re: Poker & Playing 60-75BB buy-ins in Full Ring NL
Originally Posted by Stu_Ungar
I think buying in for under 100bb would be more suited to 6max than FR. The tighter FR ranges mean that its much more important to get as much valuse as possible with your big hands.
You still don't make any sense, Stu, I'm sorry.
You know, if we played heads up, it's entirely possible that between 0 and 15bb deep, none of us has enough of an edge on the other to beat the rake, then from 15bb to 80bb I'd have an edge because i know more about short and medium stack play than you do, then from 80bb to 120bb deep you have an edge on me because you're so used playing with about 100bb stacks while i'm a bit of a calling station 100bb deep, and finally for 120bb and above, I have an edge again because I'm cool like that.
If the above is true and we were to play heads up, the proper choice of stack size would obviously be different for both of us. The only difference would be that I could force you to play 50bb deep by buying in short. the same thing goes for a FR table, although edges between 9 players are more complex to figure out.
A few things are obvious:
[*]you don't play the exact same strategy when you play 60bb deep and when you play 100bb deep. (but obviously you can adjust)
[*]if you're Phil Ivey, your win rate will increase as you play deeper and deeper. (for anybody else, it depends)
[*]Even Phil Ivey can't beat the rake if he plays extremely short, say with 1bb stacks for instance.
But none of these mean that playing 60bb deep is not the right decision for a given player, and a +EV one compared to 100bb deep. Especially when you play 400nl where the rake is much less of an issue, which makes shorter stacked play a lot more reasonable.