Who would sit with 10xBB at a cash game?

[frob23]

It's bad enough if it's a full ring game, where it's 10 handed. But today someone sat down at a 5/10c table when there were 3 people there (and two were leaving) with $1.00. Basically it left me and him heads up for his 10xBB. And, to make matters worse, he wasn't just attacking and putting the money in... which might have given him a chance. He was calling and folding most hands... and once he was down to about 3-4xBB, he tried shoving a few times pre-flop.

Basically, I got to eat him alive. Now... I didn't make the whole $1... because it was raked 22c over the hands we played. But I got the rest and then he sat out and that was the end of it. But why would someone do that to themselves. They basically have no chance to really win.

I mean, I guess if you're really short... I could see sitting with 10xBB at a 9-10 handed table and waiting for a premium hand and shoving... to try and get some money. I don't really agree with this strategy but at least I can see how it might work. I can't see how this one guy didn't figure he was donating his money to me when he first sat down.

[jimbo51]

cool thanks for sharing this story were u won 78cents lol
congrats

[frob23]

cool thanks for sharing this story were u won 78cents lol
congrats

lol... it's not about the money... it's more about the stupidity. Who sits at a table where it's almost certain they're going to lose the money they sat with?

I actually did really well at the table over-all and ran well before his happened. So I was up a little more than 78c at the end. But this just struck me as very odd at the end of it. I'd never seen someone sit heads up that short before. I'd seen it 9 handed but never 2.

[Wyte22]

lol... it's not about the money... it's more about the stupidity. Who sits at a table where it's almost certain they're going to lose the money they sat with?

I actually did really well at the table over-all and ran well before his happened. So I was up a little more than 78c at the end. But this just struck me as very odd at the end of it. I'd never seen someone sit heads up that short before. I'd seen it 9 handed but never 2.

If this wasn't super micro stakes, then I'd say that there is a theory about starting a table with 10-20BBs instead of the max 100BB buyin, but I know this wouldn't apply to this situation because, this is super micro stakes and most players don't consider much poker theory.

[liladypokerpro]

Was this the same table where that one guy bought in for 50c and ended up getting up to like $6 or so before the table emptied and I left?

PS after getting away from there I cashed a SnG LOL Told ya tourneys r the way to go LOL

[frob23]

Was this the same table where that one guy bought in for 50c and ended up getting up to like $6 or so before the table emptied and I left?

PS after getting away from there I cashed a SnG LOL Told ya tourneys r the way to go LOL

Yes, same table but this guy wasn't playing to double up. He was just limp/folding every hand when I raised preflop... or when I bet on the flop. I mean, I understand the super-short stack strategy... but this guy was doing none of that. He was just giving me his money 10-20c at a time.

[liladypokerpro]

LOL wow that's kinda.........sad.......LOL

[Wyte22]

Yes, same table but this guy wasn't playing to double up. He was just limp/folding every hand when I raised preflop... or when I bet on the flop. I mean, I understand the super-short stack strategy... but this guy was doing none of that. He was just giving me his money 10-20c at a time.

Only If I could sit down at a 200NL table and find someone like that

[XDRAGON]

cool thanks for sharing this story were u won 78cents lol
congrats

Lol, yeah when your used to paying $3 in rake each hand it's hard to take these stakes too seriously. However from a strategy side i believe you can be a profitable player regardless of the amount of BB's you buy in for as long as you understand the correct way to play for the amount of BB's your playing (this guy clearly didn't). In pot limit omaha there are $200/$400 games where very good and profitable players buy in for the min of $8,000 and just as profitable players who buy in for the max of $40,000. It's just a case of knowing how to play the best strategy for your (and your opponents) stack size. One thing i like about playing short is for example, if you have $8,000 you can basically play the same agaisnt a player who has $10,000 or $40,000 because your only playing for your $8,000. Where as a player with $40,000 has to play different against a $10,000 stack and a $40,000 stack player, this makes things tricky when they are both in the hand against you at the same time. You may like to play against the short stack in an aggressive way in a certain situation but can't because there is a big stack to your left still to act who may call or reraise you. This is where i feel having a short stack can give you an adge, the presence of the other big stack can give you a kind of protection. The first big stack may have a hand they are happy to play for a $16,000 pot but not an $80,000 pot so they may often fold a marginal hand which was infact the best hand.

[iceveins0901]

I bet it is possible that someone that would come to the table with $1 just won the dollar in a freeroll or something, and isnt very good at poker.

[skaterick]

many players are starting with almost no bankroll, some beg for a dollar or two after draining their account . on the flip side, there are lots of advantages to playing a short stack.if you are multi -tabling , allin moves with premium hands only can a be very effective stategy in aggressive games. you dont even need to concentrate on the opposition.however ,once the table becomes too short- handed you lose the option of waiting very long for a allin type starting hand.

[Vito_Nuccio]

If you can afford only 10xBB buy-in then you are playing at too high a level. If at the bottom level, well anything goes.

I do not see the positives to buying in short. OK you wait for a big hand and press. At the higher limits you will be so transparent it will be difficult to get action when you do hit. Every one will simply fold to you when you raise, since the only raise you really have is all-in. If not, then the question will be asked why is this player raising only half of their stack. Also you are giving a price for draws. Your short stack with little or no reserves could entice someone to stay with a drawing hand since they can only lose the tiny amount you have. You must have some ammo left to at least signal the possibility of a bigger second bet or re-raise.

When starting with a crippled stack you are asking for trouble. Forget about bluffing, unless you want to risk your entire buy-in. Also, what happens when you do get the monster and the other player is willing to go along? Your little stack, even when doubled up does not amount to the buy-in allowed. Do not waste opportunities by short changing yourself to start. 75-100 times the BB is what should be considered when buying into a cash game. Poker is not a game of hit and miss, it is one long game. Give yourself the best chance to survive and win big pots when you can. Sometimes you have to wait, make it worth it. With some added reserves you can survive a suckout or mistake or two and you still have chips to make a comeback, with a small starting value, a re-buy is in order.

Like I stated earlier, if you can not afford a sufficient amount of chips at a cash game, you are playing above your means. This is a recipe for bankroll destruction and many tilt sessions.


Later,

[XDRAGON]

Yes there is a big difference between buying in for less than the max because you can make more money that way and doing it because you cannot afford to buy in for the max. By the way, when you say buying in short is a bad idea in poker i assume you mean NLH, there are many other great form's of poker with huge difference's to NLH. I wish most people could see there's so much more to poker than just NLH. Apart from that there are many good NLH players who make very good livings playing a short stack strategy, in large part due to their opponents not understanding it or how to play against it.