| |
| For the maximum rakeback allowed at all the major poker sites, and exclusive kickback bonuses that cannot be found anywhere else, as well as extra value on top of all vip programmes, these guys can't be beat. |
| |
| |
| | | |
| |
| SHORT STACKED vs FULL STACKED POKER |
| Playing cash games short stacked ( buying in with only 20 big blinds ) has become a very popular way of playing poker recently, with some people swearing by it, whilst full stacked players ( buying in with 100 big blinds ) deride it as being boring and mechanical, and reducing the complex game of poker to one or two decisions. The truth is that there are pros and cons to both systems, and i will discuss them both now. The most obvious advantage to playing short stacked is that you can only loose a maximum of 20 big blinds per hand, making it a very safe way of playing poker. The most obvious disadvantage is that you can only win 20 big blinds from each opponent per hand, ( you could be all in against 2 or 3 opponents winning you 40 or 60 big blinds ), meaning that you can't maximise your profits when you hit a very powerful hand. Another difference between the two systems of poker is that when playing full stacked, you have enough chips to make the odds of playing drawing hands profitable, ie small pairs and suited connectors, where as short stacked you don't. A simple example of this is that you are dealt a pair of 2s pre flop, and somebody raises to 5 big blinds. What you really want with a pair of 2s is to hit another on the flop giving you a very powerful set and hopefully making you alot of money from your opponent. The problem is, that you will only make a set with a pair 1 in every 7.5 times. Therefor, if you were able to win 7.5 times your pre flop call whenever you hit a set, you'd break even in the long run. What you'd really be looking to do is make 10 or more times your pre flop call when you hit a set to make a profit in the long run. ( it costs you 5 big blinds to call pre flop. You hit a set once in every 7.5 flops. Therefor, to hit a set has cost you 5 big blinds x 7.5 flops = 37.5 big blinds. By winning 10 pre flop calls when you hit a set ( 5 big blind pre flop call x 10 = 50 big blinds ) you will make an average profit of 12.5 big blinds every time you flop a set ). Now it's only possible to win 10 pre flop calls ( 50 big blinds ) when you hit a set if you have 50 big blinds to gamble with and your opponent has 50 big blinds to win from him. Therefor, it's not profitable to call a 5 big blind pre flop raise with small pairs when you're playing short stacked, as it will cost you 37.5 big blinds on average to flop a set, but you'll only be able to win 20 big blinds when you hit one as that's all you have to gamble with. As you only have 20 big blinds, it's not profitable to call anything more than 2 big blinds pre flop. On the other hand, it's not in the full stacks interest to play small pairs against you if you're short stacked, as you don't have enough money for him to win to justify him paying to draw to a set, so really one system doesn't have any advantage over the other one on the face of it. It's only when you analyze things a little further that you see the real advantage that the short stacked system has. It comes into its own in multi way pots. If you enter a pot with 2 full stacks, they'll still be willing to play drawing hands because of the potential profit that they can make from the other full stack. Now you already know that 6.5 times out of 7.5 he's not making a set, and so you should theoretically take 32.5 big blinds from him ( 6.5 x 5 big blinds ) for every time he hits a set and takes your full stack of 20 big blinds from you, giving you a profit of 12.5 big blinds due to the full stacks playing the optimal strategy against each other. Another thing that can work both ways when taking into account whether to play short stacked or full stacked is your playing style. The reason that i say this is because one thing that it's easier to do with a full stack than a short stack is bluff. This is simply because it's not only easier to take an opponent off of a hand with a bigger bet, but if you're short stacked and it's cost you 5 big blinds to see the flop, and then you bet 10 big blinds on the flop, your opponent knows that he can call this, and the maximum you can bet on the turn or river is your remaining 5 big blinds. If your opponent knew that you were capable of raising another 85 big blinds on the turn or river, he'd be alot more weary of calling your 10 big blind bet. Again, this can work both ways though. I find that when i get a strong hand short stacked, it's alot easier for me to get my opponents to call my bets as i'm not threatening so much of their stack, and am therefor alot more likely to get paid off. Now if your playing style is cautious, and you don't link to bluff or take risks, then you'll probably find it alot easier playing short stacked as it's alot easier to risk 20 big blinds than 100 big blinds with hands such as top pair. It's simply alot harder to take a short stacker off a reasonable hand. |
| |
| To sum up. If a short stacker were to play a full stacker heads up, neither one would have any particular advantage. Where short stacking gains it's advantage over full stacking is in multi way pots, where it benefits against full stackers playing the premium strategy against each other and exploits this. It's up to you to decide what strategy best suits your playing style. Good luck at the tables. |
| |
| |
| |
|
