[Padster]

The problem I have with that approach is that the bb doesn't need a hand to shove if I only limp. It's almost an auto shove pf given his low M and the fact that a rock has shown weakness by limping.

Given the high likelihood of his shove I then effectively will need to actually win the hand to take the chips, and my hand's certain to be a dog.

At least by shoving first I have some fold equity.

Anyway, the reason this hand got me thinking was that he called with 99 and it held up, taking me down to cT10k and down to 30th out of 33 left. 3 hands later I picked up JJ and shoved (M6)and was called and beaten by AJ from a medium stack (T15k).

No complaints on that score but I was thinking that if I'd held off the steal bluff I'd have naturally played the JJ differently and would have had more options being a larger stack - AJ possibly less likely to call a raise than a short stack shove, A came on turn so possible to win on flop, I can maybe get away from the hand etc.

So what I'm wondering is if mixing it up against a short stack who could damage my stack to the tune of 40% if called, when I am certain to be a dog if called is just plain dumb, not only for the hand itself (marginal either way I think) but for the damage it will do in later situations as I will be forced into a shove situation the next hand I choose to play.

Is that something that I need to be considering more fully or should I just focus on each hand as it comes and look to maximise my opportunites hand by hand and let the chips take care of themselves? (can't wait for AA to play a handand all that)