Short Strack Strategy obsolete?

  • 14 replies
    • MrMardyBum
      MrMardyBum
      Bronze
      Joined: 14.03.2009 Posts: 2,206
      Hi, this is technically the case, However a few people on this site are still using the SSS at the 20 - 50BB tables and they are doing quite well.

      The blogs where you can find all the information are in the links below.

      Midlife Crisis? What Midlife Crisis?

      Grinding up and down (NL100+ SSS and Rush BSS)

      Have a look through those and use the SSS discussion boards to find out more :)

      Hope that helps :)
    • Leito99
      Leito99
      Bronze
      Joined: 27.07.2009 Posts: 754
      its still good...pokerstars have nice shallow tables
    • TheKaizen
      TheKaizen
      Bronze
      Joined: 21.05.2010 Posts: 22
      Originally posted by MrMardyBum
      Hi, this is technically the case, However a few people on this site are still using the SSS at the 20 - 50BB tables and they are doing quite well.

      The blogs where you can find all the information are in the links below.

      Midlife Crisis? What Midlife Crisis?

      Grinding up and down (NL100+ SSS and Rush BSS)

      Have a look through those and use the SSS discussion boards to find out more :)

      Hope that helps :)
      Thanks for the links :s_biggrin:

      I liked the guy who enters SS and just sits even through BSS status
    • HannesZ
      HannesZ
      Headadmin
      Headadmin
      Joined: 30.06.2010 Posts: 16,311
      Thank you for the links.

      If you have further questions do not hesitate to ask.
    • BCShad0w
      BCShad0w
      Bronze
      Joined: 07.06.2010 Posts: 78
      Originally posted by TheKaizen
      In the Introduction to SnG's video, it's stated the SSS is now obsolete.

      Any more details on this?
      I'm a SS player
      I see it still alive... I play BSS, however, many tables I go on I see players holding on $3-$5 on a $10 max table... People seem to get sucked into a SSS player going all in with $4 and calling, but when a big stack raises to $4, you see everyone fold.

      If its being classed as obsolete, maybe not many players are using the strategy, meaning it's less used and freer for you to use to find tables and play against the big stacks.

      I also see it used by players who don't want to lose a big chunk of their stack... They'd happily call an all in with $4 with KK, rather than calling a raise with KK to see someone betting every round, to be called, to see AA at the end and lose like $8 of their stack.

      I guess it's all about table image.

      /C
    • MrMardyBum
      MrMardyBum
      Bronze
      Joined: 14.03.2009 Posts: 2,206
      SSS requires you to only have 20BB's in your stack when you buy-in.

      These players are just not buying in full.
    • TheKaizen
      TheKaizen
      Bronze
      Joined: 21.05.2010 Posts: 22
      Originally posted by BCShad0w
      Originally posted by TheKaizen
      In the Introduction to SnG's video, it's stated the SSS is now obsolete.

      Any more details on this?
      I'm a SS player
      I see it still alive... I play BSS, however, many tables I go on I see players holding on $3-$5 on a $10 max table... People seem to get sucked into a SSS player going all in with $4 and calling, but when a big stack raises to $4, you see everyone fold.

      If its being classed as obsolete, maybe not many players are using the strategy, meaning it's less used and freer for you to use to find tables and play against the big stacks.

      I also see it used by players who don't want to lose a big chunk of their stack... They'd happily call an all in with $4 with KK, rather than calling a raise with KK to see someone betting every round, to be called, to see AA at the end and lose like $8 of their stack.

      I guess it's all about table image.

      /C

      What i'm doing isn't textbook SSS.

      I enter with 20bb and then try to find a table with two rock hard nits to my left.
      Every orbit I can, I get in two blind steals or just fold out.

      Over time, I seem to be making a few bbs to the level of having maybe 40bb's after 10 orbits.

      On top of that, I play aggressive and textbook opening ranges with 4bb+limp raises and 2/3rd pot re-raises.

      BUT, if the ring opens with just one person aside from my rock-nit companions then I will use my studied notes to widen my range.

      If 1 person limps in with 35 vpip / 5pfr for example. I would raise with an AQo mid position or a KQs.

      If my flop doesn't hit, I raise anyway and wait to see their action instead of checking to see their action.

      This false raise, I do not consider bluffing but instead probing to fold and in this false raise, I very often win the pot.
    • EmanuelC16
      EmanuelC16
      Bronze
      Joined: 02.01.2010 Posts: 13,897
      How can you say a false raise isn't a bluff? Isn't that the definition of a bluff? A bet or raise to make the opponent fold the better hand making it look like we have him beat and are value betting?
    • wasy8
      wasy8
      Black
      Joined: 29.01.2009 Posts: 1,507
      If my flop doesn't hit, I raise anyway and wait to see their action instead of checking to see their action.

      This false raise, I do not consider bluffing but instead probing to fold and in this false raise, I very often win the pot.
      you need to work on your poker terminology dude. betting with the intention to folding to a raise is the definition of a bluff. you're not breaking new ground by renaming it a 'false raise'.

      when betting you are always either betting for value or as a bluff. betting for 'information' is lolbad
    • TheKaizen
      TheKaizen
      Bronze
      Joined: 21.05.2010 Posts: 22

      when betting you are always either betting for value or as a bluff. betting for 'information' is lolbad
      Betting for information against someone proven to limp and fold yields money.

      Play the player, not yourself.
    • TheKaizen
      TheKaizen
      Bronze
      Joined: 21.05.2010 Posts: 22
      Originally posted by wasy8
      If my flop doesn't hit, I raise anyway and wait to see their action instead of checking to see their action.

      This false raise, I do not consider bluffing but instead probing to fold and in this false raise, I very often win the pot.
      you need to work on your poker terminology dude. betting with the intention to folding to a raise is the definition of a bluff. you're not breaking new ground by renaming it a 'false raise'.
      It's a protection mechanism.

      If the outs are high enough and he shows initial weakness. It's not a bluff, it's legitimate reasoning. Strain his decision.
      I bet in these spots for solidarity and not wit the intention to fold.

      If I have AK on a low dry board, the villain's calling range is high, fairly tight but looser than mine then I most likely have him by the balls.
      My hand is strong in the situation, equally to his at worst in most cases.

      I bet, he folds.

      Bluffing would be 3betting light with low outs but high value or overbetting to bully. Playing drawy hands that have medium value or betting middle pairs.

      You need to break ground in play, remember that there's a person clicking the mouse against you and if you can read him then use it to extract profit.


      You say what I do is bad?

      consider this, 8 times out of ten, I am correct in this play and receive around 20 big blinds and my own back.

      2 times I am wrong and lose 16-20bb's of my own

      8x20 = 160bb
      2x20 = 40bb

      That's 120 bb to my redline per ten scenarios.

      I do not play like this against fish or calling stations.
      ONLY against people I have TYPED reads on, and they are weak tight passive.

      Play the individual people in isolation.
    • MrMardyBum
      MrMardyBum
      Bronze
      Joined: 14.03.2009 Posts: 2,206
      Originally posted by wasy8


      when betting you are always either betting for value or as a bluff. betting for 'information' is lolbad
      This.
    • wasy8
      wasy8
      Black
      Joined: 29.01.2009 Posts: 1,507
      TheKaizen,

      thats a long post for a lot of stuff that makes no sense. seriously, arguing about the definition of a bluff is pretty retarded, since its a very clear cut definition.

      in the AK hand where you say you bet a low, dry board against a tightish player OOP (potentially a reg) you bet, he raises, you snapfold right? that makes your hand a bluff. if he folds, its a meh result because you likely had the best hand anyway. there needs to be planning in your case as to what line you're taking on future streets as well - if he calls you and the turn is a Q, whats your line? are you check/folding? I'm not. The Q is a scarecard for him and could easily hit your flop c-betting range with AQ/KQ, etc. if you didnt have an overpair already. When he flats you on the flop his range is weighted towards small pairs, and unless he is slowplaying a set, its likely you'll get a fold.

      you're really preaching to the choir about playing hands differently against different players...in the same situation, but against a nit reg playing 9/7 (FR, lets say for arguments sake) - you raise AK from MP, he flats you on the CO. your suspect his flatting range is 22+ and AQ+. flop comes down 8 6 3. Are you betting? Wouldn't be a good idea. That range crushes his flatting range really hard and he's almost never folding to a c-bet. If he does, you either had the same hand as him or had him beat. In that case a c-bet (or information bet/raise if you really wanna call it that lol) would be unprofitable.

      i made my strat post kinda long i guess, but hopefully it helps some people. remember that your goal in cash games is to win money, not pots.
    • wasy8
      wasy8
      Black
      Joined: 29.01.2009 Posts: 1,507
      I'll also add one more piece of food for thought for Kaizen and other readers -

      just because a play is +EV, it doesnt mean it is the only way of playing it. sometimes there is a play that is MORE +EV, which increases your winrate. finding a line that is profitable is good, finding a line that is more profitable is better.