I don't understand? How can you say playing a bigger stack is always better? You realize you need a much larger roll to player 250bb as opposed to 100bb as opposed to 20bb poker right?
Also a specific stack size may be where you expect your opponent to make the most mistakes. If I could play 20bb poker with a tonne of the guys playing midstakes and some high stakes I would happily do so. Would I play 100bb with these guys? No because they have played millions of hands of this stack size and I would certainly be a loser. Would I crush them 20bb because they don't have a clue about 20bb poker? Yes.
Even if I could play as well as these guys 100bb. If I expect them to make a tonne of mistakes with 40bb or 20bb why wouldn't I play these stack sizes?
Saying it is ALWAYS +eV to have more chips in front of you is completely wrong. There are tonnes of situations where you can buy in for different stacks sizes. The most obvious of which is one where you cover the fish on your right but you wouldn't want the super amazing aggro reg on your left to always 3b or 4b your iso's and make your life hell 250bb deep.
edit: Also arguing to put yourself in the above situation to improve is complete nonsense. It's just not a situation you are going to win in because guess what, the guy with the big stack has position on you and guess what way the money flows on a poker table?
Reply With Quote