Moving up in limits

VeryMoonFunk · #1 10-10-07, 06:18 PM

Also, I have been buying in for $2 each time, even though the max is $5. I know that many of you will suggest and have suggested to me before that buying in with the max is always a good idea, but I don't feel like my shortstack is affecting my play too, and my moves are still effective. For some reason this strategy is working really well for me right now.

stormswa · #2 10-10-07, 06:55 PM

you missed the reason why its suggested you buy in full, it has nothing to do with how it affects your play. It has to do with getting value with your hands. Like if you got AA vs someone elses KK and get it all in on the flop you lose $2 of expected value in that hand. you need to maximize your value in every single hands to handle the ups and downs of poker.

BUT if its working for you then good for you but I personally would never do it.

Invigilator · #3 10-10-07, 07:07 PM

I'll chime in here, NOT because I am an authority or the most experienced on this issue, but because I am still grinding "up" my original online deposit, so it is an issue near and dear to my heart: take it for what it is worth (maybe very little

)

There are a number of issues involving short stack play when you are trying to move up and build your BR, and a number of opinions. The one that strikes me the most is that of maximizing my profits when I am getting the best of it.

As a player, if you are really working on your game, and at a level that you can handle (in terms of difficulty) you should be winning. If not, there are holes in your game that need to be worked on, and/or you need to move down. Given that, once you are playing a long term "winning" game, playing short means you are losing money when you have the best of it. Yes, you are also saving when you are on the short end of the stick, but we are assuming that you are playing a level that you are winning at. (short stack play is serving as a cushion in terms of how fast you can lose your money)

Ando has had success with short stack play and I won't argue with what works for a player if it is working long term and they are happy with it, but in the stakes I am playing, (.10/.25 NL) I find I am often able to take advantage of the players with 1/2 a buy-in in front of them, more often than I can take advantage of a player who is close to or greater than my chip count. (I pray I don't find myself against Ando in such a situation

)

*I will note that players who come to 25 max games with around 5 bucks in front of them give me a hard time. They tend to be shovers and I seem to do badly against them these days.

When your BR is VERY small, it can be hard to follow a lot of the standard BR management guidelines, but if you can't reload or just don't ever want to be in that spot it is very important to have some kind of rules spelled out before you sit down.

Before I had the proper bankroll for the level I was playing (I should have moved down, and yes, I got very lucky early on to not go broke) I had special rules. The big one was that I would quit once I had lost a buy-in. This was largely because I was still learning to gauge how I was playing (LAG or TAG,

or

) and I didn't want to piss it all away during a foolish technical/tilty slide. Now I just go with how I feel I am playing and how the table feels.

I think in the end, you have to be able to work well with long term goals in order to grind it out. If you are an instant gratification sort of person, it can be difficult.

Don't worry about getting spanked down when you try to move up. I am going through the same thing as I am trying to break through to 50 max.

If you haven't already, check out anything you can by Chris Ferguson on the topic of BR management. He has conducted some cool BR building experiments where he was able to keep from going broke by following key rules about buy-ins and what level to play.

#2 and #5 are good

I know it's been hashed out before, but I thought I'd share what has worked out for me. I am not advocating anything here that I haven't directly experienced to be true.

EDIT: In the time it took me to type this out, Raistlin responded. Yeah, what he said.

Good luck, no matter what!

stormswa · #4 10-10-07, 08:05 PM

yea but your post is better!

VeryMoonFunk · #5 10-10-07, 08:29 PM

thanks a lot for your responses guys. i appreciate the advice, and hopefully I can use it to my advantage.

I think I'm going to stick with my $2 strategy for .01/.02 but I think I will switch to the full buy in when I move up to .02/.05. Not sure if its just a coincidence with this small sample size, but I've been able to get my $2 up to about $5 or $6 at least 50% of the time (hardly ever losing the full $2).

PShabi · #6 10-10-07, 08:44 PM

Your view of this whole "poker thing" is wayyyyy too short term. Also, buy-in full everytime you drop a penny under full.

Invigilator · #7 10-10-07, 09:06 PM

True True! This is where PT comes in. It can track how much you are up or down. If I am triple tabling under my "carefull" rules, I'll quit once I down just over one buy-in "net". I'll also write down my account balance when I start and keep checking the cashier to know how much I am up or down on the night.

Like the Sgt.-Mjr use to yell "RELOAD RELOAD RELOAD!"

and ocassionally "RETREAT!"

Invigilator · #8 10-10-07, 09:31 PM

Actually, I have a question on moving up, so I'll ask it in this thread.

say you are playing 25 max and you build your BR to 1000. You play 1000 or so hands at 50 max and vary from 1150 to 900. Sitting there, AA cracked with 900 in your account, do you move down?

How bad of a beating (in terms of monetary loses) do you take before you drop back down?