Trying Mr. Miller's "winning" short stack strategy from GSIH

[Etric]

Now I'm -300BB over 21k hands. AKs, AQs, AQo, TT, 99, 88, 77 are all losing for me.

[marand]

[ QUOTE ]
Now I'm -300BB over 21k hands. AKs, AQs, AQo, TT, 99, 88, 77 are all losing for me.

[/ QUOTE ]

Well that's variance for you. There is no way you are bad enough to loose with all of them in the long run [img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img]

[mosquito]

[ QUOTE ]


Miller recommends calling on the button and co with all pairs and with two suited cards T+. The implied odds are with near certainty limited by your stack, and 20 is by far enough to call with baby pairs.

I personally call with suited connectors as well, but not one or two gaps.

I don't call with anything on the button/co if my stack has been blinded down to 10bb or less.

[/ QUOTE ]

Uh, this is not what Miller says for 25 BB buyins.

[12AX7]

LOL! Razor,
The local Barnes and Noble is telling me 11 business days to get one. So I'm sittin' here wondering what we're talking about. [img]/images/graemlins/confused.gif[/img]

Just piecing together it sounds like we are trying to get to the flop and see we have the best of it, then protect ourselves from raises on the later streets by going all in and letting the hand play out.

I was running some sims the other day and it occured to me that to get the results of these "no foldem" type sims in real life you need opponents that pay off all the way to the river.

Or another way to look at it. If a starting hand wins more than it's fair share and no one ever folded, seems that if you went all in pre-flop and let the hand play out, then playing only hands that win more than thier fair share should be profitable.

Of course the caveat being, they have to win more than thier fair share against your opponents starting standards.

Anyway, some of the post here just had me thinking that if you can identify these "more than thier fair share" situations and go all in you'd either a) take the current pot when folks fold, or b) be applying your edge without having to worry about later street raises from your opponents.

So that seems to mean the next step is to be able to identify these +EV situations and go all in.

[Rudbaeck]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Miller recommends calling on the button and co with all pairs and with two suited cards T+. The implied odds are with near certainty limited by your stack, and 20 is by far enough to call with baby pairs.

I personally call with suited connectors as well, but not one or two gaps.

I don't call with anything on the button/co if my stack has been blinded down to 10bb or less.

[/ QUOTE ]

Uh, this is not what Miller says for 25 BB buyins.

[/ QUOTE ]

I refer you to A Few More Profitable Hands on page 131. If you meant that I forgot that Miller also says to play all suited aces then you are off course correct.

[Hellmouth]

He says that they can be profitable under the right conditions. But I think that you are better off sticking to the basic strategy until you are winning.

Basic strategy
EP: AA-TT AKs,AK
MP: AA-99 AKs,AK AQs,AQ
LP: AA-77 AKs-ATs AK-AT

My suggestion is to strictly stick to the positions when you play hands. If you are two off the button and you say to yourself, well "I've got a 77 and Im only one seat away from being able to play it so Im going to" then you are making a mistake right off the bat.

Also, I think that it is a misconception that Miller advocates always pushing even if you miss the flop. In the example he he gives he has two over cards and a flush draw. If all you have is overcards or a flush draw for example and you push, you may not have the advantage anymore. I would try not to be mindless about pushing. If you are playing ATs and there are none of your flush cards on the board and one card is a Q then you are severly limited in your outs that will win against a Q. You now have one overcard and now flush draws. Especially if someone comes in infront of you here, I suggest folding.

BTW, if you are buying in for more then the minimum you are increasing your varience by pushing a larger buyin. Don't buy in for more then the minimum.

When I reach 3x my BB I switch tables to buy in again with the minimum.

Greg

[Hellmouth]

By the way, although buying in with the minimum buy-in seems like it might limit the upside. Yesterday, I was able to get all in with ~$5 with KK and got 3 callers for the win.

It will work for you if you really follow it correctly. Dont play those extra hands until you have mastered the basic strategy.

Greg

[Rudbaeck]

[ QUOTE ]
He says that they can be profitable under the right conditions. But I think that you are better off sticking to the basic strategy until you are winning.

[/ QUOTE ]

Well, almost everyone who discusses short stack strategy here is a winning limit player. And to be frank it doesn't take all that much strategy to hit your set/flush/straight or fold.

[Hellmouth]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
He says that they can be profitable under the right conditions. But I think that you are better off sticking to the basic strategy until you are winning.

[/ QUOTE ]
Well, almost everyone who discusses short stack strategy here is a winning limit player. And to be frank it doesn't take all that much strategy to hit your set/flush/straight or fold.

[/ QUOTE ]

Then why is OP losing? I would say that in a situation where you want to get in with the best of it that actually making your hand would be a lot better then missing and pushing anyways.

My origional quote was more aimed at trying to focus OP on the highest EV hands and then to experiment once winning with the basic strategy, as well as to point out that the strategy is not supposed to be mechanical. It is not intended to be a "get this hand and push no matter what after the flop type strategy." It is just supposed to eliminate the need to play the turn and river which simplifies the overall game. You still have to make decisions on the flop.

Greg

[Rudbaeck]

Yes, you are right in that. And the flop play can get fairly tricky at times, especially against opponents who are actually thinking on the second level.

Unfortunately even a 300BB downswing doesn't prove that OP is a loser with whatever flop strategy he uses. My win rate and standard deviation came out eerily close to great fixed limit stats. And in fixed limit I've had a ~300BB downswing every few hundred thousand hands.

But alot of work can be done on the flop play, especially for those still thinking that Miller meant you should always go all-in on the flop. This is only the first time I've seen Miller be (intentionally?) vague to the point of obfuscation.