Shortstacking?

Hey I have a question, why would a player play shortstacked?

If one thinks they are better than their opponents, then shouldn't they buy in full?
The winning more (with full stacks) would outway the losing less (shortstacked) as you are a winning player.

Is it because it easier to play shortstacked? You can shove pre-flop a lot more, and don't have to face hard decisions post-flop?

Thanks.

That's pretty much my understanding of it.

Yeah pretty much.

Some just like to drive out action between two other big stacks who are involved. If the short stack shoves first and there are two big stacks who are already in the pot then the player on the short left has to call/fold or shove in to the bigger stack. If he just flats though, there is a chance the other big shoves on him, leaving him in a difficult situation.

Some short stack because they want to play higher limits but aren't bank rolled for it.

I don't like short stackers, really frustrating..

I think most have rubbish post flop play and can only shove PF with A,K/A,Q and pairs, that's about as good as they get....not very good.

because their lives are so bad, no aspirations, no hope.

Some massive multitablers play SS because of the easier decisions -- when you have 24 tables open I'm sure it is much more simplified to play an effective SS strategy than a 100bb one.

I'm not actually ashamed to admit I did play SS for a while on Absolute while I was trying to clear my withdrawal requirement for a free starting capital deal. The reason for this was that the 2nl games would have required I play something around 50,000 hands or more, whereas if I shorstacked 10nl I could clear the requirement in about 5,000 hands due to the way they calculated rake. The starting capital was a $50 deal, which I had ground up to $100 at 2nl and 2plo, then I decided to SS 10nl since I wanted to use that capital to take advantage of bonuses and depositor freerolls on other sites. I could have played 10nl fullstacked, but SS could handle variance a little better. BTW, 10nl on Absolute played a lot like upper playchip levels on FTP, imo.

yea i think its simply the fear of losing more in a big pot...when ur SS you're forced to be patient and wait until you get ur cards, and if someone doesn't pick up on it they'll pay you off and you maximize ur profit while minimizing the risk...obviously there's major drawbacks to playing SS as well, but no matter what you arent risking as much of ur money as you normally would....when i play live i buy in for about half the max buyin usually, i just have a superstition against buying in for the max..

The ss'ers tend to disrupt the usual flow at the table sometimes tightening the others up. I notice I tend to take different lines against these stacks esp PF.
Ftmp I see many more poor players doing this (ss'ing) at 6 max micros than the more rare ss reg. If there are more than two of these at a FR table and ur 100bb+, maybe its time to look elsewhere for a more +ev seat if it begins to disrupt ur game?

i make the most money from these people, these shortstackers alot of the time play like massive fish, or way too aggressive, they generally dont stick around long, double up and quit or more usual, exit with a big fat 0.00

i have seen people who actively move tables every 20 mins or so, they play massive LAG, crazy stuff try to win a few pots, then when people work him out, he just jumps tables, i was multitabling the other day and saw him pop through all my tables, god bless the HuD

They probably arent shortstacks.

Shortstack, in the context of a discussion about shortstackers means players who are playing 20bb stacks and playing a SS strategy which is hyper aggressive.

Most commonly when you see someone with a small stack, they are just a bad player and not playing any real strategy.

Somoene playing a SS stratagy is going to be shoving a lot from the blinds, against CO and BTN opens if the BTN or CO isnt adjusting to the SS.

Bad payers will be calling alot and trying to play postflop with small stacks.

Itys generally accepted that its almost impossible to beat the rake playing a SS strategy at under 200NL so if you are playing under 200NL you probably havent come across a real shortstacker.

I've seen this 3 or 4 times the past few days. Buying in for like 30bb and then just going all in 4/5 times. As soon as he lost his buy in to me he was out of there and on the next table.
-Its tempting to play against them though since its hard to gauge sometimes what they have. I settled for pocket Q before finally calling him and he had J9o or something like that

LOL ... Once Guilty.

When I first started playing ring games, it was at Full Tilt. I used to buy-in for the min. amount, byt, not anymore, (the only reason I did this, was because of Phil Gordon), FTP Academy. The lesson was aimed at beginners, and, at the time, that's was exactly what I was.

So you maybe right, these players might not be that good, YET.

I have to admit, I still only min. buy-in on the Rush Poker tables. The main reason for this is, If I get caught up in a big hand, then my lose isnt as bad, and, I have noticed that, some player will target you because of this, and I love that.

Easy, I play short stacked because I don't have any money

Currently thinking of moving to FTP where I have a bit more money, just seeing if I can stick it out at Stars, trying to get above $30-40 again by playing short stacked at 12-14 tables.

Not because I think it's a good strategy.

Most shortstackers are just trying to adjust the size of their stack to the size of their penis, imo.

Exactly, I am working on getting a much larger stack, to reflect just that.