|
|
|
|
#1
11-04-2005, 02:14 PM
|
|||
|
|||
Re: Starting stack size question: Is it generally agreed that....
[ QUOTE ]
Well at the risk of generalizing too much, yes the larger the chip stack in comparison to the blinds then the more time there is for skill to be involved so the "better" players should generally do better. [/ QUOTE ] It's not just time, by the way: good players understand that the game itself is different with deeper stacks (implied odds, etc.) and adjust accordingly. Donks just keep donking along. 
|
|
#2
11-04-2005, 02:36 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Starting stack size question: Is it generally agreed that....
I'm a winning player, but I expect that I'd have a lower ROI with deeper stacks. I'm not a great player and I really lack post-flop skills, which is a large component of deep-stack poker. My strengths lie in my pre-flop game with well-timed pushes because of shorter stacks.
If a winning player were good at post-flop play or deep-stack poker, then yes he'd have a higher ROI. If a winning player is not good at deep-stack poker, then chances are that his ROI would be lower with more chips.
|
|
#4
11-04-2005, 04:02 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Starting stack size question: Is it generally agreed that....
[ QUOTE ]
all other things being equal [/ QUOTE ] One thing you may have overlooked - if "all other things" were equal, you'd be facing the same array of donk-to-winning skill levels within each structure. Even if the comparison of two structures led you to conclude that one would be more advantageous to a winning (well rounded) player, you cannot assume that this player would rise to a higher rung in the 'compared to' structure.
|
|
#5
11-04-2005, 06:08 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Starting stack size question: Is it generally agreed that....
i like to start with a smaller amount of chips.
i think its an advantage. its very easy to play incorrectly when you start with t800. Which is good for the few who understand how to place top 3 on a regular basis.
|
 |
|
|
Hybrid Mode
