10/20 Short vs. 15/30 Full
 

I'm posting this here since it is my impression that the people who play or have played both these games a lot read this forum.

El Diablo asserts that the 15/30 full game is more profitable than the 10/20 short game. I am curious about peoples oppinions regarding these games. The table selection question is kind of odd; with shorthanded games, I see a pretty dramatic difference table profitability, I am curious if the differences are more or less pronounced full handed. (I suspect less with full, since the standard deviation with a larger sample size should be smaller (10 player sample size vice 6), but that is just a guess.)

Re: 10/20 Short vs. 15/30 Full
 

Great poll. Please post results for those of us who have not played in those two limits.

Re: 10/20 Short vs. 15/30 Full
 

I quess 10/20 is more profitable because of higher speed and lower skill level of players.

So your results in 15/30 must be nearly the _same_ in terms of BB/100 to achieve the same amount in $/ true hour, cause speed in 6max higher nearly 1.5 times. Is it possible to achieve results in full game more than 3BB/100? If so, i soon join in as full game easier to play than SH.

Re: 10/20 Short vs. 15/30 Full
 

Other things that are not considered here are 4-tabling 10/20 short versus 8tabling 15/30. Also - if you're talking even number of tables, the rakeback for 10/20 short is way bigger.

-DrG

Re: 10/20 Short vs. 15/30 Full
 

Just because of this topic i tryed 15/30 full today. Khm, this is wonderful game. SH skills are extremely painful for these Sklansky players. Reading is simplier than in 6max much more. Folds are very easy. Bluffs are predictable. There is less % of LAG's than in 15/30 6max and even in 10/20 6max but more loose-passives and TAGs seem to play many tables and don't read at all (because of these LP's i guess) so they're very inertial and mechanic and easy to bluff. Often it gets SH 4-6 handed and people still stay in and play very terrible, fold more than needed, pay more credits to raiser than needed, raise PF etc less than needed.

My results after 1K hands is +100BB. Of course there is much part of luck and maybe i'm a bit result's oriented but i believe this 15/30 game is very beatable as i see very many mistakes other players do.

So, i like this game and plan to play it more. [img]/images/graemlins/wink.gif[/img] Thanks for input.

Re: 10/20 Short vs. 15/30 Full
 

I played this game a little bit last night. Very very slow paced compared to short handed, I can see how people would 8 table this.

The play seemed exceptionally bad. I took some wicked beats on a few big hands from utter crap hands, but made a lot on driving decent hands. I also felt that hand reading was a lot easier here, and was having no trouble getting away from hands that were beat.

The swings did not seem extreme at all. Did it seem to you like pre flop raising standards were low? I may just not be in the full game mindset, but I saw a lot of early raises from small pairs, and some bizare early raises from hands like Kxs.

So far, I like the 15/30 full game. I am farming data now, I am definitely going to put in 10-20K hands to get a better feel for it.

Re: 10/20 Short vs. 15/30 Full
 

[ QUOTE ]
Great poll. Please post results for those of us who have not played in those two limits.

[/ QUOTE ]

You can click on the view results and it will open a new window with the current tallies.

Re: 10/20 Short vs. 15/30 Full
 

You only get a pop-up which shows the results of the first two polls, the rest you cannot see or scroll to.

Re: 10/20 Short vs. 15/30 Full
 

Click on the pop up and use your mouse wheel or arrow keys to scroll.

Re: 10/20 Short vs. 15/30 Full
 

[ QUOTE ]
Other things that are not considered here are 4-tabling 10/20 short versus 8tabling 15/30. Also - if you're talking even number of tables, the rakeback for 10/20 short is way bigger.

-DrG

[/ QUOTE ]

8-tabling 10/20 6-max is very possible.

Re: 10/20 Short vs. 15/30 Full
 

So I just voted in this poll and found that my answers are like opposite of what the leading vote-getters are.

There've been close to 40 people who have voted... Are there that many people who've seen this poll and have extensive experience in both games to be voting?!?

Anyone who I know that has logged a lot of hours in both games feel that 15/30 fulls DO produce more swings. My own play in both games says this as well.

Likewise, table selection is so, so, so much more important in 15/30 fulls it's ridiculous. Seriously, table selection requirements for 10/20 6m should almost always be "open seat." If you have good notes it's very easy to see when to not sit at a table, since there are so few TAGs and so many mediocre playing regulars. I think I avoid tables because they're bad like once in 20 times. At 15/30 there is a large enough collection of solid playing TAGs (thanks 2+2) that it becomes much more important to know who they are, since it's more likely you'll eventually end up seated with a bunch if you don't happen to know better.

Regarding profitability, I think it's close enough that either game works. The difference in stakes gets made up for by playing extra hands at 6max, as well as extra rakeback.

Re: 10/20 Short vs. 15/30 Full
 

[ QUOTE ]
Click on the pop up and use your mouse wheel or arrow keys to scroll.

[/ QUOTE ]

That didn't work for me, but once you have the pop-up up then you can hit <Ctrl><N> and it will open a new regular window in which you can see the full results.
[img]/images/graemlins/cool.gif[/img]
B.

Re: 10/20 Short vs. 15/30 Full
 

[ QUOTE ]
So I just voted in this poll and found that my answers are like opposite of what the leading vote-getters are.


[/ QUOTE ]
Hey Schneids,

What's your opinion of a safe bankroll for 10/20 6-Max. 500 BB enough?

Benjamin - almost there. [img]/images/graemlins/laugh.gif[/img]

Re: 10/20 Short vs. 15/30 Full
 

I voted 500BB for 10/206m and 750BB for 15/30 full. I actually think 600-650BB is good for 15/30 but that wasn't an option.

About the largest losing streaks that very good players I'm aware of have been on in 10/20 6m has been ~300BB, versus 15/30 that reaching upwards of 400BB.

However, yes, 500BB is about right for regularly playing 10/20 6m.

Re: 10/20 Short vs. 15/30 Full
 

[ QUOTE ]
You only get a pop-up which shows the results of the first two polls, the rest you cannot see or scroll to.

[/ QUOTE ]
I'm able to resize the window under Firefox. Not sure about IE.

Re: 10/20 Short vs. 15/30 Full
 

Nope that does not work - I am using Netscape.

Had to view page info and copy the URL, then post this in a new window (<Ctrl><N> opens a blank page... [img]/images/graemlins/mad.gif[/img]).

Re: 10/20 Short vs. 15/30 Full
 

[ QUOTE ]
Nope that does not work - I am using Netscape.

Had to view page info and copy the URL, then post this in a new window (<Ctrl><N> opens a blank page... [img]/images/graemlins/mad.gif[/img]).

[/ QUOTE ]

LOL ... the first time I wanted to see it I looked at the html ... kind of hard to track it down in the code, but it does work. [img]/images/graemlins/grin.gif[/img]

B.