I've been reading Sklansky/Miller's latest addition to the poker populace, No Limit Hold' Em and since I've never gotten into the game on a consistent basis I have been giving it some time in my regular lineup.

A lot of people recommend the short stack approach where myself and others believe in deep stacks (for myself, this is a purely theoretical decision since I don't have enough time put in either way).

The way I see it:

Short stack play is for people who want to decrease their risk by decreasing their possible gain.

Deep stack play is for people who want to increase their risk in order to increase their gain.

I'd like to hear some comments on why you play either short or deep. And what advantages/disadvantages you find it offers.

I like to play deep because my strength is postflop play. I love to see flops and this would break me in short stack play because my wins wouldn't make up for my losses. Playing a deep stack allows me to take a lot of flops, make a lot of bets in quantity (not neccessarily large in size), and maintain a more reliable constant in my implied odds.

The more your stack flucuates under the maximum, the higher your variance because the situations where you're using numbers require large samples to prove the theorems. This is why I suggest using a "hit n' run" method when short stacking.

I do like Deme's method, though. He uses short stacking to scout a table while still giving himself chances to make a little bit lowering his investment when he fills up if he elects to stay. I choose rather to watch a table while on the wait list or sit out a couple of orbits if the number of unknowns is uncomfortable to me.

I've played a ton of shorter stacked NL games live with great success. 2/5 games with $200 max. and 5/10 $500 max. as I can adjust to a table or structure a lot faster in a live game because it's easier to feel out. Though the most live NL success that I've had are the 5/10's in mixed games with caps and No Max. buy in games.

What I've been doing is buying in for $11-13 on the $25 tables.

I pretty much raise to $2 any premium hand QQ-AA, AK, sometimes JJ or TT and limp in with pairs 22-JJ and AQs, AJs, KQs and mid suited connectors from LP. If there is a raise in front of me I push all-in with JJ-AA, AK and depending on this size of it and who it came from call/Push/Fold with rest of the hands.

My thinking is: If someone raise to $1-$1.50 I have implied odds to still call with pairs and such.

If you're shortstacking, do you play mid suited connectors? If so, how?

My other issue is, I can't get a call if I raise to $2?????????? these people are so tight. I can't get paid off with AA or KK. Maybe I'll try phyto's push all-in method.

PLaying deep gives you lots of options. I get lots of room to feel where im at. Sometimes you need to bet to see how you are in the hand, with a short stack, you have little room, and can't use all the tools a deep stack has.

Also im never really pot comitted, I can say "hey, I can salvage 50bb and fold here".

Also, I have the possiblity of doubling my stack (which is 100bb+x). Although many times I lose 100bb, I think i win slightly more 100b, thus im +EV. In cash game, I am most comfortabble with 100bb. Infatc if they'd cap it @ 200bb, Id always sit w/ 200bb minimum. I just feel less pressure. I can wait. I dont have to make moves (like get my chips in on FD).

In my opinion over the long run deep stacking will net you a greater profit, however short stack play is a very sound strategy for minimizing risk. I use a short stack strategy whenever I am clearing bonuses. The advantage to doing this is playing a short stack I can multi table very very easily. When you play a short stack your goal is to play extremely tight, double up, and run. I'm not worrying about weather or not my opponents are LAG or passive or weak. I have been very profitable doing this.

I do believe that playing a deep stack is more profitable. One of the advantages to the short stack is killing your opponents implied odds but by doing this you are also killing your own implied odds. If your playing with a 20bb stack and flop a monster your maximum profit is very limited compared to someone with a 150bb stack. I mentioned before that an advantage to the short stack is the ability to multitable because your not playing your oppenents but this is also a disadvantage. By not playing your oppoenents your missing out on a lot of +EV.

I was very skeptical of the short stack strategy until I tried it clearing the pokerroom promo from pso. I four tabled 25nl, something I would never do at that time deep stacking, with 6 dollar stacks. I only played 10-10 through ace ace, ace king, and ace queen if i got to open. I would also limp small pocket pairs in position and complete my sb with good suited connectors. Even with a short stack you have good enough odds to limp with these hands in an unraised stack. I finished the promo up 100 dollars plus a 40 dollar bonus from poker room, and 500 piece custom set of Nevada Jacks from PSO.

I still believe that a deep stack is the correct way to play and with a short stack you are leaving a lot of money on the table. However, for quickly clearing bonuses or for a change in pace to get you off tilt, short stacking can also be extremely profitable.

I'll sum it up like this;

I think playing deep makes for more difficult decisions. But, with those difficult decisions comes greater reward. Playing short on the other hand makes your decisions easier but cuts down on the reward.

Obviously, playing deep can be more profitable. But playing short allows you to: multi-table easily and stay emotionally balanced.

When i see people without money, I just figure that they're gonna play really, really good hands. But almost anytime an ace is on the flop, they'll leave.

Just what i've noticed. I always take 100bbs to the table and use a "down 10%? reload!" It's become a cheer in this apartment.