Short Handed v. Many Callers v. Few Callers

[AmericanAirlines]

Seems to me I've read that when you are playing short handed you should play more hands... but if I'm playing a full table and have many callers I should play more hands.

Seems to go two ways at once.

If heads up I should play, say, the upper 49% of my hands...that would seem to imply that against 10... play my upper 9%.... but we know that the all starting hand standards say to play more drawing hands in LP with lots of callers....

Also, is it safe to say that the primary reason to play more hands in short handed games is the need to recover blinds that are going out faster... yet playing more hands is usually a "beginners mistake".

So what is the continuum these issues reside on and how does one accurately gauge what adjustments to make?

I suspect that as I get more callers (full handed game) I get the pot odds to play more hands... but as I get less callers or am in a short handed game I have to play more hands... but why exactly... and is there some sort of middle ground where, perhaps, I should be the tightest?

Sincerely,
AA

[MD_]

This question come from not understanding the way hands play out in various situations. Shorthanded you want to play fewer drawing hands, but more big card hands. AT, for instance, is a hand you should play agressively short handed, but would through away against 3 callers at a full table. On the other hand, you shouldn't be too happy with 67s in a short game (probably toss it), but would like to play it against many players at a full table. In sum, you play more hands when shorthanded OR with many callers, just different TYPES of hands.

-MD

[MD_]

And regarding the middle ground for tight play: when there are many players to act behind you or there is a raise in front of you. Remember that short-handed is not all that different from when the first 5 people fold at a full table.

-MD

[AmericanAirlines]

Hi MD,
Yes you are correct. I'm still getting grounded in how the various HE hands play out. When I'm grappling with issues that seem to go two ways at once... I post them!

:-)

I've played significantly less HE than stud. But it's clear to me I could improve on the way I learned stud (sat down at the MGM and tried it, later moved over the Mirage / Bellagio while reading lots of books). I'm putting more thought in first, away from the table.

Thanks.

Sincerely,
AA

[J.A.Sucker]

That's mostly true. However, people are more apt to defend their blinds and/or 3 bet behind you in a short game than a full game where people have folded. This can affect how you play a few hands, but hands like AT still have good value.

These are just my opinions, but I'm Just Another Sucker...

[tewall]

Heads up 49% wouldn't be anywhere near the percentage of hands you would need to play.

You're right about recovering the blinds being an important element of determining the number of hands to play.

In a full table, it's quite possible that you should severely limit the number of hands you're playing. In a 10 person game it's quite possible you should be playing far less than 10% of your hands. For example, in a game which is routinely capped with many players seeing the flop you would want to play very few hands. On the other hand, in a loose-passive game you might play well more than 10%, including quite a few out of position. So a key is knowing which sorts of hands play well in which sorts of situations.

[tewall]

Also in a full game the last 5 people are likely to have better hands than in a full game.