Short stack strategy at the micros - thoughts?

Revolutionary. I see many cheeseburgerz in your future.

You will look back on the days when you short stacked $0.02/$0.04 as some of your finest.


+ Show Spoiler +

On April 12 2012 07:56 YouGoTGoT wrote: Revolutionary. I see many cheeseburgerz in your future. You will look back on the days when you short stacked $0.02/$0.04 as some of your finest. + Show Spoiler + On a more serious note, you will get butt-raked.

Lolz. Alternatively, how would you suggest someone with very little experience play?

You came a little too late. This was good some 5 years back, now it will take way more effort to make decent money playing poker.

On April 12 2012 08:10 Joe wrote: You came a little too late. This was good some 5 years back, now it will take way more effort to make decent money playing poker.

Well, that's good to know. Are larger stacks still seen as a liability for new players?

EDIT: I'm almost glad, really. That playstyle seemed pretty boring and mentally disconnected. If anyone has any (new and relevant) theory / strategy books for relative beginners, I'd love to hear 'em. I probably have just as much fun reading about poker as I do playing it. My undergrad was in pure mathematics so anything that involves math is thumbs up here.

If you enjoy studying poker theory and do it several hours a day you'll become a microstake winner within weeks imo..

start here: http://www.reddit.com/r/poker/comment...t_a_new_player_guide_beginners_guide/

get cancer and die

on a side note
'do you think short stack strategy works when your minimum starting stack is 30x BB?'
-it changes little bit, do your math

-shallow tables are soft (that's what i heard)

the main problem is youre going to struggle to win from other players faster than the rake eats away at you playing a shortstack strategy. I wouldn't be surprised if it's still very possible but it isn't ideal if you average $2 or more of rake paid for every $1 profit. if you want to play to win the goal at micro/low should be to make your edge per hand as big as possible and try to win the money faster. This involves trying to attain a much higher skill level than that necessary to employ a +ev shortstack strategy, and playing deepstacked better than your opposition

On April 12 2012 10:41 morph1 wrote: get cancer and die Always Look On The Bright Side of Life

wat

<3

On April 12 2012 11:03 Ket wrote: the main problem is youre going to struggle to win from other players faster than the rake eats away at you playing a shortstack strategy. I wouldn't be surprised if it's still very possible but it isn't ideal if you average $2 or more of rake paid for every $1 profit. if you want to play to win the goal at micro/low should be to make your edge per hand as big as possible and try to win the money faster. This involves trying to attain a much higher skill level than that necessary to employ a +ev shortstack strategy, and playing deepstacked better than your opposition

So pretty much, the amount of money you end up making (if anything these days) from a short stack strategy will get eaten up by rakes, so you've got to move on to playing more near a large stack / table maximum so that you can extract that much more money from your opponents and turn a meaningful profit. I see. I think my problem when moving to playing a larger stack is where to draw lines, especially when first starting out. With a larger stack, depending on the action before me, I'll play pretty much any pair, 89s and higher, AK, AQ, AT, etc. I don't really see a definitive recommendation that's widely accepted when playing cards with deep stacks... everyone seems to just say "well, depends" - usually on reading your opponent.. which is difficult for a player without a few thousand hands of experience, especially online.

to learn about ranges get the pokerstrategy.com equity lab (or pokerstove, but the equity lab is simply more powerful a tool), you can fiddle with all kinds of things, but I'd start by looking at the differences between the top xx% of hands. this way you can begin developing an idea of what someone who calls preflop raises 15%, or 50% of the time might have

shortstacking at micro is like having a 5 inches dick and trying to shoot a porn ...

On April 12 2012 11:56 tirceol wrote: Show nested quote + On April 12 2012 10:41 morph1 wrote: get cancer and die Always Look On The Bright Side of Life wat <3

people here don't share much love for short stackers. I would suggest switching to big stack and working on improving your squat.

On April 12 2012 14:03 GoTuNk wrote: Show nested quote + On April 12 2012 11:56 tirceol wrote:   On April 12 2012 10:41 morph1 wrote: get cancer and die Always Look On The Bright Side of Life wat <3 people here don't share much love for short stackers. I would suggest switching to big stack and working on improving your squat.

Ah, I see. It's understandable, as short stackers are basically avoiding the difficult decisions of poker.

I'll probably see if I can fit some reading in tonight with some of these materials and see where it takes me. I feel like my biggest problem is chasing draws or other hands when I should just slow down, rethink it, and realize that I'm probably beat.

i beat the carbon micros at like 15-20 bb/100 and am still basically breakeven after rake (it is like 10bb/100 + )

On April 12 2012 14:58 traxamillion wrote: i beat the carbon micros at like 15-20 bb/100 and am still basically breakeven after rake (it is like 10bb/100 + )

Where should I play? Seems like US players don't have a solid option these days :<

learn 250bb poker

Just buy in full. is a $4 buyin really that much to be afraid of losing?

On April 12 2012 15:43 K40Cheddar wrote: Just buy in full. is a $4 buyin really that much to be afraid of losing?