OMG RIGGED (pt. 7??)

Decided to try the $1/$2 as i've been recently doing pretty well at .5/1 and decided to move up.
First hand in my first session: ()

Attached Images

KKKK.JPG (78.9 KB, 127 views)

Very nice, i noticed you sat down with the max $'s ($200?).

I try not to, just me i suppose. My reasoning is that it sets you up as a player who uses his stack as part of his game as well as being a target for getting a double-up from.

I normally sit down with between 25 - 50 BB's worth, inconspicuas-everyday-don't bring extra attention to yourself-Joe.

Thoughts? (What i mean is am i wrong? )

I buy in for the max for one reason: if i'm in a big pot, I want to be able to take the maximum as possible.
I mean what happens if you're sittin in the BB with AA and a $300 stack raises you and after you reraise him, he pushes.
If you've got a $100 stack or $50 stack, you'd be wishing you had more.

at a .5/1 NLHE table:
(thats what you get for limping with AA!!)

Attached Images

aaaavsa2345.JPG (79.3 KB, 117 views)

Ouch! I'd like to see the reactions in the chat box on that one!

i imagine they were "thanks for the $300" or however much the bad beat bonus was per player that wasnt a winner/loser that hand?

hmm my greedy-senses are tingling...
doesn't that mean that the whole table gets a cash prize?
titansupport, here i come!

In regards to buy-in amount. My general strategy for limit games is to sit down with min 50x - max 100x lower limit.

However at a NL table I double this.. so 100x - 200x small blind. So, what chuck sat down with is completely reasonable. I say.. if you can't afford to bring 100x small blind, you shouldn't be playing at those stakes in the first place

I have only been playing NL25 and NL50 for about two months. I always sit with max possible for the same reason as Chuck...never want to be caught with a smaller stack when I get the big hand. Yeah, I know, I can also lose more when I have a bigger stack, but that only concerns me if I am a losing player. So far (knock on wood) I am winning, therefore, I expect my bigger stack will help me in the long run. I also buy back to max buyin if my stack falls below 80% of max buyin. I have found that this works well for me.

I don't use my stack as a tool when playing cash tables. Maybe I should, but I find that just playing a solid TAG game has paid off. Also, at the low limits I play, I don't think there is any table image problem with buying in at max (probably 75% do the same). Actually, I don't think having the table image of a high-rolling bully at the higher limits would be a negative. With a TAG game, you may get calls that pay off well for you...so the big stack could be a positive.

So, I am curious what others think and how much the limits affect this thinking. Maybe it makes more of a difference at NL400.

BTW, I never understood the idea that a big stack is just someone you can double up through...they are also someone that can bust you! I know there are some who like tangling with the big stack, but personally, I just treat them like everyone else at the table (until I get stats and notes on them).

CORYAN