Little rant about short tables!

I can't really call my move from half stacking to full stacking a "transition", just common sense. Nevertheless, I have experience at both forms of the game and thus I think I can compare the 2 games impartially. Shortstacking is just not real poker! (Still being impartial obv ;))

I've had so many discussions on the 2+2 forum about this subject and although people have brought up some valid points about why I should embrace the new 50BB table trend, I don't think I ever will. Most of the reason I enjoy poker so much is that it makes you think, you're pitting the strength of your decisions up against the decisions of others, so why would I take away this part of the game and replace it with just pure gamble. It's not enjoyable for me, and according to my Omaha Manager, it's definately not profitable either.

Unfortunately for me, others don't share my disdain for it. Right now as I write this post, there are 10 tables running at PL25, not one of them a full stack table, or even a deep table. Even when I sit on my own at these tables, they'll take an hour to fill and if I'm honest, sitting HU or 3 handed with decent regs isn't the most profitable idea in the world. I assume that most players who have decided to have a go at PLO8 are new-ish to the game and would like to learn how to play it properly, so why sit at a table where you're going to be pushing around small stacks without even having a clue what equity you're going to have. Come play some full stacked poker and you'll learn so much more about the game and become adept far faster than you will at the short tables.

Sorry this isn't a meaningful blog post, just a bit of ranting and raving about silly short tables. I write something actually half decent later. So bye for now :)