Posted Sun Feb 04, 2007 11:39 pm GMT by BigSlick34
Hey guys quick question,
say im playing .5/.10 NL this means max buy-in is 10. 100$ BR. What do i buy-in for and why?
Did you know that participating in a poker forum can help you improve your own game? Be it by sharing experiences or simply asking for help, participation in a forum helps you focus and keep 'on topic' which will help you improve your game. You can learn from other players feedback and from their experiences. Why the THP poker forums? We offer one of the best managed texas holdem poker forums available, and the community within is far more friendly than those typicaly found on other sites. We've made a 'lurkers edition' of the poker forum available here on Holdem Poker Online, but we encourage all visitors to register and join in on the conversations on TexasHoldem-Poker.com
Posted Mon Feb 05, 2007 12:01 am GMT by aaronw
Max buy in. Always buy in for the max because when you get a good hand you want to be able to make the most out of that hand.
Posted Mon Feb 05, 2007 12:33 am GMT by Ensano
| aaronw wrote: | | Max buy in. Always buy in for the max because when you get a good hand you want to be able to make the most out of that hand. |
also if you only have 100$ in your BR then it'd prob be better to play .05/.05 NL for the $5 max buy in... always try to have 20x buyin... unless of course you plan on reloading if you bust... if that's the case then knock yourself out...
Posted Mon Feb 05, 2007 1:40 am GMT by xDiamond_CutteRx
I strongly disagree with the "always buy in for maximum philosophy," though I once was a strong advocate of it. In general, when you have an advantage in the game, you want to maximize your edge, and that usually means having all the money you can at the table, but there are several reasons why you may NOT want to buy in for the maximum every time. For instance,
1. Lower buy-ins lowers your variance and RoR. This is the same philosophy behind counting cards in blackjack. You want to put in as much as possible when you have the advantage, and as little as possible when you have the disadvantage. This can be a powerful BR management tool.
2. If you are not the best player, you want to minimize the chance of making a mistake, and shorter stacks are more conducive to that since decisions are much more clear cut the smaller your stack is in relation to the blinds.
3. You want your decisions to be easier in general, even if you a good player (especially if you multi-table and don't pay a lot of attention to a single game).
4. You are new to the game and want to observe the other players. Remember, you can always add more chips, but you can't take chips off the table, so I frequently buy-in for the minimum and see how the other players play before sticking in a larger sum of cash. That way, I minimize the losses from a mistake I might not have made if I'd known the players better.
5. For psychological reasons. Some players do not play well against a short stack. When players sit in for short amounts, good players often (and often correctly) assume that player is not very good, and can make some mistakes against them (I found myself doing this against some short stack players and realized that perhaps there was more than meets the eye to their play style). The interesting thing about Poker is that making "bad" plays (like buying in short) can actually cause otherwise good players to make some very bad mistakes against you.
There are some decided advantages to playing a short stack.
1. Good players have much lower implied odds against you, which can hem in some aggressive players from playing small pairs and suited connectors optimally against you (by "optimal," I mean such a way that is mathematically ideal).
2. Your decisions are much easier, and most of your money will be going in on the early rounds rather than the later ones.
3. You can often gain fuller value on the equity of your cards since you are all-in more frequently.
4. Some players will give you more action with your moderate-to-good hands.
Some players feel that playing short "cripples" them because they cannot "force an opponet off a hand." This may be true, and your bluffs and semi-bluffs may be less successful, but awareness of this somewhat negates the problem. If you value bet more and bluff less, the strategy should work fine unless the players are such that they will stop giving you action at all.
So to answer your question... it depends. Sorry, I did it again. However, since you have only 1000 big blinds in your stack, I might try to buy in for only $5 at a time until you are a little more comfortable with the game or your increase your BR. You may want to try, as I suggested, buying in for the minimum, getting a feel for the table, and then buying more chips if you feel the situation warrants it.
Posted Mon Feb 05, 2007 1:57 am GMT by Ensano
although I agree with DCs point I do not think it the best approach...
SS poker is an art... you have to be good at that style of play... granted people will call you down with worse than premium holdings but a bit part of playing poker gets cut out of the game...
for example a good player will never had to make a hard desicion against you... if you push even with just good hands your opponents will be getting correct odds to call with bad draws...
for example... 1/2 NL live i have about 600$ infront of me.. guy buys in for 80$ (max is 200$)... he's OTB and raises it to 12$. my bb and a couple limpers already in so I call with my 67o... 1 other calls..
pot 40$ flop 9 7 2 rainbow... with second pair I decide to find out where I'm at so I bet 25$... MP folds button thinks for a bit then calls..
pot is now 90$ and villian has only 43$ left so I know I'm going to call if he puishes so I move all in in the dark...
turn 4s... he asked why I pushed and I put it simply "if you bet it I'd call and if I bet it you'll call so why not..."
he calls and shows KJo and doesn't improve... this of course is just one hand but you can see how easy this hand was for me to play simply because he didn't have more chips to worry about...
Posted Mon Feb 05, 2007 2:07 am GMT by xDiamond_CutteRx
Ensano, by the same token, think of how atrociously bad your play would have been if he had even 88. He played the hand terribly, but it had nothing to do with the size of his stack, or yours.
I'm not saying short stacked play is "better." I'm simply saying it can have certain advantages. Overall, I still much prefer deep-stacked Poker.
Posted Mon Feb 05, 2007 1:49 pm GMT by Ensano
defenately has it's advantages...
|
|
