6 or ten handed?

[pearljam]

I've decided to set aside 500$ for limit hold'em exclusively. The general consensus of the board is that limit is much more profitable the NL SNG's which is what im currently playing.

From what I can see, the advantages of 10 handed is that I can multitable alot easier then 6 handed. However I have read skill is more of a factor in 6 handed games.
I feel I would be better at the 6 handed games because I have a good amount of experience in it from the SNG's. However with 10 handed im sure I could play alot more tables at a time.

And also, and probably the most important question is what limits should I play with a 500$ bankroll?
thanks for your help guys

[dealer_toe]

the lowest 6max on party is 1/2, and $500 might be a little slim. Generally BR requirements, or reccomendations I should say, are highger if you're going to be playing 6max. Swings are more frequent, and bigger. If you want to play 1/2 full w/ that roll, you should be fine as long as you bonus whore and get rake back along with that.

[pearljam]

Actually the lowest limit is .5-1, I get 26% rakeback and plan on doing any reload bonuses they have.

[MicroBob]

he said the lowest limit for 6-MAX is 1/2...and he is correct.


regardless of rake-back and bonuses you should consider sticking with the 300BB rule.....and more than that since you don't even know if you are a winning player at limit.
Thus, I would recommend the very lowest limit (which on party is .5/1....but it wouldn't be too terrible if you got your feet wet at even smaller limits than that on other sites).

[GemiNiveK]

I really think you should stick to full ring for a while before going to 6-max. Limit play differs significantly from NL, and even more from NL tourney-style. I think it's dangerous for you to assume that your S&G skills will carry over to limit. Sure, every limit player should experience NL, and every NL should experience tourney-style...all of these strenthen your theory and understanding of the game and enhance your ability to adapt your play style on-the-fly. But being good at one doesn't really carry over directly to being good at another...I personally it could hurt you as much or more than it helps.

I'd say start with $300 at .50/1 party skins and play until you've doubled it (before bonus and rakeback). You should be able to crush .50/1 (3BB/100+) before you go to 1/2. 1/2 is much tighter and much more aggressive. Once you've adapted there and doubled your roll again (so $1,200 before bonus/rakeback), then go to 1/2 6-max. If you can make another 300BBs there within say 10-15K hands, then you're definitely ready to step up. I was too arrogant and impatient to play 1/2 so I spent a long time at 2/4 with some really bad swings before I figured out some major leaks that should have been ironed out at 1/2.

The fact that you're reading everything you can get your hands on including these forums is great...I wish I would have been humble enough to do that a year ago instead of pissing away a ton of money learning the hard way. I still have a hard time disciplining myself to stay away from limits not supported by my roll. I'm still happy with my overall progress this year, but I think I'd be happier had I followed the advice given in these forums (which is basically what I just wrote above).

Good luck, and see you at the tables!

~K

[Predator314]

My suggestion is to take that $500 and do follow this post:

http://forumserver.twoplustwo.com/showflat.php?Cat=&Number=1060198&page=&view=&sb=5& o=&fpart=1&vc=1

[ctv1116]

DEFINITELY start with 10 handed games, if you've played very little limit holdem. The reason for this is you want to start with a solid tight aggressive playing base. Once you have the basics mastered, then you can go to 6max and expand the number of starting hands and other "plays".

[pearljam]

Ok ill start playing ten handed .5-1$. I think I will be able to beat the games even though I have only played limit a few times, ive read SS1 and 2 and alot of things online about the game. anyway I'll start today and post my results later.

[AquaSeaFoam]

Definately full ring games....the number of players will afford you some protection against more skilled players as you learn the game. Six handed games bring out a more aggressive, bluffing type of play that isnt the best when learning limit poker. No sense in taking too many lumps when starting out....remember you'll almost always have to show down the best hand at these limits in a full ring game; be patient and let the others make the mistakes.....and yes you are correct; Limit is much more profitable (at least it is for me). gl

[sethypooh21]

I think I may have to voice dissent from those who say ten handed. I think many of the skills that do help in NL tourneys (aggression, and being able to get away from hands) serve you well at 6-max. $500 may be a little short for the party 1/2 6-max, but with any kind of game, that game is emminently destroyable. Just memorizing a decent starting hand chart should be enough to show a profit.

Speaking from experience, I found it much easier to acclimate to 6-max then to full when moving from NL SNG's

[MicroBob]

there may be SOME validity in what you are saying.


but the OP has only had moderate success at SNG's i believe.
and has very little experience playing limit.


He is only assuming he is a winning player without actually having won (at least at the limit level).
He is not exactly a newbie....he knows how the betting works and knows that a full-house beats a flush....but he should still take baby-steps here. Especially with a small-ish roll that he doesn't want to lose.


SS1 limit section is not exactly the very best for today's game.
Haven't read SS2.


Suggest WLLHE, ITH and obviously SSHE.
Primarily SSHE of course...but the OP could still benefit from WLLHE and ITH if he hasn't already read them.


Reading books on poker is good....but quantity does not make one a good player. If you can't distinguish from the ideas and quality of Krieger's Hold-Em Excellence or Ken Warren vs. a decent book like Hilger or a REALLY good book like SSHE then reading all of those books will be more hurtful than helpful.

[sethypooh21]

Fair enough, I guess I could have been making assumptions that weren't warranted about OP. That being said, I think that tournament NL (and especially the redonkulously fast paced party 1-tablers) to SH is a much easier transition than to full ring. The smaller pots in SH are more analagous to the leverage you can exert with a big bet in NL.