RING: Why do people NOT like short stackers?

Stick66

Stick66

Legend
Silver Level
Joined
Nov 10, 2005
Total posts
6,374
Chips
0
"Why do most players NOT like to play against short stackers?"

This question just popped up in my mind today as I just began using the table scanner HEM has. I noticed how many multi-tabler short stackers play at 50NL on Stars. I usually like to play against these players because I like to isolate them and put them to a decision for their stack while only being 1/3 of mine. More often than not, I end up busting them when they either call me PF with weakish stuff (me = 2-1 fave or better) or I win a flip (1-1 or close). I also win when they fold (me = 1-0 fave, lol). So as I figure it, I have the edge overall. BTW, if they are super tight, I usually leave them alone since just stealing their blinds isn't always worth it. It's the average or loose SS's I like to outplay. But for some reason, even though it feels like I am not losing money doing this, I have a feeling that my outlook on this subject is wrong.

Most players don't like to play against shorties and many experts advise against it. But I have yet come upon an expert's full explanation as to why this is. Does anyone have a good link? Or can anyone share a simple technical explanation here for us?
 
vanquish

vanquish

Legend
Silver Level
Joined
Apr 26, 2007
Total posts
12,000
Chips
0
because they're often hard to exploit
 
Egon Towst

Egon Towst

Cardschat Elite
Silver Level
Joined
Jun 26, 2006
Total posts
6,794
Chips
0
The presence of the short-stacker alters the nature of the game. Since it is the effective stack which matters, you are for practical purposes a short stack yourself when playing against him and must adjust your game accordingly. You cannot, for example, profitably set mine or play small connectors when short stacked.

Players who prefer deepstack play dislike this, either because they dislike being forced into changing their style of play or, perhaps more often, because they lack the skill to change gears and therefore become unprofitable in the presence of short-stackers.
 
the lab man

the lab man

CardsChat Irregular
Silver Level
Joined
Jan 12, 2006
Total posts
3,557
Awards
1
Chips
1
And for whatever reason they seem to run (leave the table) when they hit, which I know disturbs some players.
 
kidkvno1

kidkvno1

Sarah's Pet
Bronze Level
Joined
Aug 20, 2008
Total posts
16,281
Awards
4
Chips
50
I like playing them, even tho some may win, have 2 times the amount, from beating me, but they leave the table with 0.00 :).
I think if you play, short stacked, then you know how they play, and can beat them...
 
BelgoSuisse

BelgoSuisse

Legend
Silver Level
Joined
Nov 26, 2007
Total posts
9,218
Chips
0
Players who prefer deepstack play dislike this, either because they dislike being forced into changing their style of play or, perhaps more often, because they lack the skill to change gears and therefore become unprofitable in the presence of short-stackers.

Nonsense. It's not a problem of skill. Most deepstack players are a lot more skilled than the scumbags who shortstack.

The problem is that it's impossible to play perfect mixed stack game. If you're deep and play against a mix of deep and short stacks, you will either have to make -EV plays against the deep stacks to avoid being exploited by the shorties, or vice versa.

Example: a deep stack opens in MP. You're on the button with a suited connectors. It's a clear call. But if there are good shortstackers in the blinds, it might be better to fold because they can squeeze profitably with such a wide range.

The reverse is true too. There are cases where it would be +EV to iso-raise a shorty or call his 3bet but you have to fold because there's another deep stack behind you and you can't risk committing a large part of your stack while he's still in the hand.
 
Stu_Ungar

Stu_Ungar

Legend
Silver Level
Joined
May 14, 2008
Total posts
6,236
Chips
0
Because people choose to play with deep stacks because they enjoy the deep stacked game.

When you enter a pot with a SS or a SS enters with you, the game switches from deep stack to SS.

Its annoying simply because I don't want to play SS, if I wanted to play a SS game... I would have bought in as a SS.
 
Snowmobiler

Snowmobiler

Legend
Silver Level
Joined
Mar 1, 2009
Total posts
2,644
Chips
0
The reverse is true too. There are cases where it would be +EV to iso-raise a shorty or call his 3bet but you have to fold because there's another deep stack behind you and you can't risk committing a large part of your stack while he's still in the hand.


Belgo,Can you give an example of what kind of hands you would want to raise a short stack,but wont because of player behind you?


Snow :cool:
 
Egon Towst

Egon Towst

Cardschat Elite
Silver Level
Joined
Jun 26, 2006
Total posts
6,794
Chips
0
Nonsense. It's not a problem of skill. Most deepstack players are a lot more skilled than the scumbags who shortstack.

Seems a tad emotional, m8. Are you having a bad day ? Not like you to tilt, surely ?
 
BelgoSuisse

BelgoSuisse

Legend
Silver Level
Joined
Nov 26, 2007
Total posts
9,218
Chips
0
Its annoying simply because I don't want to play SS, if I wanted to play a SS game... I would have bought in as a SS.

The thing is: even shortstacking scumbags don't enjoy playing the SS game. As soon as the deep stacked players leave and only SS scumbags remain at the table, they all leave. Because unless they can exploit the artificial edge of playing against deep stackers who suffer from mixed stack sizes, even a perfect short stacker cannot have enough of an edge to beat the rake.

They are strictly parasites on the deep stack games who cannot survive by themselves.
 
BelgoSuisse

BelgoSuisse

Legend
Silver Level
Joined
Nov 26, 2007
Total posts
9,218
Chips
0
Belgo,Can you give an example of what kind of hands you would want to raise a short stack,but wont because of player behind you?


Snow :cool:

In the first example, you're MP and have TT. You're ahead of a good shortstacker's squeezing range, but if the deep stacker on the BTN is known to be tricky, it becomes really dangerous to commit 20bb.
 
BelgoSuisse

BelgoSuisse

Legend
Silver Level
Joined
Nov 26, 2007
Total posts
9,218
Chips
0
Seems a tad emotional, m8. Are you having a bad day ? Not like you to tilt, surely ?

I'm having a bad day (see monthly chat), but it's not related to playing against SSers and i feel exactly the same way about those worthless parasites on my good days.
 
B

Bishop Poker

Rising Star
Silver Level
Joined
Apr 14, 2009
Total posts
19
Chips
0
these players are often hit and run players buy in for the min amount in a ring game hit a few hands often just 1 then leave usually back to a lower limit . This is aggravating!
 
nevadanick

nevadanick

Back to work ... zzzzz
Silver Level
Joined
Oct 3, 2007
Total posts
8,477
Chips
0
Nonsense. It's not a problem of skill. Most deepstack players are a lot more skilled than the scumbags who shortstack.

The problem is that it's impossible to play perfect mixed stack game. If you're deep and play against a mix of deep and short stacks, you will either have to make -EV plays against the deep stacks to avoid being exploited by the shorties, or vice versa.

Example: a deep stack opens in MP. You're on the button with a suited connectors. It's a clear call. But if there are good shortstackers in the blinds, it might be better to fold because they can squeeze profitably with such a wide range.

The reverse is true too. There are cases where it would be +EV to iso-raise a shorty or call his 3bet but you have to fold because there's another deep stack behind you and you can't risk committing a large part of your stack while he's still in the hand.

Advantages and edges. Poker has them in all cases.

Because people choose to play with deep stacks because they enjoy the deep stacked game.

When you enter a pot with a SS or a SS enters with you, the game switches from deep stack to SS.

Its annoying simply because I don't want to play SS, if I wanted to play a SS game... I would have bought in as a SS.

A game/table structure is set by the house. If you don't want to be on a table with shorties, don't buy into a table where THEY can.

Seems a tad emotional, m8. Are you having a bad day ? Not like you to tilt, surely ?

No, I've seen these comments regularly by Belgo. His opinion never changes. I don't play nlhe ring at any stakes, so it doesn't affect me 'personally' one way or the other. But calling any player who buys into a table according to the rules and requirements "a scumbag" is not right.

Just like any cash player who makes bad bets and calls, they have paid to be there. If it changes the nature, texture, advantages or edges in any manner, that's part of the game. Doesn't make the player a 'scumbag', imo. He's paid his buy-in and is entitled to play any way he sees fit until he has neither a chair or chips.

If it weren't part of the game of poker, sites and pokerrooms would make all their cash tables 100BB ONLY buy-ins. Then it might be a level playing field. This is the same reason sites limit the max buy-ins so one whale cannot come in with $100,000 and bully a $100 buy-in table.

Many players may not enjoy shortstackers for various reasons, but there are a lot of CC members here who might play that way and they are in no way 'scumbags', imo. (but that's just me :p )
 
zachvac

zachvac

Legend
Silver Level
Joined
Sep 14, 2007
Total posts
7,832
Chips
0
Because the good ones can basically play unexploitably and they have a mathematical edge over deepstackers?
 
TPC

TPC

Legend
Silver Level
Joined
Nov 5, 2008
Total posts
3,766
Chips
0
A game/table structure is set by the house. If you don't want to be on a table with shorties, don't buy into a table where THEY can.

This is impossible, none of the big three sites offer this on the micro levels. There are deep stack tables, but you can still buy in short stacked. Which makes no sense. Just make the deepstack tables, deepstack, where you have to buyin for 200BB, no more no less. As of right now, this isn't offered.


No, I've seen these comments regularly by Belgo. His opinion never changes. I don't play nlhe ring at any stakes, so it doesn't affect me 'personally' one way or the other. But calling any player who buys into a table according to the rules and requirements "a scumbag" is not right.

You said yourself you don't play nlhe ring at any stakes. Start playing and run into the SSers and you'll feel the same way Belgo does. I know I do.

Just like any cash player who makes bad bets and calls, they have paid to be there. If it changes the nature, texture, advantages or edges in any manner, that's part of the game. Doesn't make the player a 'scumbag', imo. He's paid his buy-in and is entitled to play any way he sees fit until he has neither a chair or chips.

Freedom of Speech imo. I paid to be there as well, and can voice my opinion how I see fit. That's part of the game as well.

If it weren't part of the game of poker, sites and pokerrooms would make all their cash tables 100BB ONLY buy-ins. Then it might be a level playing field. This is the same reason sites limit the max buy-ins so one whale cannot come in with $100,000 and bully a $100 buy-in table.

All the sites care about it the rake. And the reason they allow SS to buyin is people play above their rolls on stakes that they can't play in. So it allows someone to buyin that wouldn't be able to otherwise. Also SSers are looking to go all in, which creates a larger pot, which creates more rake.

Many players may not enjoy shortstackers for various reasons, but there are a lot of CC members here who might play that way and they are in no way 'scumbags', imo. (but that's just me :p )

SS is a losing strategy for the most part. I never find any SSers with a positive return. Or at least I haven't yet. And if there are CCers that are SSers, they are newbies and will soon learn why SS is -EV

See bold type
 
Stick66

Stick66

Legend
Silver Level
Joined
Nov 10, 2005
Total posts
6,374
Chips
0
Because the good ones can basically play unexploitably and they have a mathematical edge over deepstackers?
See. This is basically what I get when I Google and read about this stuff. I'm looking for more. Anyone have a good link? 2+2 maybe?
Because the good ones
Define good. I seem to find loose ones I can punish.
can basically play unexploitably
How's that?
and they have a mathematical edge over deepstackers?
What's their edge?
 
the lab man

the lab man

CardsChat Irregular
Silver Level
Joined
Jan 12, 2006
Total posts
3,557
Awards
1
Chips
1
See. This is basically what I get when I Google and read about this stuff. I'm looking for more. Anyone have a good link? 2+2 maybe?
Define good. I seem to find loose ones I can punish.
How's that?
What's their edge?


2+2 did have a great section on how to play the SS against deepstacked but I can never seem too find anything there when I need to look for it... sorry
 
TPC

TPC

Legend
Silver Level
Joined
Nov 5, 2008
Total posts
3,766
Chips
0
Cause if you plays whit a big stacked player you are affarid of loseing it cause they can scare you to the end and if you are short stacked in when blinds are to high then you have to dbl all the time to get in to the top ?


The thread is about Cash games, not tourney.
 
U

unchosen

Enthusiast
Silver Level
Joined
Mar 5, 2009
Total posts
76
Chips
0
I like to play against short stacks as well because then I can try and bully them. But playing against short stacks can be somewhat dangerous because when they have a good hand, you can easily overlook it because of there stack size.
 
NineLions

NineLions

Advanced beginner
Silver Level
Joined
Sep 20, 2006
Total posts
4,979
Chips
0
Stick, the problem to me comes with the mixed stack sizes. If you have a short stack sitting beside a big stack it gets awkward. If I have a tight short stack to my left, I'll minraise to steal. If there's a big stack beside, a min raise gives him good implied odds. If I raise normally because one of the blinds is a full stack, the short stack can easily shove or at least raise and commit himself postflop.

And the loose ones that you run across are not the good ones, they're just bad players afraid of losing more money. The good ones are the ones who can pressure by raising/reraising/shoving while offering no implied odds.

Then, as mentioned, once they double up they can't play their game anymore because they start offering more implied odds, so the leave and rathole their winnings.
 
R

RA2000

Rock Star
Silver Level
Joined
Jan 4, 2009
Total posts
284
Chips
0
Normaly they are in push or fold mode.
And most of the time they are holding a good hand if they push.
So you can not make them fold after the flop...
 
Zorba

Zorba

27
Platinum Level
Joined
Jul 21, 2007
Total posts
41,797
Awards
15
AQ
Chips
169
But calling any player who buys into a table according to the rules and requirements "a scumbag" is not right.
No calling them scumbag is not right they are Arseholes, they dont play poker, they play Bingo, but they are a good source of cash anyway. :smile:
 
Stick66

Stick66

Legend
Silver Level
Joined
Nov 10, 2005
Total posts
6,374
Chips
0
Stick, the problem to me comes with the mixed stack sizes. If you have a short stack sitting beside a big stack it gets awkward. If I have a tight short stack to my left, I'll minraise to steal. If there's a big stack beside, a min raise gives him good implied odds. If I raise normally because one of the blinds is a full stack, the short stack can easily shove or at least raise and commit himself postflop.

And the loose ones that you run across are not the good ones, they're just bad players afraid of losing more money. The good ones are the ones who can pressure by raising/reraising/shoving while offering no implied odds.

Then, as mentioned, once they double up they can't play their game anymore because they start offering more implied odds, so the leave and rathole their winnings.
Ok, this is making good sense now. Thx.
 
nevadanick

nevadanick

Back to work ... zzzzz
Silver Level
Joined
Oct 3, 2007
Total posts
8,477
Chips
0
See bold type (for Trigga's replies to my post)

Originally Posted by nevadanick
A game/table structure is set by the house. If you don't want to be on a table with shorties, don't buy into a table where THEY can.

This is impossible, none of the big three sites offer this on the micro levels. There are deep stack tables, but you can still buy in short stacked. Which makes no sense. Just make the deepstack tables, deepstack, where you have to buyin for 200BB, no more no less. As of right now, this isn't offered.

My point exactly. Are there ANY tables online or live where a deepstack buy-in is 'required' ?? Except maybe the true 'High Stakes' games, but those aren't 'micro-stakes' either.

You won't see them 'live' because (afaik) there aren't MICRO LEVELS at live play. I haven't played (nor found) a live .25/.50 stakes table for (hmmmmm) 30 years or so.

No, I've seen these comments regularly by Belgo. His opinion never changes. I don't play nlhe ring at any stakes, so it doesn't affect me 'personally' one way or the other. But calling any player who buys into a table according to the rules and requirements "a scumbag" is not right.

You said yourself you don't play nlhe ring at any stakes. Start playing and run into the SSers and you'll feel the same way Belgo does. I know I do.


Not liking them is one thing. I don't like freeroll all-inners every hand either ... but it doesn't make them 'scumbags'. Bad players ... maybe. Name calling 'scumbags' ... no.

I may not play nlhe ring, but I do play limit micro stud. We see the same thing on those tables. Buy-ins of the min $1.60 where $8 is the 100BB buy-in. They cap every round on a starting hand, hit their hand and run. Still doesn't make them 'scumbags', nor does it make them 'winning players'. BUT... they have met the table minimum according to the rules.

Just like any cash player who makes bad bets and calls, they have paid to be there. If it changes the nature, texture, advantages or edges in any manner, that's part of the game. Doesn't make the player a 'scumbag', imo. He's paid his buy-in and is entitled to play any way he sees fit until he has neither a chair or chips.

Freedom of Speech imo. I paid to be there as well, and can voice my opinion how I see fit. That's part of the game as well.


The same Freedom of Speech that I have to not like other players and some of our own members being called 'scumbags'. Try calling a SS buy-in at a live table a 'scumbag' to his face... :D I've looked over a lot of poker glossaries and have not seen 'scumbag' listed as a defining term .. on any glossary.

If it weren't part of the game of poker, sites and pokerrooms would make all their cash tables 100BB ONLY buy-ins. Then it might be a level playing field. This is the same reason sites limit the max buy-ins so one whale cannot come in with $100,000 and bully a $100 buy-in table.

All the sites care about it the rake. And the reason they allow SS to buyin is people play above their rolls on stakes that they can't play in. So it allows someone to buyin that wouldn't be able to otherwise. Also SSers are looking to go all in, which creates a larger pot, which creates more rake.

Why do the sites always get blamed for only caring about the rake? For one, rake is where they make their money. No rake ... no poker room ... live or online. Second, rakes are capped. Blame rakes if it makes you feel better, but (for example) a .25/.50 table, Deepstack buy-in $100 (200BB), Shortie buy-in at $25, won't change a thing about rake. Rake from any hand in this game is CAPPED at a $20 pot (on PStars) rake is $1 max. 2 handed HU you and the shortie all-in ($50 pot), rake is $1. At 3 handed (with an all-in $25 shortie, min pot is $75) rake is $1. 3 Deepstacks, 3 all-ins for $300 pot, rake is $1.


Many players may not enjoy shortstackers for various reasons, but there are a lot of CC members here who might play that way and they are in no way 'scumbags', imo. (but that's just me :p )

SS is a losing strategy for the most part. I never find any SSers with a positive return. Or at least I haven't yet. And if there are CCers that are SSers, they are newbies and will soon learn why SS is -EV

Has anyone written to the sites and ASKED for Deepstack tables where min buy-in is at least the Deepstack amount? If so... responses from the sites?
 
Top