Immediately buying back in for the minimum after leaving a limit game

[Lee Jones]

Hi folks -
Here's the deal: currently on PokerStars, you can leave a limit poker table, then immediately buy back in for the minimum buy-in. [1]

I've gotten a couple of complaints about this behavior, and I can't decide if it's really important or not. So I'd like to get your all's opinions.

If you select option three (Players doing this can get an unfair advantage), please provide at least a semblance of an argument why.

Best regards,
Lee Jones

PokerStars Poker Room Manager

[1] Not at big-bet games.

[Steve Giufre]

Hi Lee,

I was one of the players who emailed you about this. I think its great that you posted this poll, Stars support is so far and away the best on the net.

[bdmcgraw]

I don't really see anything wrong with it.

It's always been a rule in No Limit, which to be honest I don't quite understand either..I have always thought it was just made not to piss other players off who wanted to get their money back.

In limit this is much less of an issue as their is capped betting per round. It sometimes is frustrating to play with someone who is short stacked but I don't think its a big enough deal to disallow it.

As for an advantage..I just don't see it, unless you're some preflop genius who doesn't know how to play postflop and just wants to shove them in anytime you get AK or whatnot...I don't see having a shortstack being +EV in limit, if anything its -EV because you will be forced "all-in" and you don't have the ability to but as many bets in as you want.

[bobdibble]

Barry Greenstein claims that someone doing this would have a huge advantage. He talks about it on Ace on the River and has a post about short limit buyins somehwere on the forums.

[TwoNiner]

Sure Barry wasn't talking about big bet?

[durrrr]

[ QUOTE ]
I think its great that you posted this poll, Stars support is so far and away the best on the net.

[/ QUOTE ]


Agreed. Also I dont think that an advantage can be gained by leaving and coming back w/ a smaller stack, because you miss a hand if you do this; or you start again (from the BB) at the start of a round.

[bobdibble]

[ QUOTE ]
Sure Barry wasn't talking about big bet?

[/ QUOTE ]

yes. I am 100% positive. I was surpised by this myself. I'm too lazy to search for his post right now, but he doesn't have many, so it can't be too hard to find. I think it was in the General forum.

[durrrr]

[ QUOTE ]
Barry Greenstein claims that someone doing this would have a huge advantage. He talks about it on Ace on the River and has a post about short limit buyins somehwere on the forums.

[/ QUOTE ]

I believe he meant really short buyins (i.e. 2 big bets). IMO having 5 big bets is a large amount, and any advantage either way is incredibly insignificant.

I'm not sure if it gives much of an advantage or not as I'm not a limit player. However, if some people think that it does, then I suggest either banning it or making it easier to do. It seems a little absurd to make people close and reopen a table in order to get an edge (or to get what they think is an edge).

Btw, you really rule for doing this, and I'm sure you're stealing a lot of people from party by being so customer friendly.

[bobdibble]

Ok.. I found the thread.

Here is a quote by Barry.

[ QUOTE ]
If you allowed a break-even player to buy in for one-fourth the normal minimum, he would easily be come a winning player, whether in limit or no-limit. The times that pots would be won because of being all-in would far outweight the times that an opponent could be bet out of a pot.

[/ QUOTE ]

And the thread is at: link

Note that he really isn't talking about min buyin, he's talking about short buyins that are allowed in some cardrooms.