Short stack play in the Party NL 2000

[Ulysses]

How good this strategy is depends largely on what the average action is pre-flop. 50bb is a nice amount in the UB 25/50 game because it often lets you get in your stack very good on the flop. 100bb is often an unwieldy amount in that game given the standard pre-flop action. On the other hand, 100bb is a great amount in the UB 10/25 game and often lets you have 2 streets of play. Of course, given the right caliber of bad opponents, those considerations become less important and you just always want to buy in for as much as possible. I've spent a (very) little time in the Party 2000 game and based on what I've seen (both at the start and just last week), I'd always buy in for 2000 in that game. Too many players willing to get stacked with not very much and not quite as aggressive play on early streets as the UB games.

In general, when deciding how much to buy in, I think you should consider a few factors:

1) How do you stack up v. the competition?

2) What is the average action pre-flop?

3) How many streets do you want to play?

4) Given the other factors, at what point and how will you get pot-committed?

Basically, I think you want to avoid situations where stack sizes result in you either getting yourself pot-committed with mediocre hands against decent players or having to make either underbets or overly large overbets.

[bkholdem]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
its profitable, but youll need to change names often.

[/ QUOTE ]

Can you elaborate?

[/ QUOTE ]

Once someone sees you fold fold fold..all in KK...fold fold fold...all in AKs....fold fold fold... they know all your moves?

[cero_z]

Hi Luv,

[ QUOTE ]
I played only 55 hands so of course this a tiny sample size. I only VPIPed twice - once to call a $60 raise with 66 and once to call a $70 raise with AKo. Both times the flop missed me.



[/ QUOTE ]

This is what I was talking about. You played both hands wrong (fold 66 unless there are already 3 players voluntarily in the pot, re-raise AKo to at least 200).

[AZK]

[ QUOTE ]
Basically, I think you want to avoid situations where stack sizes result in ...having to make either underbets or overly large overbets.

[/ QUOTE ]

Another thread hijack, but how do you play in games where everyone has 3-400xBB? The stack sizes in relation to the pots more often than not result in a pot being played for too small a % of your stack, no? Is this ever a problem?

[LuvDemNutz]

[ QUOTE ]
Hi Luv,

[ QUOTE ]
I played only 55 hands so of course this a tiny sample size. I only VPIPed twice - once to call a $60 raise with 66 and once to call a $70 raise with AKo. Both times the flop missed me.



[/ QUOTE ]

This is what I was talking about. You played both hands wrong (fold 66 unless there are already 3 players voluntarily in the pot, re-raise AKo to at least 200).

[/ QUOTE ]

Two questions - following the 5/10 rule it's OK (but not great) to call 10% of my stack hoping to flop a set, no?

Secondly, if I'm reraising AKo to 200, I'm obviously calling a push.

What's my action on a flop of all unders? (assuming my opponent checks to me).

[Paragon]

Playing for sets is something that becomes less appropriate the smaller your stack. Even if you can guarantee doubling up if you spike a set versus an overpair, it might only barely be +EV longterm. Conversely, with hands like AK you just want to throw your stack in there pre flop to put the pressure on. A lot of pairs will fold, and there might be enough dead money to make it neutral EV against them anyway.

This is my understanding at least. I think many of the regular STT'ers would especially excel at playing the shortstack in these NL ring games. Many of the same principles crossover in my opinion.

[KaneKungFu123]

[ QUOTE ]

If you can make money waltzing into a big game with a tiny stack, that's a problem with the game, not the player.

[/ QUOTE ]

Isnt the problem with the structure of the game, and not the other players? I dont really understand why the minimum buy-in for a $2000 game isnt set atleast $1000.

[Ulysses]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Basically, I think you want to avoid situations where stack sizes result in ...having to make either underbets or overly large overbets.

[/ QUOTE ]

Another thread hijack, but how do you play in games where everyone has 3-400xBB? The stack sizes in relation to the pots more often than not result in a pot being played for too small a % of your stack, no? Is this ever a problem?

[/ QUOTE ]

In some games like this, straddles and larger than normal standard opens effectively increase the size of the game. Other times, there's weird action post-flop. The games where you love to play deep, the stacks end up getting in there.

[Ed Miller]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]

If you can make money waltzing into a big game with a tiny stack, that's a problem with the game, not the player.

[/ QUOTE ]

Isnt the problem with the structure of the game, and not the other players? I dont really understand why the minimum buy-in for a $2000 game isnt set atleast $1000.

[/ QUOTE ]

I agree.

[soah]

Hey Ed, would you mind giving us a quick summary of what you wrote in GSIH with regards to the shortstack NL strategy? I don't mean this to come off as "just tell us everything that's in the book so we don't have to buy it," but an introductory poker book simply isn't going to be of any interest to most of the people posting here. The book's strategy is referenced enough on 2+2 that it would be nice for us to know the basics of what you've written. I suspect most of it is stuff that the majority of posters in this forum already know, and if you just provide us the basics outline we could fill in the blanks on our own.

~edit~ Are the guidelines in this post a fairly complete summary? I hadn't noticed that thread until after posting here...