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

[HiatusOver]

Did u actually read the thread???? Your response here shows u didnt give this the respect that it seemed liked u were giving it to start out. If you actually read through you would have realized that it is +EV to play with a short stack. Barry Greenstein said a breakeven player could turn into a solid winner by using this short buy-in theory. ALSO YOU DIDNT SAY THAT THE SMALL BUY IN WAS 5 FREAKING BIG BETS!!!!!!!!!!!! Your poll was very misleading and didnt ask the question that u need answered. People buying in for 1000 dollars in a 100-200 game hurts the game its that simple, thats why everyone complains. U need to revisit this

In any live game I've ever played in, this was called "rat-holing" and was strictly prohibited. Its a real dick move. I've always appreciated how UB makes you buy in for the same amount you had on the table if you try this. I don't play pokerstars but this would tick me off.

[shaniac]

[ QUOTE ]
Hi folks -
I want to thank everybody for their votes and thoughts. It seems that the overwhemling consensus is that it's nothing to worry about.

I think we'll leave it the way it is, and I will go worry about the other 147 things that are on my priority list.

Best regards,
Lee Jones

PokerStars Poker Room Manager

[/ QUOTE ]

I'm surprised you're allowing a flimsy and largely inadequate poll on 2+2 to determine policy on Pokerstars.

I think there's more to the issue than those poll results betray. A 10X-BB minimum buyin requirement would seem to efficiently solve the problem and offend no one, except possibly Amazing Grace.

[Alex/Mugaaz]

I agree with Shaniac, almost no one who responded was capable of determining the edge buying in short gives. The few posters here who do know what they are talking about replied that they didn't know, or that it wasn't in their best interest.... so no. This isn't a great poll.

[oreogod]

ratholing is some of the lamest [censored] ever.

By the way...please fix the HU stucture on your full/6max tables. (you have BB on the button, instead of vice-versa.)

[rigoletto]

Hi Lee

Your concern should be your customers and not the poker technicalities. Everybody hates ratholing and it annoyes your customers, so get rid of it!!!!

On the edge thing: ratholing gives bad postflop players an edge (or cuts down the oppositions edge against them) and that is annoying to skilled players.

[Steve Giufre]

[ QUOTE ]
Hi Lee

Your concern should be your customers and not the poker technicalities. Everybody hates ratholing and it annoyes your customers, so get rid of it!!!!

On the edge thing: ratholing gives bad postflop players an edge (or cuts down the oppositions edge against them) and that is annoying to skilled players.

[/ QUOTE ]

Agreed. I dont know why Lee ignored Barrys quote that basically answered the question for us. You cant expect to get accurate information just by posting a poll in the midhigh section when 99% of the people responding dont play in that game or play that high. I can garentee that way more than half of your regular 1-2 players hate that rule. Most (but not all) of the guys who like it are short on money and are taking a shot.

[rbenuck4]

I was one of the people who thinks that you do get an unfair advantage. The reason is as follows. Assuming you can buy in min for 5BB. The chances of you at some point starting a hand with 2BB is much greater than for someone who bought in for 25BB. This should be fairly obvious why.

At the point where you have 2BB or less, you are at an extremely larger advantage than everyone else at the table. Any multiway pot, you are going to get great odds to play. Let's say there's a raise, and two cold callers, and its up to you. You can commit yourself to the pot And be sure you are going to see all 5 cards. Unfortunately for everyone else, they don't have that advantage. Anyone with a draw or a small pair will very likely have to pay to see the turn/river, and while the pot might've started out with 5 people, it might only be 2 or 3 people (including yourself) by the river, giving you a big advantage because now there is so much extra dead money in the pot.

In other words, if you put yourself all in preflop with 4 other people and you all had similar hands, you are getting around 4 to 1 on your money (depending on the blinds) for a 4 to 1 shot of winning the hand. But in this case your chances of winning this specific hand are much greater than if you had 25BB left after the preflop action, because you know you can't be forced out but others probably will be forced out. Granted you can't make extra money off of your good hands, but I still think that this is a huge advantage.

[Duke]

[ QUOTE ]
Did u actually read the thread???? Your response here shows u didnt give this the respect that it seemed liked u were giving it to start out. If you actually read through you would have realized that it is +EV to play with a short stack. Barry Greenstein said a breakeven player could turn into a solid winner by using this short buy-in theory. ALSO YOU DIDNT SAY THAT THE SMALL BUY IN WAS 5 FREAKING BIG BETS!!!!!!!!!!!! Your poll was very misleading and didnt ask the question that u need answered. People buying in for 1000 dollars in a 100-200 game hurts the game its that simple, thats why everyone complains. U need to revisit this

[/ QUOTE ]

I sat.

Nah, you need 50-60 grand to play right in that game.

Well I had 3, so even if Johnny Chan is better than me I still have an edge just playing good cards.

Good point.

In that sense, I outplayed him.

Sure.

---

It's kinda like going to 50 radiologists and listening to the 180+ photographers that agrees with your own self-diagnosis of that shadow on your left lung.

EDIT: added more photographers and radiologists when I saw the results of the poll. Wow, a lot of people don't get it.

~D

Very good point, which I had not considered.

Tex