Poker Bankroll Blog - online poker bankroll management, poker bankroll building, poker strategy, poker mathematics, poker rules, sports and fantasy betting and much more

Hello Mark,

As this was posted 6 months ago, you probably have written feedback somewhere else.

The only comment I have is that the short stack strategy that I see online is that short-stackers get allin preflop. They do not bet half their stack first, then the other half at the flop.

The advantage are:
- more fold equity preflop
- betting 50 pre, 50 post is predictable as your opponents know you will bet the rest at the flop. This is inferior to allin preflop because it is cheaper for them to see the flop knowing that you are allin anyway.

It could work if there is large turnover though.

Hi Maurice

Most other short stack strategies agree with betting 50% of your stack preflop and the rest after the flop.
You wan’t action (from a couple of players) with your premium hands, and an all in is less likely to be called by anyone at the table.
However mixing your play up is always a good idea so sometimes you could go all in preflop to fake stealing blinds.

Best Regards

Mark

Basically, it does seam to be a working strategy, but I think you should not be so strict on calculations. And if I were you I wouldn`t chose a low stack strategy, I`d rather play the poker than do this, but this is me not you.
And me again, I`d like to tell you that I would not play with someone like you any hand if we were at the same table because I can see myself that when you`re allin preflop it`s obvious that you have a big pair or premium cards in hand, so I`d pay you only in the same situation so that would be a hand played totally on luck.
I usually refuse to play with people who use this kind of strategy from other reasons too. If you have the luck and get me on an all-in hand, you`ll have my money, and than I would fight for my money with you, which I would not like, and even if I beat you then I wouldn`t win much, so I better not risk for 5$… because we all know that when you will take my money I would probably loose myself and I`ll play worse and you`ll take even more from me, and that`s not what I want

Mathematically that is a poor way to play poker, also there is no “theory” ever even mentioned in the blog post. I have reviewed your forum thread about your updates and notice you did not achieve your goal and just left the thread dead. “Sucky Sucky is my only comment….” are your last words.

That is the reason why I reply to this “hall of fame” blog, because your giving false information on how to achieve a bankroll with short stack strategy, with no proof it works.

I can only wish more people that play poker read this as it would increase my poker bankroll with out much effort.

Hi Donkey

First of thanks for reading my article on short stack strategy play and the forum thread.
I agree that short stack play is not the most nuanced way to play poker since it basically boils down the game to a predefined set of rules that you just follow like a machine.
You will not develop your overall poker skills by following the short stack strategy.
However, I do think the strategy is profitable in the long run.
If you read through my forum thread carefully you will see that moved to a higher limit which I was underrolled for.
This was a prime example of why it’s so important to practice good bankroll management, but does not necesssarily mean that the short stack strategy does not work.
Once again thanks for sharing your thoughts:-)

I’ve read off and on for a few months the pages on this here site, some good, some bad.. just like hole cards……………no page break?…………………I don’t question the short stack strategy works, I’ve done it a number of times. My concern is your theory, with nothing for proof. Mathematically your system is flawed, in my view. I wish to only understand how you presume yours does, it is your theory after all……………….there is nothing wrong with teaching players a system, but it is no good if there is no understanding to how it will work.

Hi Donkey

In order for me to respond to your claim that the short stack strategy is mathematically flawed, you will have to specify what these flaws are.
I would also like to point out that the short stack strategy is not my idea. I guess Ed Miller was the first to formulate it and what I’ve done is make my own modifications.
You write in your comment that you have tried the system yourself and seen that it works. Doesn’t that contradict that the math is flawed?
If what you really want is an article explaining the math behind the short stack strategy I will definitely consider writing it.

Mark’s last blog post..Basic poker tournament strategy

It doesn’t contradict at all actually, as I don’t use the same system you are using….but I think your missing my point. ………….your trying to provide a bankroll building strategy, that you have tried and failed……….. This theory is all about math, and it would only benefit the readers to understand why it should work………..

Hi Donkey

First of all I am not trying to provide people with a short stack bankroll building strategy. It has been a project of mine which I found interesting enough to share with whoever wanted to read it. Sure it ended with me giving up the strategy but that was mostly due to playing underrolled and finding out that I am a poker tournament player.
I totally agree that it would benefit the readers to know the math behind the short stack strategy.
If you believe your strategy is less flawed than mine let’s have a discussion about the math behind.
Where for example do you think my strategy is flawed, and how does your strategy fix these flaws?
It would be great to write an article with you presenting an improved short stack strategy!

Mark’s last blog post..Basic poker tournament strategy