I know general wisdom is that buying in short is not optimal, and it's great to take someone's entire stack, but I wonder if playing short stack works. You don't give implied odds for people to go for a set. You have a better chance of people playing with you when you have a high PP, even though you make less on each of those hands. I can see some advantages...

There's this guy on 50NL on party who always buys in for $14 at the 50NL table, and I make fun of him but his stats look pretty good.

Hands: 2100
VPIP: 22.25%
BB/100: 18.58BB (actual BB)
PFR: 9.19%
AF: 2.82
WtSD: 24.5%
W$SD: 54.6%

His plan is this: comes in with $14, plays fairly tight and aggr good cards, when he makes 3-4$ he goes out and comes back with $14. I don't have that many hands on him, but it seems to work for him. What do you think?

Then the question is how do you play against this? If he raises to $2 or $3 you don't have odds to go for a set. If he has a pp and the flop is small, he will go to the end. A lot of times with AQ or AK he will bet strong or go all in on a missed flop. Should I always reraise him preflop with TT+, AQ+ or even small pocket pairs? He does fold to reraises a reasonable percentage (not a maniac).

The problem is you don't get implied odds for a set preflop, you don't get implied odds for draws on the flop. The frustrating thing is that when I fold to a flop bet, he takes that money out of the game and I don't get it back even if I bust him later. Do you just wait for reasonable hands and force him to play for his stack or fold preflop? What's your gameplan?

This is a very good one, but it's not completely easy to exploit.

I think the first question to ask is: Why is it bad? Well, the answer is that it gives you no stack depth to play for sets or to play your suited connectors. Your "high leverage" hands have no value.

So, a fairly good player in short-stack really has only big card hands to work with.

Now, as opponent with deep stack, it's a bit aggravating, because when the short-stack raises his AA, you can't draw to your own set. And, indeed, one counter-strategy against a short-stack is to simply deny him any money in the pot when he raises. What you're really doing is just making his AA much less profitable (AA is going to be ahead on the flop more often than not). And, if the short-stack is actually fully aware of his own situation and plays tight, he can't set on your AA either. So, objectively, he has very few hands to play, largely just trouble hands, and he has lost all equity on the really good draw hands.

But most short-stacks don't recognize this or else go into "tournament mode," raising hands like 66 or AQ, with the intention of doubling up or rebuying. If they do THAT, what I've been doing is becoming much more inclined to put them in on my own JJ or AK. They limit your losses when you lose, and AK often has them dominated (otherwise, it's usually just a coinflip). For the JJ re-raise, it's best if you can weed out through reads whether they have something like 88 or AK/AQ.

Anyhow, these are just a few ideas. You really have to look carefully at just how they're playing in order to really develop the best strategy against the particular short-stack. And, I know it sounds like you're giving them an advantage by laying down your 22 when they raise, but it's actually a DISadvantage to the short-stack. From ME, their AA (which is rare anyway), only wins blinds, basically. And that's just not much potential for AA. And they can't play anything better than KQ or such--if they're a good short-stack player, and most aren't.

I think it's also a situation where some tournament experience comes in handy, because in tournaments, you see what limited options short-stacks have.

I guess I'd kind of sum it up with: Give them almost no action if they're tight, and, if they're looser, try to put them in with limited risk when they're likely to be dominated.

"I know general wisdom is that buying in short is not optimal, and it's great to take someone's entire stack, but I wonder if playing short stack works. You don't give implied odds for people to go for a set."

That is clear thinking. If a short stack raises and I have a small pair I wont play the hand because he dosent have much to win. I like my opponent to have 7-10 times his raise in front of him if I am going to take a flop with a PP. BUT, if I feel like gambling and his stack is real small I may re-raise to get heads up with him, hoping he has overcards. This may not be the greatest play in the world but you know you cant lose much because he simply dosent have much!

I would disregard the guys PT numbers because 2100 hands dosent mean much. Check it out at at least 10-15000 for results that mean something.

Buying in short is a great way to be either a small winner/loser or break-even player. Sure, you save money when you get a bad beat but you definitely lose more money on the hands when you are way ahead and can only push your small stack in.

Short buys are for suckers. I rarely see these folks win much, either online or in the casino. The short-buy player is usually a under-funded player with too much gamble in them.

gl

YD