[pzhon]

[ QUOTE ]
Short stack will get less action on his decent hands as he's giving out very little in implied odds preflop. When people do see a flop against him they may very well have correct pot odds to call him on a draw even if he goes all in.

[/ QUOTE ]
Deep stacks don't want to offer those implied odds. Ideally, they are only getting more action because they are paying off even more to sets and straights.

That a deep stack may correctly call a short-stack's push with a draw is balanced by the fact that a short stack can correctly call all-in with a draw. This can't be a weakness of having a short stack because you can imagine no one has more chips than you.

Short stacks can play optimally to take the big stacks chips. They play for high pairs and don't mind getting everything in with a draw. Deep stacks can't play optimally to take the short stacks' chips, because if they do, they are vulnerable to the other deep stacks.

[ QUOTE ]
Another disadvantage is that by the time he gets a big hand half his' stack may well have been blinded away, resulting in only a very small win even if he gets any action.

[/ QUOTE ]
Nothing stops you from buying more chips before you blind down, but you shouldn't be waiting for a big hand. A short stack allows you to value bet much more effectively with weaker hands.

[ QUOTE ]
I think it makes far more sense to work on your game at a lower level.

[/ QUOTE ]
That may be good, but there is no inherent disadvantage to having a short stack. You are not harmed by the chips that can't be used against you. For beginners, it may be a good idea to simplify the game with a short stack. This also lets you see more showdowns, so if you are losing, you can figure out what your opponents are doing.