Ughhh, I Hate Playing With Short Stacks In Nl

[DudeSurprise 0]

I swear the biggest leak in my game is donking off money to short stacks in NL ring games. It's like I just hand them money every single time. I raise with something decent, they call for a third of their stack then when I go to C-bet I somehow convince myself to just put them in since they barely cover the pot. I don't think it's ever worked...Anybody have any advice on playing with a few shortstacks at the table?

[jcashx36x 0]

I swear the biggest leak in my game is donking off money to short stacks in NL ring games. It's like I just hand them money every single time. I raise with something decent, they call for a third of their stack then when I go to C-bet I somehow convince myself to just put them in since they barely cover the pot. I don't think it's ever worked...Anybody have any advice on playing with a few shortstacks at the table?

C-bet? define that for me please.

[DudeSurprise 0]

C-bet? define that for me please.

Continuation bet, aka following a preflop raise with a bet on the flop.

[fckthis 0]

dont bluff shortstacks?

[pokerfan1080 0]

I swear the biggest leak in my game is donking off money to short stacks in NL ring games. It's like I just hand them money every single time. I raise with something decent, they call for a third of their stack then when I go to C-bet I somehow convince myself to just put them in since they barely cover the pot. I don't think it's ever worked...Anybody have any advice on playing with a few shortstacks at the table?

I think it depends on how much of a short stack you are talking about, and possibly at what limits. Keeping pressure on the short stack seems to work best for tournaments, not so much in ring games because the short stack is fighting for their tourney life whereas in ring games you can simply add more money if you fall below the buy-in.I'll still try to keep the pressure on the short stack in ring games, just not as much as I do in tourneys.

[Sluggo 0]

Bluffing shortstacks is fine.The posters above don't know what they're talking about. "Keeping the pressure on" is pointless outside of a tournament. SHortstacks do very well in ring games (when played properly) because other players don't play well against them.Against shortstacks (10-20 BB), realize that position is pointless. So are implied odds. You have to change your starting hands. Start throwing away garbage like KQs. Visibility and implied odds disappear against shortstacks. Play TT-AA, AK from early position. Play TT-AA, AQ-AK from MP. Play 88-AA, AT-AK from LP. Play any ace in the SB.On the flop, realize that shortstacks will usually push with anything heads up. Take that into account when deciding to call or fold. However, if a shortstack shows strength multiway, he probably has top pair or better.Implied odds go away. Say it with me. Implied odds go away. This means no limping with a low PP or a suited ace (except in late position after other limpers). This means no calls without proper odds. This means KQs, QJs, JTs are garbage. Kxs is garbage. This means playing extremely tight in early position.

[Actuary 3]

I'll still try to keep the pressure on the short stack in ring games, just not as much as I do in tourneys.

how do you put pressure on a stack with little to lose?you can pressure big stacks much eaiser.Oh, you mean you aren't scared to lose to a short stack because they have less chips than a big stack.well, say that then.************************if Shorties are playing that way because they know how to, that's different than playing that way becuase they are broke or afraid. I wouldn't think you have to play ultra tight against the latter. But obviously implied odds are non-existent either way.

[Sluggo 0]

Well, playing tighter is an extension of your implied odds going away. You essentially need to play big aces and big pairs. KQs is an underdog against A2o, for example. Normally it's a much better hand than A2o because of its visibility and implied odds. But when playing short, A2o is arguably better (but still bad). Against loose or passive players though, you can generally loosen up.

[pokerfan1080 0]

how do you put pressure on a stack with little to lose?you can pressure big stacks much eaiser.Oh, you mean you aren't scared to lose to a short stack because they have less chips than a big stack.well, say that then.************************if Shorties are playing that way because they know how to, that's different than playing that way becuase they are broke or afraid. I wouldn't think you have to play ultra tight against the latter. But obviously implied odds are non-existent either way.

For me, like I said in my first post, I think it depends on how short they are AND at what limits. I'm still playing low-limit, so alot of these players are not very good (neither am I, I'm still learning). If I recognize an opportunity to take the rest of someone's money because they are careless, I play them more aggressive.If we are talking about someone who knows how to play short, that was my point about "at what limit". I would think you are apt to find better players at higher limits than at lower limits, which would suggest at higher limits you will find more players who know how to pay short than at low limits.

Bluffing shortstacks is fine.The posters above don't know what they're talking about. "Keeping the pressure on" is pointless outside of a tournament. SHortstacks do very well in ring games (when played properly) because other players don't play well against them.

I believe I said pretty much the same thing you just did with regards to tourneys to ring games. In fact, I was the first one in this thread to mention it. As far as ring games go, I disagree to a point, see my response to Actuary.Keeping pressure on the short stack in ring games can be done if you recognize their carelessness and bad play. Alot of times these short stacked players are that way because they are really bad players/beginners. That's something that can be taken advantage of.

[Sluggo 0]

As far as ring games go, I disagree to a point, see my response to Actuary.Keeping pressure on the short stack in ring games can be done if you recognize their carelessness and bad play. Alot of times these short stacked players are that way because they are really bad players/beginners. That's something that can be taken advantage of.

Disagreeing to a point is irrelevant. "Pressuring" shortstacks is still stupid.Against bad players, exploit their weaknesses. Don't blindly "keep the pressure on." You can't pressure shortstacked players. Once they decide to get involved, they're usually pot-commited. You cannot control when they are dealt good hands. You cannot control when they decide to raise preflop and commit themselves to the pot. You cannot "pressure" them.

[pokerfan1080 0]

I said nothing about "blindly" pressuring. I'm simply referring to situations where I have a good hand against a short stack. If by "pressure" you mean to always get invlolved with the short stack (play more hands), then, yes, I agree with what you are saying.

[Actuary 3]

I said nothing about "blindly" pressuring. I'm simply referring to situations where I have a good hand against a short stack. If by "pressure" you mean to always get invlolved with the short stack (play more hands), then, yes, I agree with what you are saying.

pressure implies you are in control of the pressure.Shortstacks take that option away. Pressure is what you do to a big stack that has more to lose, see?betting with a good hand is just what you do agianst all stacks.How does that specifically put pressure on a short stack? THat is to say, how is that concept unique to shortstacks? And if not unique, then why bring it up?you still like me? :PI'm fully with Sluggo here.

[pokerfan1080 0]

pressure implies you are in control of the pressure.Shortstacks take that option away. Pressure is what you do to a big stack that has more to lose, see?betting with a good hand is just what you do agianst all stacks.How does that specifically put pressure on a short stack? THat is to say, how is that concept unique to shortstacks? And if not unique, then why bring it up?you still like me? :PI'm fully with Sluggo here.

In my limited experience playing on-line for money, it seems that once someone gets short-stacked, they tend to get careless (tilting). When I recognize that, I'll play them harder than I would anyone else.I understand the concept of "pressuring" as you and sluggo have explained it. I just don't see it as the only way to apply pressure to an opponent.

[Sluggo 0]

What does play harder mean? I've never heard that term before.

[pokerfan1080 0]

What does play harder mean? I've never heard that term before.

Ehh, I'm not up on the proper lingo. If I recognize the tendencies I mentioned, I will over-bet (play harder) alot, hoping to keep the upper hand, and "pressure" them. Keeping the pressure on them when they are tilting on a short stack can lead to cleaning them out.It may not be the traditional style of pressure play, but it seems to be fairly effective.

[flintsword 4]

A short stack is going to be looking for an opportunity to double up.A short stack is going to call any bet as long as he feels his cards have close to a 50-50 chance of winning.A short stack is risk-oriented; they are ready to gamble, .. because they have to.You have to really understand this. You need quality to hit at a short stack.If you have fire off a bet with AJo for 1/4 your stack against a BB with a similar stack, he is going to fold the small pairs and KQo of this world. He does not need that kind of risk.If you fire off a bet putting a small stack all in with AJo, and the small stack has any pair or KQo, and reads you for Ax and loose, you will probably get called.Your table image is important here. If you are clearly viewed as a rock, even a small stack will steer clear, knowing they are facing AA, KK, or another premium hand, but the temptation is there, as well as the motivation, to call you. A small stack is going over the abyss, so he might as well take a stab at the pot. You try pounding a small stack and he will say thank you and take his chances.Pound with good hands.When YOU are in the BB, eventually, a small stack will go all in against you, but the odds shoe is now on the other foot, and you can call with anything since you already have your BB in the pot. Wait for that time. That said, it is a delicate balance and you should calculate your odds.One of the reasons that games tighten up in the later stages of a tournament is because raises are apt to be called by shorter stacks, so there has to be more 'quality' in a raise than in the middle of the tournament.Daniel Negreanu has a new article on the subject of 'pounding on the weaker players' because they are weak and fold. (Good article). It applies when a weak player has chips to defend. Rising blinds create a big problem for weaker players. Once a player gets short-stacked, there is no reason to be weak anymore, there is nothing to guard, and I find weak players become loose and weak which means you better have a decent hand or a large stack (ideally both) to play sherrif at a table where short-stack hunting has become the sport of choice.Good luck in your games and I hope that the good advice (Actuary for example) is put to good use.

[Actuary 3]

stuff related to tournies, I think

hi.the original post is a cash game post, not tourney.huge differenceyour post is not relevant

[TheCorporation3 0]

dont bluff shortstacks?

QFT

[mtdesmoines 2]

I swear the biggest leak in my game is donking off money to short stacks in NL ring games. It's like I just hand them money every single time. I raise with something decent, they call for a third of their stack then when I go to C-bet I somehow convince myself to just put them in since they barely cover the pot. I don't think it's ever worked...Anybody have any advice on playing with a few shortstacks at the table?

Slow down if they are the type who's just waiting for a spot.

[Actuary 3]

QFT

why?Shortstacks value money less ?

[Abbaddabba 0]

No, but calling continuation bets becomes easier because they wont have to make difficult decisions on bigger streets because reverse implied odds are virtually non existent.

[Actuary 3]

No, but calling continuation bets becomes easier because they wont have to make difficult decisions on bigger streets because reverse implied odds are virtually non existent.

exactly.Well, they don't have implied odds either, so calling with made hands and pot odds is easier.and this is NL. All streets are big.

[Abbaddabba 0]

It gets bigger as the hand plays out.Weak made hands are the types you'll get called by here more often than normal because they benefit the least in terms of implied odds and suffer the most from reverse implied odds.

[flintsword 4]

hi.the original post is a cash game post, not tourney.huge differenceyour post is not relevant

Oops, absolutely right. Sorry.Short Stacks in Ring games tend to increase the average pot size is one thing I noticed, but not as much as just having looser players in the game. It makes sense to believe it would create bankroll fluctuation, but I only have lower limit experience in NL ring games.I think the key to beating up short stacks is to get a really good read on their range of hands in various positions and take it from there to evaluate your odds against that range of hands. Be ready to put them all in if necessary. If you read the situation wrong, they will become bigger stacks and then implied odds can help your evaluation of hands.