Roughing the Punter

Go Back   Roughing the Punter > Main Forums > The Chip Count

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
  #1  
Old 05-29-2013, 08:39 PM
TomTom TomTom is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Posts: 22
Default Short-stacking PLO

There's a 5-10 PLO game near me that I believe is ripe for playing a short-stack strategy. Minimum buy in is 300, 2000 max. The down side is the rake ($8 a half hour).

What types of hands (besides the obvious AAxx, AKQJ, etc.) should I be looking to get it in with? It seems that the rake structure prevents me from playing ultra tight.
Reply With Quote
  #2  
Old 05-30-2013, 07:54 AM
trixtrix's Avatar
trixtrix trixtrix is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Posts: 1,354
Default

4 card rundowns (preferrably no gaps, the more/higher gaps in the rundown, the more worthless the hand becomes) preferrably suited, 2 high pairs perferrably suited, suited ace w/ either high/mid pair or 3card rundown. if shortstacking any kkxx or aaxx will do if you raise preflop, meaning there would be only 1 bet left on the flop anyways. limp in w/ speculative hands up front, position matters less.

ss is v high vol though.
__________________
http://sportsbettingsites.org/wagerweb/

ps: why do everyone insinuate that i'm j7's beard/sidekick? why can't he be my beard/sidekick?
Reply With Quote
  #3  
Old 06-01-2013, 03:11 PM
TomTom TomTom is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Posts: 22
Default

I was planning on limp-reraising unless there's a straddle and limpers where I can get a significant portion of my stack in preflop.

Not sure what you mean by "ss is v high vol though."

Do you think this game has a big edge (Assuming a good game with at least a few loose players)? I'm a winning 2/5 NLHE player, but have little PLO experience.
Reply With Quote
  #4  
Old 06-01-2013, 11:47 PM
PokerKat's Avatar
PokerKat PokerKat is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2013
Location: Las Vegas
Posts: 1,524
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by TomTom View Post
I was planning on limp-reraising unless there's a straddle and limpers where I can get a significant portion of my stack in preflop.

Not sure what you mean by "ss is v high vol though."

Do you think this game has a big edge (Assuming a good game with at least a few loose players)? I'm a winning 2/5 NLHE player, but have little PLO experience.
Short-stacking is high volatility. The Dutch kid Slotboom has a written a couple of books that deal with semi-shortstacked play, but they are poorly written and thus a pain to trawl through. Hwang's stuff is unsurpassed IMO and you can use it to develop short-stacking strategy through his pump and shove ideas. If you really want to make money, though, learn how to play deep and post-flop. Most people aren't very good at it.
Reply With Quote
  #5  
Old 06-02-2013, 12:31 AM
TomTom TomTom is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Posts: 22
Default

I've read that chapter in Slotboom's book, but he doesn't go into much detail which why I started this thread. I intend to improve my PLO game-- I can either spend my time doing that or winning at HE, so it's not a big priority at the moment. I just thought this might be a good opportunity due to the low minimum buy-in, but I'm getting the impression that the EV isn't that great.
Reply With Quote
  #6  
Old 06-03-2013, 08:20 AM
Craps Master's Avatar
Craps Master Craps Master is offline
Moderator-The Chip Count
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Posts: 810
Default

Short-stacking has much lower variance than deep stack play, but also lower EV if you are competent at both styles. Sometimes it is your only +EV option at a given table though, at least until you can get a good seat. In an uncomfortably high stakes game (whatever that is to you) it may be your only good option as well.

Short-stack PLO play is based on the two-pronged approach of 3- or 4-betting a high enough percentage of your stack (preferably all of it) preflop with premium hands or getting it in against one opponent getting great pot odds. Many situations will arise where you have some imperfect rundown or other good but not great hand that will do OK against AA or an A-high broadway rundown and you have a chance to get it in against one person holding that sort of hand with a lot of dead money in the pot. For instance, if a tight-aggressive player opens UTG and gets 5 or 6 callers and a 3-bet from you in the blinds gets you all-in and the OR has a good chance of repotting and isolating, you can do this with a fairly wide range. It's perfectly acceptable to get it in with 37% equity getting 2-to-1 on your money, for instance. A hand like 7655 would qualify here, or 8753. A little work with a simulator will show you exactly the types of hands to consider in these types of situations given varying amounts of dead money and varying probabilities of being HU or multiway (getting 3-to-1 and having, say, 28% equity would also be acceptable).

TL;DR: Go play around with a simulator.
Reply With Quote
  #7  
Old 06-03-2013, 11:27 AM
trixtrix's Avatar
trixtrix trixtrix is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Posts: 1,354
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Craps Master View Post
Short-stacking has much lower variance than deep stack play, but also lower EV if you are competent at both styles. .
disagree, sticking your whole stack in w/ 35% expected win rate b/c pot+player in hu situation is offering you better than 2-1 odds, is alot more volatile than say playing deep stack w/ position and pot control.

Example: say you flopping the nut straight (shortstack have to go allin here) and then turn brings a pair or 3rd of the suit, in which case deepstack can get away from the hand but shortstack cannot.
__________________
http://sportsbettingsites.org/wagerweb/

ps: why do everyone insinuate that i'm j7's beard/sidekick? why can't he be my beard/sidekick?
Reply With Quote
  #8  
Old 06-03-2013, 06:46 PM
Craps Master's Avatar
Craps Master Craps Master is offline
Moderator-The Chip Count
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Posts: 810
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by trixtrix View Post
disagree, sticking your whole stack in w/ 35% expected win rate b/c pot+player in hu situation is offering you better than 2-1 odds, is alot more volatile than say playing deep stack w/ position and pot control.

Example: say you flopping the nut straight (shortstack have to go allin here) and then turn brings a pair or 3rd of the suit, in which case deepstack can get away from the hand but shortstack cannot.
Disagree all you want. I have hard data that I have accumulated over the years both online and live. Frankly, it isn't even close. Short-stacking is significantly less volatile.

You have constructed a very specific example to justify your position, but you are off the mark. What if the board doesn't pair or bring the flush card? What if the river is safe too and a guy stacks off? You have just won a monster pot, but it's still volatility. Positive variance is still variance. You will not get it in as frequently with a big stack, but you will play more hands overall and often get more BBs into a pot without going all-in than a short player has in his stack. You will also have those times where you get your entire enormous stack in and win or lose. The variance from those events dwarfs the frequent but minuscule short-stack all-ins.
Reply With Quote
  #9  
Old 06-03-2013, 10:02 PM
PokerKat's Avatar
PokerKat PokerKat is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2013
Location: Las Vegas
Posts: 1,524
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Craps Master View Post
Disagree all you want. I have hard data that I have accumulated over the years both online and live. Frankly, it isn't even close. Short-stacking is significantly less volatile.
Hmmm... Well you have the data and I don't, but on general statistical principles and assuming a winning player:

1. Short-stacking reduces your win-rate.

2. A lower win-rate means greater downswings, at least if we define a downswing relative to break-even rather than the variance about the mean.
Reply With Quote
  #10  
Old 06-04-2013, 12:43 AM
The Chaperone's Avatar
The Chaperone The Chaperone is offline
Marmalade, I like marmalade ...
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Bank of America Stadium
Posts: 6,065
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by PokerKat View Post
Hmmm... Well you have the data and I don't, but on general statistical principles and assuming a winning player:

1. Short-stacking reduces your win-rate.

2. A lower win-rate means greater downswings, at least if we define a downswing relative to break-even rather than the variance about the mean.
Win-rate and variance are two entirely different things.
Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

All times are GMT -8. The time now is 07:26 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.7.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.