|
#1
|
|||
|
|||
Re: Big pot with TPTK
gawd i'm sorry, it's 09:00 in the morning here in sweden and i've just finished a looooooooooooong session. well disregard. i don't think we're good often enough anyway.
|
#2
|
|||
|
|||
Re: Big pot with TPTK
[ QUOTE ]
I hate 100bb stacks [/ QUOTE ] I have been thinking about how big the buy-in stack should be. If you are a good player but perhaps not the best player at the table, it seems like it's better to go with a medium stack around 50 bb instead. That way you still cover most of the poor players and you don't risk as much against the good players. Thoughts? |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
Re: Big pot with TPTK
[ QUOTE ]
If you are a good player but perhaps not the best player at the table, it seems like it's better to go with a medium stack around 50 bb instead. That way you still cover most of the poor players and you don't risk as much against the good players. Thoughts? [/ QUOTE ] The nuts or close to it will stack the good players and the bad players. If you aren't buying in full because you are scared of the better players I think you should move down. Donks get big stacks sometimes too. Adapting your play against players is a GOOD thing. Loosen up with position to isolate the donks and foldout the tighties; be (much) less likely to commit your stack with a hand like TPTK vs a tighty than a loosey. You already know how to do this, so don't buy in short. |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
Re: Big pot with TPTK
I guess you are right. But I just recently began playing NL. I played limit before and as you know it takes a while to go from loving the TPTK to be careful with it. So at this moment I'm probably not good enough to have a full buy-in. And hey it's hard to move down from 0.10/0.20. [img]/images/graemlins/grin.gif[/img]
When I started playing NL i played KQo, KJo, KTo, ATo and such hands alot more than I do now. I guess they are mainly good limit hands. Now I'm aiming for a straight or a set. And of course TPTK with AK or AQ. I play 8-handed. And of course I raised with AK every time when I began playing NL. I really don't like AK as much as I did playing limit. If I'm not first in with AK I hardly ever raise with it. Perhaps to isolate 1 loose limper once in a while. My main weakness is that I am always afraid that I have a set up against me if I'm getting raised on the turn. If I have two pair and no straight or flush is possible and a tight player raises I'm always afraid of the set. And if I don't have top two (A5 from BB or something) and the board is AT95 I'm not very happy with my hand at all. Then it is easier having a small stack. Cash games NL is so much different than SNG and tournaments. I have learned that the hard way. [img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img] I have read all the classic NL books. The one I like the most for cash games is probably "Championship nl & pl hold 'em" by Cloutier. |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
Buying in for 50BB
Barry Greenstein's book points out that there are some advantages to buying in fairly short. The main one seems to be that you have a bigger stack when you are playing well / winning.
I gave this a try for a week or so (about 4000 hands) and results-wise I didnt notice much difference from buying in for 100BB. This was playing 6max 50c/$1. Afterwards, I decided that playing 100BB was much simpler, especially when 3-tabling, as the way you play hands at 50BB should be different to playing them at 100BB. Having different stack sizes at different tables could un-necessarily confuse things. I reasoned that if I was worried about being outplayed by big stacks to my left, it was better to switch tables (there are plenty more fish in the sea), and so i reverted to playing 100BB. |
#6
|
|||
|
|||
Re: Buying in for 50BB
If you have a smaller stack it seems like players doesn't recognize you as a good player as when you have a big stack. I think I have been getting more calls on my big hands when I have played with a smaller stack. But then again that could be variance.
And having 50bb doesn't change the way you play much. You still have quite a big stack. The thing that differs is of course calling raises which is harder to do because you get worse implied odds. |
#7
|
|||
|
|||
Re: Buying in for 50BB
[ QUOTE ]
If you have a smaller stack it seems like players doesn't recognize you as a good player as when you have a big stack. [/ QUOTE ] I agree with this, to the extent that my 'default' rating of a 100BB player is higher than that for a 50BB player. I think that having 100+BB against another player with 100+BB you can play more on the river,but with 50BB you are often pot-committed or all-in by the turn. For the better players, this is a big advantage. |
#8
|
|||
|
|||
Re: Buying in for 50BB
I guess I am a 50bb player at the moment. [img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img]
I have only played NL cash games for 3 weeks and 20 000 hands. So I'm learning alot every time I play. I have been studying alot prior to starting out with NL though but I need the playing experience. And one thing that is hardly mentioned in the books is how to play TP. So that one has been the hardest part. |
#9
|
|||
|
|||
Re: Big pot with TPTK
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] I hate 100bb stacks [/ QUOTE ] I have been thinking about how big the buy-in stack should be. If you are a good player but perhaps not the best player at the table, it seems like it's better to go with a medium stack around 50 bb instead. That way you still cover most of the poor players and you don't risk as much against the good players. Thoughts? [/ QUOTE ] Actually I was referring to the fact that 100bb is too short stacked. Pot sized bets on the flop and turn leaves less than a pot sized bet on the river. I hope online moves to 200bb stacks soon. |
#10
|
|||
|
|||
Re: Big pot with TPTK
Yeah, I don't like 100bb either sometimes. If you get 2 callers on a potsized bet on the flop you're practically allin right there, like this hand shows
|
|
|