My new favorite play (loose 5-5 NL)

[RollaJ]

Alfonz has only been nice to me, seems like a real seetheart of a guy, that being said though he does have deep pockets, and is not afraid to put in some big money (from what Ive seen)

[kirisim]

I disagree Paul. If an aggressive player has $5000 in a 5/5 NLHE and you sit down with $500, it will be obvious you are taking a shot. They can constantly raise to $40 preflop, then bet the flop. They know you know only call with a huge hand. So, if you call a bunch of preflop raises and don't hit a huge flop (more likely than not), then you are losing $40 at a time. Suddenly you're at $250 and you have to double up just to get even. I think this is the most likely outcome of sitting down shortstacked.

Of course you could hit a rush and double up right away, but this will happen rarely.

[turnipmonster]

the secret is you don't need a huge hand to call, just a pair. I've doubled up plenty in that game with a short stack by outkicking people in the main pot. if you really can get people to constantly raise preflop and bet the flop when you have a short stack you can do quite well. the biggest problem is no one giving you action once they realize how you play.

--turnipmonster

[Post-Oak]

[ QUOTE ]
They can constantly raise to $40 preflop, then bet the flop.

[/ QUOTE ]

What do they do when you reraise them big? What if you limp-reraise them big? Anyone who constanly raises to 8X the BB is a fish, plain and simple. Yes, you will have to fold a lot of hands preflop but it will be so easy to hammer them when you have a big one.

Basically, if you are playing shortstacked in relation to the blinds (or in this case, in relation to the typical PFR), you have to play certain hands differently. If you are not getting implied odds to hit a set, then just fold hands like 66. Wait for big pairs and big slick and then hammer the idiot who constantly raises to $40 preflop. I would be willing to go all-in preflop with AK against someone who raises to 40 "constantly". The beauty is that in these kinds of games the action tends to go like this: raise to 40, call, call...

No way does everyone have a hand worth 8X the BB, but they are deepstacked. You are not. If it gets to you on the button and you have AK, just push. They have no defense to your constantly folding and then suddenly hammering them when they are constanly splashing around with huge preflop raises and muliple callers.

[kirisim]

I think about your post quite a bit, and then a simple fact hit me: I was used to the game being 5/5 POT limit, rather than NL. In NL, you definitely could use the strategy you describe of moving all-in preflop with a big pair or AK after a raise to 40 and several callers.

While I believe it could be effective, there are a couple problems:

1) What do you do when you double up your $500 and you have $1000? Now you have to start playing for real.

2) Like turnip said, once people realize what you are doing, you will have trouble getting action.

I guess my main problem is that I always assume I am one of the better players in the game, so I always play at stakes where I am comfortable with having the table covered. If you are doing a short buy-in with a hit-and-run mentality, you are probably underbankrolled for the game.

[Post-Oak]

[ QUOTE ]
1) What do you do when you double up your $500 and you have $1000? Now you have to start playing for real.

[/ QUOTE ]

This is true. You have to either play for real, or leave the game.

[ QUOTE ]
2) Like turnip said, once people realize what you are doing, you will have trouble getting action.

[/ QUOTE ]

This I don't necessarily agree with. It depends on the game. But our premise is that large PF raises become the norm in the game and that as a shortstack you won't be getting the implied odds to call. How much action do you want with AK when you go all-in for 500 with 160 already in the pot? The only way they can avoid giving you action is by stopping the 10X BB raises in the first place. Then you can start to play real (assuming you are not extremely short stacked).

[ QUOTE ]
I guess my main problem is that I always assume I am one of the better players in the game, so I always play at stakes where I am comfortable with having the table covered. If you are doing a short buy-in with a hit-and-run mentality, you are probably underbankrolled for the game.

[/ QUOTE ]

There are now many games that have horrible structures. For example, 2-5 games where the max buy-in is 200. On top of that, there are games with reasonable structures, but where the typical PFR is higher than 4-5X the BB. For example, I have played in one of these NYC 5-5 games (only twice) and both times the typical PFR were 35-45. Some players (one fish in particular) would raise to 50-60 PF with hands like TT. The max buy-in was 600. It's not the internet, so if you get bled down to 550 it is not so easy to just reload. It's not even a legitimate casino so you have to get up and wait in line to buy more chips. You might be sitting with 500 and the typical PFR is 45. You have to change the way you play the game. No calling with small pairs. Their are players who raise to 45 with AJs, so it's not like you can know a 9X the BB raise is a big pair and so you are assured of the implied odds to hit a set. You have to fold hands like 66. Yes, it takes a lot of patience and it can be boring/frustrating. It is not "real" No Limit. But there is nothing you can do about it until you build up a reasonable stack.

Some players have also said they take shots at games above their bankroll by buying in short. I have not done this, but in this case the same strategy can be employed. They can either play "real" or leave the table if they win enough chips to have a big stack. As for whether they should be taking a shot, that is a topic for another discussion (and I don't have a good answer).

By looking at our posts, I can see that I am thinking of it this way; I have to buy in to a game with a max buy in structure and the typical PFR is so high in relation to my stack that I don't have implied odds to call with drawing hands or low pocket pairs. I have to change my strategy to exploit the large preflop raises. When (if) I win some chips and I have a stack which is large enough in relation to the preflop raises, I can change my strategy again to play "real" no limit.

You seem to be looking at it like this; a player buys in to a game with a short stack in order to exploit a preflop nut peddling strategy. This player's stack is small even in relation to the BB.

I think we actually agree on a lot here. I agree that no player should be buying in with a stack which is small in relation to the big blind. I am more thinking along the lines of playing in a game where the opponents are employing a strategy of raising 8-10X the big blind and you only have <100X the BB in your stack (you would have to change your strategy the same way even if you were the big stack and they were the small stack). In this case, I believe their strategy is flawed and easily exploited.

[SpeakEasy]

I just wanted to come back to this thread and say that this strategy (overbet in the correct situation) has been the single most useful tactic I have learned on the 2+2 boards in the last few months.

The overbet on the river, in select situations when I am way ahead, has turned many "normal" NL pots into monster winners for me. Simply put, at the right time, a huge overbet with a big hand seems to get paid off in no-limit because the opponents assumes that I am bluffing to steal the pot. On balance, when I am holding the nuts on the river, I would say at this point that the overbet/overraise is a better strategy than the smallish bet/raise (i.e. 1/3 of the pot) because (1) players are (amazingly) calling it more often than the small bet/raise, and (2) it results in massively larger pots when it does work.