Petition to Remove <50bb Buyins From Party Skins (xposted) - Page 3

turnipmonster · #21 07-16-2005, 01:28 PM

if you adjust correctly you have a big advantage over people that play this kind of short stack strategy, particularly if pots are mostly heads up. the big disadvantage is in multiway pots, where you sometimes have to sacrifice main pot EV in exchange for side pot EV.

--turnipmonster

KaneKungFu123 · #22 07-16-2005, 02:02 PM

exactly.

i hate it when im playing heads up and some dick sits with 20BB's.

[ QUOTE ]
A more realistic solution will be to have 2 categories of games. One with min buy in, one without. It's reasonable to want to play short for those attracted to tourney style NL but it shouldn't spoil deep stack games.

James

[/ QUOTE ]

toke · #23 07-16-2005, 02:23 PM

It probably wouldnt work. In best scenario they might open few separate tables with 50bb min but leave the rest as they are. I would certainly support it because I hate shallow stack poker.

KaneKungFu123 · #24 07-16-2005, 03:19 PM

I agree with OP. At 2K I really just want to play with deep stacks only. Shorts just get in the way. End of story.

[ QUOTE ]
Do you think such a petition would work?

Would you support it?

fim

[/ QUOTE ]

touchfaith · #25 07-16-2005, 06:39 PM

double up then triple up and make everyone the short stack

excession · #26 07-16-2005, 07:01 PM

can't see how party trying a few tables like this would hurt..

XXXNoahXXX · #27 07-16-2005, 09:26 PM

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
probably most people don't care, I love when people buy in to my games short. people buying in short pretty much fall in two categories:
1) fish
2) people who are playing a short stack to play tight and hope nobody notices and gives them action.

since we all know how to deal with both these styles and it's easy to tell them apart I don't think it's really a big deal.

--turnipmonster

[/ QUOTE ]

i couldnt agree more.

there are several short buyers at the big party games who i love to see at the table. they usually play kinda bad.

[/ QUOTE ]

The only problem is that there are far too many players out there that don't seem to grasp #2. Sure there are a lot of downsides to bringing a shortstack to a table, but when you can get a lot of action on your premium starting hands, it makes it highly profitable. You have to pass up on calling certain draws, but you nearly always get paid off more in the end making it much more profitable to buy in for $50 to a $400NL game than $50 to a 50NL game. Refill to 50 everytime you drop down, and once you double up, leave and come back with 50. I know it may be an annoyance to some players, but it will continue to be an effective strategy as long as big stacked players keep giving them more action than they deserve. Somehow someone raising $15 out of a $50 stack does not raise suspicion to someone used to such raises. I don't have any hand histories available to illustrate this, but I'll give an example. The last time i was dealt pocket aces at a $50 table with my stack around $75, i raised to $2 preflop and it got folded around. Last time i got dealt AA when i had a stack of $50 in a higher limit game, I raised $10 preflop and got four callers, two of whom evewntually showed 56s and JQos. I tripled up. The preflop calls alone equal nearly a double up for me, and yet players didn't think twice to call with marginal hands. Whenever u can get this much action when your raising 1/5 of your stack preflop, I'm a happy man.

PS- I do agree that most of the time I see a short stack sit at the table I sigh waiting for the inevitable all-in blind steal and run or something similar. And it can be annoying to have to adjust in a 200NL game to play the $400 stack and the 50$ stack, but its something that must be done. Party could of course change a lot to make everything optimal conditions, but your remembering all the times they doubled and dashed and forgetting how many times they lost it all first or second hand then slinked away in shame.

XXXNoahXXX

turnipmonster · #28 07-17-2005, 01:31 AM

I don't think anyone is arguing that many players have problems adjusting to short stacks. most people here know how to deal with short stacks correctly though, and as such don't really mind having them at the table. they pay the blinds like everyone else after all.

flawless_victory · #29 07-17-2005, 01:43 AM

[ QUOTE ]
I don't think anyone is arguing that many players have problems adjusting to short stacks. most people here know how to deal with short stacks correctly though, and as such don't really mind having them at the table. they pay the blinds like everyone else after all.

[/ QUOTE ]its that i dont want to effing adjust!
ex. 10/Q NLH. solid player(6K) opens in MP for 75, im next(cover) and reraise to 230, gay shortstack moves in behind us for 405 (wonderful)... everyone else folds, i get to call.
either im forced to quit playing hard at MP or i give something up to the shorties... if i adjust, hell know im only raising/reraising w/ premium hands... great. i dont see why buying in to a NLH game for less than 100BBs should be legal.

ptmusic · #30 07-17-2005, 03:06 AM

[ QUOTE ]
its that i dont want to effing adjust!

[/ QUOTE ]

I'm sure the B&M pros are all saying that about all the online players when the onliners play B&M.

It is what it is... adjust or quit. This petition isn't going to work. What's more likely to work is B&M changing their buyin policy to reflect online, because short buyins keep the fish coming, and games dry up without a constant supply of new fish. That's what happened to B&M cash NL games for a long time before the current poker boom.

-ptmusic