Just like in war, when we have lots of ammunition, we don’t respond to combat the same way when we have very little, or when supplies are scarce or in excess, or when it’s time to survive without fighting. We don’t respond to combat in the same way when it’s already arrived. Very long or noticeable. chips.
In poker, the number of chips we play with is one of the most important factors in strategy design.
Chips are not the only determinant of a good game. But this is one of the most important, and other factors vary depending on the size of your own and others’ stacks.
The first and most important general explanation that needs to be given involves determining the size of the usefulness stack and the consequences of these quantities in different game modes (cash games, sit & go or tournaments), Because there are almost no points of contact between them.
In cash games, the number of chips we play is optional (within the limits set by the room, e.g. minimum 30bb – maximum 100bb). So this is a voluntary strategic decision.
José Litvak is a great poker theorist.
Everyone has a certain body type they can choose and may feel more or less comfortable with, or find tactics that work better or worse for their respective body types.
In tournaments, however, everyone’s starting chips are the same, except for those allowed to start with a double box, which fluctuate depending on how the game develops.
Thus, the size of our stack at any moment incentivizes us to play accordingly. This is a mandatory tactical adjustment.
To put it more clearly: At cash tables, we are the ones who choose the strategy we like to play, which determines the number of chips we will use. In a tournament, on the other hand, our evidence list specifies and limits actions.
This is where the first differences emerge – motives and goals – the effects of which are crucial to the analysis of the problem.
It is not the same as voluntarily implementing a specific strategy, but rather doing so out of obligation. In one situation we would be comfortable, in another we certainly wouldn’t (a friend of mine in the old trade told us she wasn’t entirely satisfied when she did it just for love).
The purpose and possibilities of cash games are also different from tournaments. Therefore, the consequences of the number of “balls” and/or “reserves” on the table also apply.
To win in cash games you must exit with more chips than you purchased, and you can rebuild your stack at any time if you wish so you don’t have to change your tactical line. That’s impossible in a tournament.
Regardless of the genre, the ultimate goal of the game is to steal other people’s chips, but the size of the chips changes the immediate purpose; that is, “how” it is achieved. The gravity of the situation is that anyone who doesn’t fit within this parameter is doomed to fail.
And the “how”, these strategies, are not different, “they vary according to the opposite magnitude”. We will analyze this in more detail.
In the literature and poker conversation, stacks are often classified as short stacks, medium stacks, full stacks, or deep stacks, although this in itself doesn’t mean much.
Because the measurement parameters, objectives and conditions are different for each game style, and the scope or importance of cash is not the same as the scope or importance of seats and wagers. go or MTT (multi-table tournament).
When talking about stack size, it is important to be clear about which variant we are talking about. Any vague or general reference will fail to express anything specific and, on the contrary, will be confusing.