Short Stacker Era Coming to an End

Looks like the plague of Short Stacking will soon be behind the poker world.

FT changed their minimum buyins a while ago, and now Titan and PokerStars have both implemented changes to their min buyins for cash tables.

Titan now has a 30bb minimum on ALL cash tables (used to be only 20bb, but its a good start), and PokerStars is implementing 40bb minimums on their next upgrade on all $ cash tables (euro games will still have 20bb minimums though it appears).

Even Cake has changed their minimums now, from 20bb to 30bb, much to the dislike of former P* boss now running the Cake room.

Good things happening everywhere in online poker. Only about time.

Comments

  • now if only tilt and stars would take some sort of action against datamining
  • yup, scoop event 12 is going to be a KO
  • Minimum buy in should always be 100bb.
  • Strictly as an intellectual argument, why is eliminating a legitimate strategy seen as a "good" thing?

    Just curious . . .
  • knockout sit n go's, not sure on these yet and there is more coming, but if I knockout say 3 people and bubble due to some kind of standard BS, still get back something rather then nothing or I knockout no one and don't cash and lose more, hmmmmmmmmmmmmm


    What do you guys think?
  • Milo wrote: »
    Strictly as an intellectual argument, why is eliminating a legitimate strategy seen as a "good" thing?

    Just curious . . .

    Because it's good for the game to let big stacks play deep stack poker without being held back by shortstacks looking to double up methinks. Same for omaha I'd like a 60BB minimum for everyone at the table or else it tend to be a much more straightforward game
  • Milo wrote: »
    Strictly as an intellectual argument, why is eliminating a legitimate strategy seen as a "good" thing?

    Just curious . . .

    it makes the game focus more on skill than luck, and therefore skillful players (like we almost all think we are) can win more.
  • Most short stackers don't imploy any kind of formal strategy anyway. They are mostly playing scared and won't get involved in a pot without the absolute nuts preflop or on the flop. The ones that DO use a strategy are mostly push/fold preflop and hoping fate decides in their favour. There is no skill to it, mostly just luck.

    The bigger issue is the number of them. You can't find a table on most sites without there being 4 or 5 or more short stackers on it and it makes it difficult to play the games the way they're meant to be played. For the full stack players, you don't get paid off with your monsters, and you don't get to try any new theories out during play because its often not worth the risk for such little payout.
  • I <3 shortstackers.

    Yea I said it.

    The great thing about them is that most have no real concepts of how to shortstack effectively. So they wanna put it in with A10 and KQ. And they tilt the regs so the regs wanna look them up light and all hell breaks loose.

    Eliminating them is bad for the game imo. Most are playing above their role and taking shots.
  • philliivey wrote: »
    knockout sit n go's, not sure on these yet and there is more coming, but if I knockout say 3 people and bubble due to some kind of standard BS, still get back something rather then nothing or I knockout no one and don't cash and lose more, hmmmmmmmmmmmmm


    What do you guys think?

    A little off topic but it depends. A good nit sng player will probably lose some roi because you are essentially taking from the actual prize pool.

    Conversely, it opens the game up a bit.
  • Wetts1012 wrote: »
    I <3 shortstackers.

    Yea I said it.

    The great thing about them is that most have no real concepts of how to shortstack effectively. So they wanna put it in with A10 and KQ. And they tilt the regs so the regs wanna look them up light and all hell breaks loose.

    Eliminating them is bad for the game imo. Most are playing above their role and taking shots.

    And, with this in mind, won't 30bb just become the new 20bb? In other words, haven't they just changed the definition of "short-stacker" and thus increased the variance factor?

    You don't honestly think all those players are going away, do you?
  • Milo wrote: »
    You don't honestly think all those players are going away, do you?

    Oh God, I hope not. Since they mostly don't have a clue, I WANT them deeper stacked at my tables. Gives much better implied odds. With 30bb, calling a 3xbet and hoping to hit your set or draw is now profitable, where with only 20bb, it often wasn't.
  • Them playing with 10 BB's extra makes the game harder to exploit from a mathematical point of view. If they start reshipping 30 BB's light I'll be happy ^^'
  • Thus, over time, the games become even tougher . . . as the shorties go bust for larger amounts, a higher % would leave (rigged, broke), no?
    And those that stay would improve, even if marginally.

    Again, who gains long term? I think only the sites themselves gain a real advantage from this through the increased rakes.

    I liken it to the changes OLG makes in their games. They boast about Lotto Max's bigger jackpots, but do not mention the decreased (overall) payout structure.
  • Wetts1012 wrote: »
    A little off topic but it depends. A good nit sng player will probably lose some roi because you are essentially taking from the actual prize pool.

    Conversely, it opens the game up a bit.


    yea just noticed that, it was late when I posted, sorry guys
  • Sure some will leave the game, but I suspect most won't. Will it make the game tougher to beat? Probably, over time, but its been getting more and more progressively tougher for the past 10years or so, and I doubt that trend will change no matter what.

    The sites actually prefer short stackers, and most are only reluctantly increasing their minimum buyins. This move in particular is based more on customer requests saying DO SOMETHING ABOUT THIS than the profit lines of the sites. Long term though, I don't think they'll suffer much if any at all.
  • Wetts1012 wrote: »
    I <3 shortstackers.

    Yea I said it.

    The great thing about them is that most have no real concepts of how to shortstack effectively. So they wanna put it in with A10 and KQ. And they tilt the regs so the regs wanna look them up light and all hell breaks loose.

    Eliminating them is bad for the game imo. Most are playing above their role and taking shots.

    I am with you, I had no problem having shortstackers on a table, mind you I rarely play cash games but still most of them had no clue how to do it right.
  • Lots of good points have been made in this thread.

    I find that the bad players often play in the shallow or capped games.

    Both these formats blunt the good players skill advantage, but I've been playing them anyways.
  • yeah i also agree with the point mentioned that i don't mind some short stacks at my table, but if it's majority or all short stacks, then goodbye skill game.

    and milo, saying "no more short stacks" equals "tougher games" equals "more short stack players leaving" isn`t necessarily the case. that is definitely a big assumption. you could just as easily say that more big stack players may enjoy playing with the slightly smaller stacks and therefore there will be more short stack play. or you could say that getting rid of the small short stack play will lead to an increase in players who were originally trying to avoid short stacks and weren`t playing as much before. who really knows.

    but from the complaints of players wanting to get rid of short stack play i`d assume that players may come back to cash games who were avoiding the short stacks in the past. obviously we`ll see in the long run.
  • Not disagreeing trigs, just spit-balling. I have always looked at short stack play as the "quick and easy" way for new players to hop into cash games. You know, give them a starting hand guideline, and tell them to shove when they see one of the hands on the list. Also, the general consensus seems to be that on-line games are becoming tougher at lower and lower limits.

    Me? I do not care either way, just enjoying the opinions . . .
  • I think that was the whole purpose of SS strategies, get more and more people playing cash online by making it as idiot proof as possible, and get them to earn a buck or two while doing it. The problem is that you can find short stackers at ALL levels of play, right up to NL500 or more, and trying to exploit the strategy for the bigger payouts.

    For a complete newbie, a good SSS would be beneficial in demonstrating hand values and doubling up quickly, however it shouldn't be the goal of any new player. I have only seen one SSS system that actually considered position at all, most don't, and that one thing is far more critical to being successful than any starting hand chart can be for a new player.
Sign In or Register to comment.