10 handed vs. 6 max tables

[TobDog]

This question is directed at those of you who play mostly 6 max tables OL. I see that most of the better players here after moving up decide that the 6 player tables offer more opportunity to win more money that the 10 handed tables. Why is this the case, other than the theory that you can play more hands per hour and be more creative with them? Are you using a similar strategy to short handed games, or does 2-4 player games require more aggressiion? And if anyone is in a sharing mod, how long did it take to adjust to playing less opponents, or are the 6 players here better suited to playing less ABC like the 10 handed plays?

Thanks all

TobDog

[Gramps]

I'll leave it to the more experienced SH players to say what's optimal strategy for 6-max vs. 10 player. I believe that one reason 6-max can be more profitable for a good player is that bad players mathematical mistakes tend to be greater.

In full table play, chasing with things like a gutshot, bottom pair trying to spike 2 pair, etc. is often less of a mistake (due to more $$ in the pot - more players seeing flop, etc.). Shorthanded, these mistakes tend to be more -EV as the odds to chase are even worse than FT. You can think of it the other way too - what if you played 23 players at a table - now it'll probably be +EV to chase with some pretty long shots (e.g. 50% or so of players seeing the flop on average). As you get fewer and fewer players, those "draw chasers" are making bigger, and bigger mistakes.

I'm sure there's countless other reasons. The real "gambling fish-types" seem to love Party Poker shorthanded games.

[astroglide]

i think it's more of an action thing than an ev thing. lots of action, surprisingly low swings. i prefer playing 6 full 15/30 games to 4 shorthanded games

[NLfool]

how many games are you playing? Amazing do you have 2 dell 2001fp 20 inch lcd's for that type of action?

[astroglide]

6, yes i have 2 2001fps and a flat crt

[Lunamondo]

More hands less opponents.