I read somewhere big stacks always lose to (good) short stacks, I think it was in Skalanskys NL book.

Does anyone know why this would be the case (assuming perfect play)?

it's because you have to either a strategy for either deep or short stacks. if you play a 100bb strat the shorters have an edge on you coz they can shove over your LP raises and you can't call them correctly, but if you adjust to the short strategy while the majority of the people at the table are deep with you you'll have your blinds taken adn you'll be folding the best hand vs them too often.

best you can do is make your pfr a bit smaller and call them with like AT+ KJ+ 66+

with a short stack, shortstackers do not play after the flop thus it is very hard to make big mistakes/bad calls/whatver when all you need to learn is unexploitable pushing ranges

Originally Posted by tightagressive

with a short stack, shortstackers do not play after the flop thus it is very hard to make big mistakes/bad calls/whatver when all you need to learn is unexploitable pushing ranges

True, but suppose the big stacks adjust to that accordingly, and play just as well. Shouldn't the short stacks be donating due to their tight play and thus losing many blinds? Also, the gap concept forces them to play (relatively) tight even against someone who opens say 50% from the cutoff.

it's b/c they suck too many dicks

ok, think about this situation:

i am on the btn with a 100bb stack, sb is a pro shortstacker with 20bb, and bb is a huge fish who has me covered. there is almost no hand that i can't play profitably in position against a weak postflop player. if the sb were a non-factor, i would certainly be opening stuff like 54o and 92s. however, if sb is 3bet shoving with close to optimum frequency, then i am basically giving away money whenever i make a light open there. so the ss'er basically ruins what would be a marginally +ev spot for me. they basically make money off people who open in those spots anyway just b/c they think the benefit of playing pots with a fish is enough to overcome any equity lost to the shorty.

what a lot of people dont understand is that the shortness of the stack by itself isnt really an issue. playing a shortstacker hu, while not very fun, will at least be unexploitable. same for playing at a 6handed table vs. 5 shortstacks. the problem only develops when there is a significant difference in stacksizes at 1 table.

Originally Posted by Steve-O

My least favorite poker term: Optimum frequency

what dont you like about it? seems pretty irreplaceable to me