I'm not sure Sherman ! There are better poker guys than me, I've never played no limit. Add 2 zeroes, so it's 1500 or 2500, then you may only want to try for the smaller buy-in and if you get zonked, move on ? Buying in for the other 1000 puts you short-stacked for real money. The theory should be the same.
I'd probably buy the 25 in this small game, and I wouldn't play the big game.
I'd probably buy the 25 in this small game, and I wouldn't play the big game.
In nolimit it is a huge difference to have the rebuy available to you later, if I am reading your piece right. You might rebuy every time, but the issue is if get unlucky on one bad hand I would love to have the chance to rebuy. I can see the argument for buying in early and trying to build a stack, but NL can be so much luck at the low limits I would rather have the second chance.
WildBill said:
After reading that 3+ times, I think Bill says buy for the 15 units initially, then decide ! Not well-written, IMO !
I made it a bigger game to analyze it better. I guess I'd want the leverage of max chips available in Sherman's game, so if I lose I can exit quick and not waste time. Bigger money changes it.
Sorry if not understood, but my point is buy in for the minimum amount if it means you still get a rebuy later. If you buy the rebuy first and have a hand that busts you out, you are done right? In that case you want to keep the rebuy possibility open. Small or big stakes shouldn't matter much strategically, but I know it does for most.
Buy the $25 then set then set 2/5's to the side of your stick. In effect, you've done both now and you are not short-stacked. This way if you run into pocket aces and someone pushes all-in you can call for 25 not 15. No matter what happens, you'll have the best of it and want to get as much money in as possible, therefore increasing your mathematical expectation.
