Starting Short Stacked or Max?

How does everyone else feel about this at the micro levels: .10NL or .25NL

I seem to do the best starting short and playing aggressive with the hands I get. I build stacks up fairly quickly alot of the times. Seems when I get to a mid or high stack at the table, I tend to stagnate. Not win, nor lose all that much. I am starting to think it is a combination of me not wanting to risk as much against a short stack, and some short stacks not gambling with me. So I tend to bank, and start over and continue that trend.

Obviously if the table is mid to high stacked, I start out mid, and start the process. I realize playing short, you are going to cut into potential profit if you get a high stack in a raising/all in war and you werent playing at the max.

I also notice alot of people at these levels buy in at the max, multi table, and are always at right at that level. Seems like they never lose or win all that much.

Anyone else notice this? or have other issues? Does it make sense at these levels to just play as a shortstack and keep banking as you triple up?

I think that unless you are really really new, you are better off to buy in mid-to-max. The key is to play tight, and when you hit make the most of it. The biggest challenge is not playing scared, unless the board is really coordinated, don't be afraid to get a lot in on your set, or your tptk+flush draw. I think that playing scared is most people's biggest problem....play tight, not scared.

[AKQJ10]

It depends on whether you're confident you're one of the best players at the table or not. If you are, you're sacrificing expectation to play a short stack. At very low stakes, you probably are one of the best players.

My views are more or less summed up at http://poker.wikicities.com/wiki/Short_stack (edits to that article are very welcome!).

[ajmargarine]

If you have bankroll issues, I don't think it's a problem if you buy in for 80%. I think you can still play normal poker with that buy-in. Less than that and you have to play sub-optimally, and you might as well play Ed Miller's system and buy in even shorter.

If you have no bankroll problems, buy in full. Play tight ABC. Play better. Play smarter. Think.

At the smaller stakes, I find my stack increases rather steadily. Therefore, I'm less likely to buy in for max; especially shorthanded. My main exception is when I find one of the people who buy in for the max ( often 2 to 3 times min. ) and basically just put people all-in on most of the hands. Against these people, I always go re-buy for the max.

As stakes and table size go up, money is made by winning fewer/larger pots. Now buying in for the max is very important

[stu-unger]

i never understand how this question comes up so often. at ssnl, a good player has the opportunity to stack off quite often. if u stack off someone with 100bbs u win 100bbs, if u stack someone off and only have 50bbs u can only win 50bbs. i want the extra 50bbs every chance i get...

Thanks so far for everyones comments. I especially like the links to the extended thread of the mass pages of discussion.

[Mercman572]

[ QUOTE ]
i never understand how this question comes up so often. at ssnl, a good player has the opportunity to stack off quite often. if u stack off someone with 100bbs u win 100bbs, if u stack someone off and only have 50bbs u can only win 50bbs. i want the extra 50bbs every chance i get...

[/ QUOTE ]

Somebody actually made a very good case for starting off at 50 BB then buying in full or leaving. Their reasons were:
1. people perceive shorties as bad players and are more likely to pay them off.
2. it prevents them from running into problem hands without reads (QQ and you just sat, CO raises, button calls) that could potentially cost 100 BB's.
3. If the table is good you can buy in full, if it sucks you didn't risk 100BB without reads.

I think this is an interesting philosophy.

[AKQJ10]

[ QUOTE ]
i never understand how this question comes up so often. at ssnl, a good player has the opportunity to stack off quite often.

[/ QUOTE ]

I've bolded the operative words there. Yes, if you're better than most of your competition, you're giving up EV by buying in short. GSiH only recommends it for beginners (which I am, in NLHE).

[elus2]

there is more money to be made for good players on the turn and river. buying in short negates this advantage.