min vs. max buyin at 25 cent BB PLO

I've been trying to build up a bankroll/learn to play poker well for the past half year or so. To give you an idea where I'm coming from I sold a million Pokerstars chips for a dollar (long story short i was scammed - but i got my dollar which is all i really wanted). I spent several months slogging it out on the penny NL HE until i discovered the joys of 10/25 cent PLO. I have since built my microstack up to about $650. I have done this almost exclusively by buying in for the minimum ($5) on multiple tables. I've noticed that this is not a common approach for most winning players.

My basic strategy is buy-in for the minimum looking to double or triple up and then leave when the BB comes around. What I've noticed is that the vast majority of pots are in the $5-$15 range and so my $5 stack is enough to get full value for all but the biggest pots. I find that what I lose in the giant pots is more than made up for by decreased volatility and my ability to stick with nut draws in large multi-way pots.

Furthermore, I believe it gives the false impression that I don't have clue what I'm doing (and by some standards maybe I don't) plus I get more calls because the big stacks don't fear me. True it becomes next to impossible to bluff some pots (but certainly not all) but the flipside is that I can't be bluffed either (at least not so easily).

So please explain to me why this is a sub-optimal strategy.

[nebben]

This decreases the number of mistakes that you can force your opponents to make on later streets when teh really big money is going in (i think).
Congrats on that 650 though.

I realize this of course but in return I can call on the turn with my 8+ out nut draw for the rest of my stack (say $1 or $2) when $20+ is in the pot. I find I make a lot of my money in these situations. Comparable, I think, to what what i lose by not having the ability to punish the 2nd chaser/sucker.

[nebben]

But you are not maximizing your EV this way. These situations where it is correct to call because you have so few chips come at the cost of situations where you can call because of the pot size in comparison to your outs and stack someone when you hit. In a lower stakes PLO game, these mistakes make you a lot of money.

OK, I'll take this under advisement. I think part of the problem with my occasional full buy-in experiments is that I need to learn how to adjust my play when i have a bigger stack.

[Ribbo]

It's a fine strategy for someone trying to reduce variance which you are. So long as you realise your preflop selection is very important then why not. I wouldn't do it personally because I like outplaying opponents post flop and am considerably looser than most with starting hands.
Do not worry about your strategy, but at some point you will have to learn to be able to buy in for the maximum and adjust your game accordingly.

[Ribbo]

No reason to change the habit of a lifetime right now though. If something isn't broken don't try to fix it. Keep winning money the way you do right now and when you can afford to spend money on improving your play, do so when you are ready.

[jj_frap]

:-) I've seen you at PokerStars...I'll have to remember that you're not a casual fish who's come to gamb00l like most people who make small buy-ins at this level.

If you're the best player at the table, then you're probably playing the best starting hands. This means you will have the best hand on the flop a very substantial proportion of the time. This means you want to charge the maximum to make people draw out. It's almost worthless hitting top set the way you play because even someone with a gutshot and two three flushes can call you almost correctly. If you hit top set and someone else gets a flush/gutshot draw with four callers before the flop, then he has hit the flop as well as he'd like to when you can't raise more than 2 dollars. In fact his flush/gutshot draw is worth as much as your set with other runners in the pot. It sounds like I'm exaggerating, but that's the power of money. You'd probably win faster playing 1c2c by buying in for 5 bucks a time.

It's a shame they don't have 5c10c plo at Stars but you'll just have to start buying in for 25 if you want to make 100 a night rather than 100 a month. $650 is more than enough to play four tables for $25 each. If it goes tits up then surely you can buy in again for a few more hundred. Don't you have a job? Heheh.

[euri10]

i dont see the point in short buying especially when you know the odds of top set against flush+str8 draw on the flop like thomas said.
your style is for me like making a coin flip in most situation. the way you build your bankroll, without any offence, proves you had luck more than skill. it wouldn't be true in holdem for instance, but in PLO where in terms of odds almost all situation lie between 40/60.
you lose the max in case you're against a strong draw, you win the min when you are max and it holds : who wants that asymetric profile franckly.
about short buying, Rolf Sloftbom (orthograph of his name is different but never remember it) wrote an article in carplayer, it's worth the read but really restricted to special situations.