I don't quite understand either..I have always thought it was just made not to piss other players off who wanted to get their money back.

In limit this is much less of an issue as their is capped betting per round. It sometimes is frustrating to play with someone who is short stacked but I don't think its a big enough deal to disallow it.

As for an advantage..I just don't see it, unless you're some preflop genius who doesn't know how to play postflop and just wants to shove them in anytime you get AK or whatnot...I don't see having a shortstack being +EV in limit, if anything its -EV because you will be forced "all-in" and you don't have the ability to but as many bets in as you want.

Re: Immediately buying back in for the minimum after leaving a limit g
 

Barry Greenstein claims that someone doing this would have a huge advantage. He talks about it on Ace on the River and has a post about short limit buyins somehwere on the forums.

Re: Immediately buying back in for the minimum after leaving a limit g
 

Sure Barry wasn't talking about big bet?

Re: Immediately buying back in for the minimum after leaving a limit g
 

[ QUOTE ]
I think its great that you posted this poll, Stars support is so far and away the best on the net.

[/ QUOTE ]


Agreed. Also I dont think that an advantage can be gained by leaving and coming back w/ a smaller stack, because you miss a hand if you do this; or you start again (from the BB) at the start of a round.

Re: Immediately buying back in for the minimum after leaving a limit g
 

[ QUOTE ]
Sure Barry wasn't talking about big bet?

[/ QUOTE ]

yes. I am 100% positive. I was surpised by this myself. I'm too lazy to search for his post right now, but he doesn't have many, so it can't be too hard to find. I think it was in the General forum.

Re: Immediately buying back in for the minimum after leaving a limit g
 

[ QUOTE ]
Barry Greenstein claims that someone doing this would have a huge advantage. He talks about it on Ace on the River and has a post about short limit buyins somehwere on the forums.

[/ QUOTE ]

I believe he meant really short buyins (i.e. 2 big bets). IMO having 5 big bets is a large amount, and any advantage either way is incredibly insignificant.

Re: Immediately buying back in for the minimum after leaving a limit g
 

I'm not sure if it gives much of an advantage or not as I'm not a limit player. However, if some people think that it does, then I suggest either banning it or making it easier to do. It seems a little absurd to make people close and reopen a table in order to get an edge (or to get what they think is an edge).

Btw, you really rule for doing this, and I'm sure you're stealing a lot of people from party by being so customer friendly.

Re: Immediately buying back in for the minimum after leaving a limit g
 

Ok.. I found the thread.

Here is a quote by Barry.

[ QUOTE ]
If you allowed a break-even player to buy in for one-fourth the normal minimum, he would easily be come a winning player, whether in limit or no-limit. The times that pots would be won because of being all-in would far outweight the times that an opponent could be bet out of a pot.

[/ QUOTE ]

And the thread is at: link

Note that he really isn't talking about min buyin, he's talking about short buyins that are allowed in some cardrooms.

Re: Immediately buying back in for the minimum after leaving a limit g
 

Besides BG, you can read Sklansky in TPFAP for the obvious explanation.

Re: Immediately buying back in for the minimum after leaving a limit g
 

It drives me crazy when players buy-in for the minimum. It allows weaker players to keep me from out-playing them on the flop. When HU, I'll refuse to play an opponent that is too short stacked. However, I don't see the difference btwn leaving and coming back or simply rebuying. I clicked the bad ettiquette button.

Re: Immediately buying back in for the minimum after leaving a limit g
 

I know that in some book some author goes into detail about why 7CS would be beatable if you could buy in for 1 or 2 BBs and if you left you would sit down with the minimum again. UB actually has something like this. They let you buy in the 7CS with one bet. I have no idea about the LHE games on UB though. I don't think there is an advantage at stars though, if there is it is minimal and it doesn't happen often.

Re: Immediately buying back in for the minimum after leaving a limit game
 

While you are here Lee, I would like you to consider one change regarding these new "Deep Stacks" tournaments you have added. As with a host of other inventions in your tournament-lobby, this was yet another quality addition. However, the structure is just a little bit TOO kind, it takes TOO long and I mean, 4 hours with a lot of play in your stack without adding to your starting stack is enourmous. I would suggest you go from 30 minutes intervals to 20 minutes. It will still be a fantastic tournament for those seeking a slow structure in small buy-in online tournaments.

Oh, and I think allowing min. buy-ins at any time for a limit game is fine.

Lars

Re: Immediately buying back in for the minimum after leaving a limit game
 

No changes, it's purrfect.

Re: Immediately buying back in for the minimum after leaving a limit g
 

Greenstein was wrong if you want to nitpick on his advice. If the normal minimum buyin in a LHE game was 100BB, then some1 buying in for 25BB would not have an inherent advantage. If however the normal buyin was 5BB (like it is on stars), and some1 were allowed to buyin for 1.25BB they would make a killing.

Re: Immediately buying back in for the minimum after leaving a limit g
 

i dont know if you meant to reply to me, but I've never read BG's book

[ QUOTE ]
If however the normal buyin was 5BB (like it is on stars), and some1 were allowed to buyin for 1.25BB they would make a killing.

[/ QUOTE ]

this i believe(and what i was referring too) are inside a 2+2 book. I know that narrows it down alot [img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img].

Re: Immediately buying back in for the minimum after leaving a limit game
 

here's my take:
essentially, it PROBABLY wouldn't matter. however, if someone were to double their stack, leave the table, and then immediately buy-in for the original amount, they may have have an advantage by limitiing their risk. say they started w/10BB and went up to 20BB. without cashing out, they may say to themselves, i won't let myself go below my original 10BB buy-in. next thing you know, they get AA cracked by your 35o straight while they're holding trip A's, and they are down to 8BB. if you allow them to take the money off the table, they will be all-in before they can go back below the original 10BB, and will be taking out any possibility that they will be losing any money to the table.
the two ways of making money are maximizing profits and minimizing costs and/or risk in this case.
this may sound a little far-fetched, but it's just a few of my thoughts on the matter.

Re: Immediately buying back in for the minimum after leaving a limit g
 

It limits some of the swings but why would it be more effective? Its not like you can go allin vs the blinds with 10BB. But if some people complain I see no reason not to raise it to 20BB. If you have 2000 to blow you probably have 4000. With 5BB it starts to become unfair imo.

Re: Immediately buying back in for the minimum after leaving a limit g
 

Yeah just raise the minimum buyin to perhaps 15 or 20BB, problem solved. If they can't afford to buyin to the game with this much, they shouldn't really be playing

Re: Immediately buying back in for the minimum after leaving a limit g
 

i believe most limit players, especially the higher limit ones, would much rather have a lower amount that you can buyin for (so that more fishies come). Personally i rarely play high stakes limit anymore, but i'm pretty sure the above would be true. However in NL i'd rather have the minimum buyin raised... quite a bit.

Re: Immediately buying back in for the minimum after leaving a limit g
 

[ QUOTE ]
believe he meant really short buyins (i.e. 2 big bets). IMO having 5 big bets is a large amount, and any advantage either way is incredibly insignificant.

[/ QUOTE ]

Keep in mind that constantly lowering your stack to 5BB increase your chances of getting one of those 1/2BB good situations so its definitely +EV for "abuser". Diffrent matter is that its probably very tiny advantage and not many players can make good use out of it.

Best wishes

Re: Immediately buying back in for the minimum after leaving a limit g
 

[ QUOTE ]
If the normal minimum buyin in a LHE game was 100BB, then some1 buying in for 25BB would not have an inherent advantage.

[/ QUOTE ]

They would have an advantage as I stated in reply to your other post. If someone buyin for 25BB they have bigger chance of getting one of those "1.25BB" +EV situation.

Re: Immediately buying back in for the minimum after leaving a limit game
 

Lee,

While you're here, has Stars ever fixed that very annoying glitch where if someone bets all-in less than that round's bet (say 48 on a $60 betting round), you can only complete the bet? This is very annoying and I know it was on the list of things that were supposed to be fixed. Obviously, in this situation (all in bet more than half the required amount), I should be allowed to raise to $108. Let me know.

Thanks,
Jeff

Re: Immediately buying back in for the minimum after leaving a limit game
 

doesn't matter. Isn't the buyin for most limit games like 5 big bets. It goes both ways, I just played with someone with bought in 5 BB had AK vs 55 flop is AK5. I feel lucky he only had 4BB then. It really doesn't matter especially on the internet, people are coming and going to tables so fast I usually don't even notice

Re: Immediately buying back in for the minimum after leaving a limit game
 

Increase the minimum buyin to 10 bbs.

Re: Immediately buying back in for the minimum after leaving a limit game
 

Seems like this might be more of an issue because 'stars default buyin is the min, instead of Party's 25BB. You end up with people buying in short because they think they're doing what they're told. I know this doesn't address the leaving issue, but that might not be an issue at all if people were promted to buy in with 25BB stacks.

Re: Immediately buying back in for the minimum after leaving a limit game
 

[ QUOTE ]
Seems like this might be more of an issue because 'stars default buyin is the min, instead of Party's 25BB. You end up with people buying in short because they think they're doing what they're told. I know this doesn't address the leaving issue, but that might not be an issue at all if people were promted to buy in with 25BB stacks.

[/ QUOTE ]
I agree the defaults should be higher.


Personally I like to see short stacks at the table. I think it gives some information.

#1) They want to go for the big win and gamble
#2) They are moving up and don't want to risk much (i.e. usually weak tight)

The very slight +EV you may gain by playing a very short stack more often is IMO quickly offset by the one time you get AA only to win the blind portion of a 15 BB pot.

Re: Immediately buying back in for the minimum after leaving a limit g
 

[ QUOTE ]
Yeah just raise the minimum buyin to perhaps 15 or 20BB, problem solved. If they can't afford to buyin to the game with this much, they shouldn't really be playing

[/ QUOTE ]

there is your answer. The problem is that every player at the table, before they *look* at their cards has a piece of the blinds. You sit down on a 10-20 table with 5 other people and your share of the blinds is $5. That $5 usually isn't important, but if you're playing a 5BB stack, you're basically getting 1.05:1 odds. Other players put more than 5BBs at risk every hand. Technically, 12BBs are at risk, though most hands don't get that high. Their odds are closer to 1.03:1. It isn't much of an edge, but it is an edge a casino would salivate over.

I don't have a clear grasp of this concept, so my explanation may be hard to follow or my thinking may be off.

Re: Immediately buying back in for the minimum after leaving a limit g
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
If the normal minimum buyin in a LHE game was 100BB, then some1 buying in for 25BB would not have an inherent advantage.

[/ QUOTE ]

They would have an advantage as I stated in reply to your other post. If someone buyin for 25BB they have bigger chance of getting one of those "1.25BB" +EV situation.

[/ QUOTE ]

Having 1.25BB in the big blind is a very +EV situation. Having 1.25BB on the button is not as +EV for the next 8 hands (lets just assume ring table) as having 5000000BB. This is assuming that you play just as well as your opponents. When you have 5BB you are probably losing some EV as opposed to some1 sitting w/ 500000BB, because your first hand is in the BB, and chances are very high that you will either have a decent sized stack (5BB+), or be bust, by he time the big blind comes back around. Also with 25BB you cant control at what point you have 1.25BB or w/e other small amount (which would be +EV in the big blind). I'm sure if researh was done, and ou knewhow the games played etc. buying in for XBBmight be slightly more profitable than buying in for kXBB (where k is some factor of X). However this would be a ridiculously minute difference which would also take an insane amount of computing technology and DATA to even discover (which amount was right forwhich opponents, game types etc).

In your average pokerstars (or any other site w/ a similar buyin structure) LHE game, the difference between 2 exactly even players, one of whom tries to buyin for the right amounts, and another who sits w/ 5,000,000,000$ would be less than .1BB/100 IMO, and probably less than .02/.03BB/100 (i'd need to put more thought into this; those numbers are just a guess).

Re: Immediately buying back in for the minimum after leaving a limit game
 

The way I see it there are two cases:

1) Heads up pot: In a heads up pot both participants have an effective stack equal to the smaller stack as we all know. In this case ignoring blinds (which average out over multiple hands) there is symmetry and neither player has an advantage. However when a player is short stacked there is a higher chance of that player going all in at some point in the hand. There is no inherent advantage to this however once it happens there are no more decisions to be made in the hand. Without decisions a good player can no longer make better decisions to gain EV over his opponent, this is good for bad players and bad for good players but will never turn a losing player in to a winner. In summary there is no inherent advantage heads up.

2) Multiway pot: In a three way pot there are two effective stacks the smallest stack and the second smallest stack. There is an asymmetry here and thus the possibility of and advantage to one player or another. Whenever the smallest stack goes all-in he can no longer be forced out of a pot, however one of the remaining players may be forced out. Once a side pot has begun the player who is all-in has an EV for the main pot. If no one folds the all-in players long term return from the pot will be this amount. However if someone does fold the EV of the all-in player will either stay the same or go up it never goes down through the action of a fold by a third party. This results in an advantage to the short stack player. Some people will claim that the short stack also loses out on the chance to win a larger pot when they have a strong hand, which is true but they will also miss out on the opportunity to lose a large pot when they make a strong second best hand. This is a symmetric situation so there is no inherent disadvantage of going all-in as a short stack in a multiway pot. Just like in the heads up case when a player goes all-in they can no longer make decisions this is good for losing players neutral for break even players and bad for winning players. In summary there is an inherent advantage to going all-in in a multi way pot with action still to occur. I think it’s clear that the scale of this advantage is inversely proportional to the size of the short stack. The real question should be at what stack size this advantage becomes inconsequential. My feeling is that even at 3BB there is still a reasonable advantage to this as it’s not uncommon for a multiway pot to get capped preflop online. The advantage is probably pretty small at 5BB, but someone rat holing down to 5BB would be playing with less than that a significant portion of the time.


A low minimum buy in (5BB) does keep the bigger games open to some of the weaker players, but I can't think of any reason to allow people to rat hole back down to 5BB as they are already in the game.

Re: Immediately buying back in for the minimum after leaving a limit g
 

[ QUOTE ]
Seems like this might be more of an issue because 'stars default buyin is the min, instead of Party's 25BB. You end up with people buying in short because they think they're doing what they're told. I know this doesn't address the leaving issue, but that might not be an issue at all if people were promted to buy in with 25BB stacks.

[/ QUOTE ]

Yes, I find it very annoying that when I go to sit down in a 15/30 game on stars it automatically fills in a $300 buy-in. That is not enough.

I do think that if you immediately sit back down at the same table you should have to buy-in for at least the amount you had when you left the table. The only negative to this is if you don't have a ton of money in your account and your are multitabling.

Also, it would be great if they had a feature where you could get a seat change button and move seats when one opens up.

Re: Immediately buying back in for the minimum after leaving a limit g
 

I agree I'd love to have some sort of seat change abality online. I hate the fact that I have to wait until there is no list in order to move seats and even then there is no guarantee that I will be able to get back in the game.

Re: Immediately buying back in for the minimum after leaving a limit g
 

[ QUOTE ]
Seems like this might be more of an issue because 'stars default buyin is the min, instead of Party's 25BB. You end up with people buying in short because they think they're doing what they're told. I know this doesn't address the leaving issue, but that might not be an issue at all if people were promted to buy in with 25BB stacks.

[/ QUOTE ]

You should allow the user to decide what buyin amount they want as a default for all tables. (25BB, 43BB etc...) Subject to a minimum of course.

Krishan

Re: Immediately buying back in for the minimum after leaving a limit game
 

Hi Lee,

I actually think this is bad for most games, especially shorthanded (where this re-seating with a short stack is the easiest). While it shouldn't theoretically matter how much somebody has, as long as it's enough to play a hand out, it does. Lots of live ones go off for whatever they have in front of them if they are losing. This usually stops if they get back to even or ahead, of course. However, once they go broke, they leave. Your rules prevent this behavior from happening. This is too bad, since much of short handed poker is taking advantage of this. Of course, if you're trying to protect your players, then I understand, but it's not a good rule for the winners.

non-holdem games
 

There is a person who always does this at 30 60 stud8, sits down with 300 then if he wins a pot gets up and sits down again.

short buyins make decisions much much easier. and games like stud8 where there is a danger of being traped it is a greater advantage

IMO min buy in for any game should be 10 bb, and you should have to sit back down with what you stood up with for at least 30 min

There is nothing worse then having someone beat you out of a pot then get up and sit back down with the min buyin

Re: Immediately buying back in for the minimum after leaving a limit g
 

Lee, while you're on the subject, can you also ask to make the program remember the last amount I've bought in with at given stakes? Having to type in a meaningful amount as opposed to default of 10 BB every time is very annoying, especially because all the other open tables are trying to grab the keyboard focus at the same time.

Re: Immediately buying back in for the minimum after leaving a limit game
 

There is one option you left off the poll. That it can limit or slowdown a bad players losses. It is not positive or negative ev for a good player. But it can save a bad player from really going off when he's on tilt. Lets say we was rushing and up $1500 now he cashes out comes back with $150 loses it buys in again for 150 losses it then might quit. Where if he had to keep the $1500 on the table he woulda went through it all before quitting. If he won the money from me or whoever in the game we have aright for it to stay on the table and have a chance to get it back. Thats how it works in the b&m rooms thats how it should be online too.

Re: Immediately buying back in for the minimum after leaving a limit g
 

[ QUOTE ]
Lee,

While you're here, has Stars ever fixed that very annoying glitch where if someone bets all-in less than that round's bet (say 48 on a $60 betting round), you can only complete the bet? This is very annoying and I know it was on the list of things that were supposed to be fixed. Obviously, in this situation (all in bet more than half the required amount), I should be allowed to raise to $108. Let me know.

Thanks,
Jeff

[/ QUOTE ]

Totally agree with this.

Re: Immediately buying back in for the minimum after leaving a limit game
 

Hi folks -
I want to thank everybody for their votes and thoughts. It seems that the overwhemling consensus is that it's nothing to worry about.

I think we'll leave it the way it is, and I will go worry about the other 147 things that are on my priority list.

Best regards,
Lee Jones

PokerStars Poker Room Manager