Short Stack Strategy in Micro stakes

Ive been playing Micro stakes on Fulltilt for a few weeks now using the Short Stack Strategy. Unfortunately my BR has taken a heavy toll during that period and cant seem to figure out why..I mean in the long run the SSS is supposed to be profitable. Im just curious to know if any of you apply it in micros and have had any success building a br out of it. and what advice can u give.

I don't think your going to find too much help here if your shortstacking cash games. Many many people really dislike SSers. Didn't Full Tilt change up there buyins to cut down on SSers playing with the regulars?

Play with the full buyin is all the advice I can give. There is no reason not to unless your sitting on a measily few dollar roll. With a full buyin you can win more, of course you can lose more too.

And what did you do, copy and paste from 2+2? LOL

+1. In 2+2 style:



Also, you can't shortstack anymore on FT as you can't buy in short at normal tables, and shortstacking only gives you an edge when your stack size is much smaller than that of the other players at the table.

Go ahead and look up any of the shortstackers that you see at the tables on PTR and see if they have positive numbers... because none of them do. The only money shortstackers usually make is from their rakeback and the bonuses/player points that they add up through playing a large volume of hands. You will find articles saying "ShortStacking Strategy That Kills...."whatever, but they are all destined to lose because you can't maximize your profit by playing the smallest amount possible. What happens when you get dealt AA and you can only get 20BB in against an opponent, well, you only made .40, whereas if you weren't such an idiot, you could have made 100BB playing a real stack.

I'm not really sorry for that last soapbox comment, I hate SS'ers

the rake at 5/10 cent and lower is 6.6% so if you dont have rakeback it will be hard to break even

are you playing the shallow tables?

if you get rakeback and take advantage of the ironman bonuses you can scratch out a few hundred a month if you multi table

only play at loose tables

pfb, I see you SS'ing all the time on Tilt, at least I used to down at 2nl. You put in a large volume of hands, but is the SS'ing really doing anything for you?

ya cuz im trying to get the most advice i can..is there a problem with that chief??

LOL

No, but you didn't notice you also posted the Report and Quote buttons from 2+2s page.

keeps me outta trouble...lol

i had a good plan until they came down with higher buyins ...now i may have learn how to play...

Elaborate what and how this SSS thing works...I am not sure I really know what you are proposing with this short stack strategy. Explain please, Wally

So in essence BSS is more profitable as the name suggest when you have a large stack, and SSS when you have a short stack. Is it really that detrimental for your bankroll to play the other way around?

You are severely cutting the profits that could be made by shortstacking. Playing with a big stack guarantees that if you get into a situation that you get your whole stack in, you are going to profit more from it(because you should only be getting your stack in with the best hand, right???). Also it gives you ammo, a player with a short stack has no way of getting rid of another player in the pot if by the turn they only have 2BB's left after any raising preflop and then the flop, whereas if you have a big stack, you can scare someone out of drawing to a hand...

If by micro stakes, you are talking about .01/.02, or 2NL (max buy in) with a .70 min buy in, well, all I can ask is why would you play SS?

People tend to play these limits a good deal harder than they might at a higher limit. A 3xBB bet (6 cents) means little, so most don't bet that little.

A SS would give you too little maneuvering room. So you'd pretty much have to play super-tight. You don't have enough chips to speculate with lesser hands, to bet your draws, or make hardly any of the post-flop moves that are interesting. But, as I understand it, SS strategy is about lying in wait and playing hard preflop with a monster. And then running off with your winnings. Or slinking off, I suppose. It's not a grinding strategy. It's hit-and-run. Running with $1.40 is ...sad.

If you are waiting and waiting for AA or KK, you are wasting opportunities. And when one factors in the number of times those two hand are busted...

I'm not shocked that SSing on micros is a losing proposition.

I agree. But you have to give the guy some credit for trying this cuz on the 0.02 tables and the 0.05 ones it's not poker that's being played it's donkaluckaloo!

people never EVER get off their hand whatever the situation and when you have'em trapped, they catch whatever runner-runner suckeydonkey they need after their imbecile call cuz, let's face it, pocket aces aint gonna do shit against 8 players with rag hands...One of them idiots is gonna hit something!

that's why i stopped playing at those tables...waiting to deposit 200$ and play full stack on the 0.10 NL tables.

you need to have a good think about this, you're probably not ready.

thats exactly what it is a hit and run strat..in theory i see it being profitable in the long run multi tabling 7+ tables

Best strategy for short stackers is probably self mutilation ... Saves there soul.

Alright, I'll give this a go....
When I started playing seriously I considered SSS. But..... At the micros, as was stated, the rake is gonna eat you up. Also, you have decreased fold equity. Keep in mind that you are getting dealt premium hands, JJ+, 1.8% of the time. So while you're sitting around waiting for those nice hands the rake is nibbling away. Another thing to consider is that fuller stacks cant wait to bust you.
And then theres the FACT that poker is by no means a get-rich-quick scheme. It takes time to put in all the hours of study and play just to see if you're a profitable player.
Full stack is the way to go man.

Proper SS strategy....

Call lots of raises with marginal hands and try to see cheap showdowns when you hit anything on the flop.

If a player is super tight then shove on his pre flop raises. Hes tight so hes scared to play hands and he will fold almost anything(except As ldo) hes raising with to a shove.

GL.

OMG please NO!!

SS strategy revolves around shoving preflop to exploit fold equity against a standard deep stack opening range. It dosent revolve around seeing cheap flops and shoving when you hit.

It works because you consider both the fold equity against the range and the Showdown equity the hand has against the players calling range with a guaranteed showdown. Its rare to get many hands in against a reasonably tight preflop fange with less than 25% equity... you really have to be shoving trash against a nit to get less sd equity than that.

You might see people calling to see cheap flops at the micros.. but that's not SS strategy.. that just playing bad and not having many chips.

OK, sorry. This was my lame attempt at being funny. I guess I should have been a little more OTT cause the sarcasm didnt come off right. Basically I was trying to write the least optimal SS strategy. Won't happen again...

LOL

In that case its quite funny.

I have read so many posts where people actually think SS strategy is doing exactly that, that whenever I see something like that I assume the poster is serious.

Trust me, I've spent a whole lot of time on these super micro stupid players' tables and I know what I'm talking about. I'm an agressive player who relies a lot on bluffing and a stupid player deactivates the fold button whenever he's playing anything. So there goes agressivity...What about tight? Well when you do have something the incredible range of calling idiots means a lot of them can suck-out on your ass.

So thanks for your advicce but it's a very wrong advice for my style of play. I'd rather play on a table where players understand at least the ABC of poker and accept laying down a hand sometimes (with half of them fishies of course) rather than a table full of maniacs that will call down anything with anything because the latter is closer to gambling than playing skills and I most surely rely on playing skills rather than gambling.

So yeah I'm ready to deposit that much and play on those limits cuz it's the only way I can profit and win with my style of play.

I'm not the best player in the world, but if you can't beat 2nl and 5nl (where I am now), you really shouldnt be jumping up. If you cant adjust to the easiest game you could be in, how do you expect to beat higher limits?

You're not, you probably have a lot of holes in your game. 2nl-5nl players fold, ALOT. in fact they are much more likely to play weak tight or weak passive play that leads to too much folding than calling too much.
if you've never played 50-100nl before and move straight there (btw we talking 3k-10k investment here.) you'll get raped in the ahole. I'm serious, they really will butcher you.

I'm agreeing with the last two all the way. If you can't beat the lower stakes, there is no way you're going to beat the higher stakes. Not to mention, 10NL players play the same way as 2NL and 5NL, so you think you're going to get something different, but you're not. Ask just about any of the qualified members here and they will tell you, and I am sure they have a lot more experience than you(or I for that matter). I constantly see players like you with that same mindset and a month or two down the road they are back down at the bottom limits because they didn't take the time to close their holes in their game before they made a premature jump up in stakes because of ego or whatever and it comes right back in their face.

If you're not winning at 2NL/5NL, then you will not win at 10NL/25NL/50NL/100NL/...

Don't take this as anyone calling you a bad player either, it's just that your game needs work if you are having problems at these low levels.

Most short stackers/Hit and run players are merely gamblers who hope to get lucky because they lack the proper skills to become an efficient and profitable poker player IMO.
No offense kid but I think you need more work on your game if you have to resort to luck when playing poker.

On the same note, the reason you may not be achieving your goal while SSing could be the fact the a SSS strategy has one fatal flaw, It's limited card selection. IMO

There are specific strategies for shortstacking, and it's a bit more than waiting for top 5% hands. My understanding is that ss'ing is very difficult to execute profitably over the long run without relying on rakeback, as others have said above.

OP, we don't know what you're implementing strategically, so it's kinda hard to tell whether you're running cold or playing non-optimally relative to ss strategies, or running on average using a strategy that's generally not supposed to be hugely profitable.

I've played 8k hands in the last two days at 0.02/0.05 and trust me, people do fold They also showdown with the craziest hands and give you lots of money. Nom nom.

What makes you think that moving from 0.02/0.05 to 0.05/0.1 is going to mean you get to play far better opponents? It'll be exactly the same, just with a few more half decent regs chucked in amongst the maniacs and fish

I've run into a few shortstackers at low stakes, but no good ones. They are too easy to outplay - they only ever play extremely tight and then try and ship it either pre or on any good flop, so if you have position on them with hands like suited connectors where you can outflop their high pocket pair or premium Ace by calling their raises they'll ship it into you anyway

Random tip to help take money away from anyone playing a SS:
Don't play SCers against them (unless you're planning on bluff-shoving the flop), play high cards and stack your top pair weak kicker. Stacks are too short for implied odds stuff, just find a decent pair or some outs and shove.

I like that idea, good shout

At 5NL there are normally at least 3 people in a raised pot anyway so the implied odds come from their stacks.

The majority of the time the short stackers also have no fold equity, so if you got in the hand with them to begin with with SC's and didn't hit, your bet is just going to get called.

I have to say that I like to buy in short stacked to begin with. I use that to learn how the other player play. You find out who call all in with any pair and who is very conservative. If I loose it, then no big loss and then I buy in for a much larger amount. I usually get my buy in back pluss more.

You could also sit and observe at a table to find that information out, which is might be more beneficial to you if you are concerned that you won't find that information out by just playing your normal game...

hmm...I have to say this.(sorry OP, I'm off topic)
You may be right but I'm still going to deposit at least 100$ or 200$ next month and try and beat the 0.05 0.10 NL tables a bit for the same reason presented above, and because I've been studying a lot more poker lately (playing online, live, reading books, watching vids, posting, etc...) and I believe that you can only get smarter by playing a smarter opponent. You may argue that they're not much better than the 0.05 ones but I'll have a clearer mindset because of my prejudice, and if I do lose, I'd learn the lesson you're trying to teach me first-hand .
But really, thanks anyway guys!and plz, wish me success rather than you being right .