I have always bought in with the full buy in.

I see multitabling players buyin with $40 on a $100NLHE table and I have seen some buy in full. Both are playing 10 to 12 tables.

What are the pros and cons of each method?

Thanks for your help,

cat923

Depends entirely on how you play and WHAT you play. If you're playing super tight and want to avoid tough decisions with TPTK on the flop, then shorter stacks help. However, you give up oodles of value if you have any skill at all: you can't play as many hands since the implied odds are absent. Morever, as SOON as you double up, you have to leave that table to rebuy on another with the shorter stack. So, if you find yourself at a JUICY table, you'll find yourself ill-equipped to play with a full (or larger) stack against really bad (ie. great) players.

If you're any good (and I KNOW that you are), then get in there with a full stack EVERY TIME.

There are other reasons to start with a smaller stack, but it only involves a situation when you're playing with a LOT of other players of high skill...but there's absolutely no reason to be in that situation unless you're playing the highest of high stakes. And even then, it's not the only way to play.

Just buy in full...everytime. Nothing makes me feel better than taking MULTIPLE stacks off of the SAME donk(s).