The Bare Minimum
Tuesday, May 13, 2008
It's time for some pimpage for a guy who has definitely earned it with some intriguing posts on buying in short at NLHE.
I have long been an advocate of buying in for the maximum whenever I play poker. To me, it was an obvious move. I want to be able to win the maximum amount possible when I get myself into a good situation. I also liked the idea that you do not fuck with the big stack.
The problem is, I began to believe my own hype and eventually stopped thinking critically about why I buy in for the max.
Part of my current efforts to re-establish my game (and profitability) requires me to examine every part of my game, including table image. I haven't written about table image in a while, especially since I haven't played in a casino in a long while, but in the past, I always emphasized my "loser" image. I tend to dress like a bum when I sit in public games. I like to wear t-shirts, often emblazened with a cheesy Superman symbol or something similar. I like my hoodies and cargo pants for comfort. Essentially, I am playing the role of the fool. I want people to look at me and go, "East money!" I don't want them to think, "This guy knows what he is doing." At least not at first.
The reasoning is simple enough. I want to be underestimated so I can get paid off on my big hands. I want to appear loose so that my actual tight play will get paid off.
The problem, though, is that I have slowly moved away from this tried and true image to a "tough guy" antagonistic image that does me little good. Instead of tricking my opponents into overplaying thier hands, I have changed my focus to forcing my opponents off of hands. It might work for some people, but I know in my heart of hearts that it is the wrong strategy to me.
I need to be the quintissential loser at the table. I need to appear to be the mark, so that when I make my plays, I catch players off-guard...and playing with a shortstack may help me get back on track. Plain and simple, players who buy in short look weak. Opponents are more likely to get it all in against these opponents because (a) the bigger stack's losses are capped and (b) the short stack is likely playing scared and will probably fold to an all-in or is pushing out of desperation. It's fucking rudimentary! So, why aren't I using this?
I may try multi-tabling micro-stakes NLHE online tonight with min buy-ins. I may try playing 2/5 NLHE this weekend at AC with a min buy-in. Whatever the case, I am going to begin re-assessing table image from scratch to fight my way back to the donkey-appearing profitable guy I once was. I guess appearing like I know what I am doing isn't such a benefit after all.
I highly recommend you check out Lucypher's posts on playing with a min buy-in. The three parts can be found here, here and here. But really, just peruse his whole catalogue, because there are some great posts in there from a guy who hasn't been posting for all that long.
Until next time, make mine poker!
posted by Jordan @ 5:50 PM,
- At 6:36 PM, AgSweep said...
If you want to be viewed as the perptual mark just turn into a middle aged woman.
- At 12:06 AM, DP said...
is that easy to do?
- At 10:19 AM, Lucypher said...
Thanks for the pimpage, Jordan.
I really appreciate your support. Short stacking has worked for me for a long time but I always got tons of grief from other online players and the 2+2 gang whenever I mentioned it so I felt it was time to set the record straight.
Good luck using it, too.