full ring vs. 6-max
 

In Ed Miller's magazine column he suggests that anyone playing full ring games should drop down a limit and start playing the 6 max tables there . Has anyone tried this or have good stats/experience to compare these 2 kinds of games?

Re: full ring vs. 6-max
 

I would say 6-max is so much better, but I've had 6 losing days in a row so I'm bitter.

6-max makes you a better full limit player, and it's usually easier to make more money at 6-max than fullring, although you need a bigger bankroll to support it (there's some pretty retarded swings).

Re: full ring vs. 6-max
 

I followed Ed Miller's suggestion and have no regrets so far. I've only played 5500 hands, but enjoyed the experience since it forces you to make a lot more difficult decisions. Also, I find the pace really fast, and it feels like you are always in the action as opposed to be waiting for 2 playable cards.

I might be biased since I have been running very well and these games were extremely juicy [img]/images/graemlins/cool.gif[/img]

Re: full ring vs. 6-max
 

He's right, IMO, and that's a great article.

Re: full ring vs. 6-max
 

I have not played much 6-max at all but I would suggest you post this in the SSSH forum as well. When I started here last month there were alot of regulars who played 6-max. They are not here as much these days and I think you'll find them over there.

Re: full ring vs. 6-max
 

I think you need to check out the rake structure (maybe miller mentioned this, I haven't read the article yet). I know there are some sites where you have to play at least 2/4 to not get raped by the rake at 6 max.

Re: full ring vs. 6-max
 

I've enjoyed 6 max quite a bit. You get alot more time to practice HU and 3 handed play along with blind steal/defense situations. 6 Max has been great for improving my PF raise % and overall agression and has thereby helped my full ring game immensely. The great thing about 6 max is the ability to find tables full of fish and then have them all to yourself or maybe sharing with another player. The swings are annoying but overall BB/100 should be better if you pick the right tables as you will get so much more personal time with guys who have 50%+ VPIP and very low aggression or guys with 70%+ VPIP who are super lags. (I enjoy playing super lags so much more than fish)

Re: full ring vs. 6-max
 

[ QUOTE ]
In Ed Miller's magazine column he suggests that anyone playing full ring games should drop down a limit and start playing the 6 max tables there . Has anyone tried this or have good stats/experience to compare these 2 kinds of games?

[/ QUOTE ]
Where can I find this article?

Re: full ring vs. 6-max
 

I too recently have taken the 6-max plunge and am loving it. I found much looser/more passive games than full-ring, as others have said it helps your short-handed and HU play when playing full-ring, and you get to play more hands and see more scenarios. Here are two posts from MrWookie that lay all this out very well. These are must reads if you're gonna take on 6-max.

Six Max Baby Steps

Pooh-Bah Dissertation - 6 Max Stats FAQ

Re: full ring vs. 6-max
 

[ QUOTE ]
Where can I find this article?

[/ QUOTE ]

Observations on 6-max Limit Hold 'em by Ed Miller - 2+2 Magainze

Re: full ring vs. 6-max
 

My thoughts on the subject.

Re: full ring vs. 6-max
 

I've been playing 6max for about the last 6 months at the .5/1 and 1/2 levels. I'm seriously considering moving back to full ring. Part of that is frustration stemming from a ~300bb downswing over my last 6800 hands, but this is something I've been thinking about for a while.

First of all, there's no doubt in my mind that I'm a winning player in these sorts of microlimit short-handed games. A very solid chunk of opponents at these levels are retarded. Moving back to full ring is not out of concern for my winrate, which is still solid.

Also, it's not that 6max isn't fun. It's definitely more interesting that full ring since you find yourself in many more marginal situations and since you face a greater level of aggression and trickiness from your opponents.

The main reason why I'm thinking about switching back is because when I'm honest with myself, I know my style of play is better suited to full ring than shorthanded:

1. I tend to play ABC poker on autopilot. PAHUD is not enough to get serious reads on players, and you need those sorts of reads to really do well at short-handed play. If I play only one or tables I can get good post-flop reads, but I also get bored very quickly. Basically, I've discovered I have a preference for playing a large number of mechanical hands as opposed to a small number of finely-tuned hands.

2. I have no desire to move up. Ever. There is no doubt that if you want to move to higher levels you need to be able to get good reads and get used to "playing the player." I would never dispute that attentive play is superior to auto-pilot play. But auto-pilot ABC play works just fine at low levels, especially at full ring. If I don't plan to move up, I might as well stick with the game that best suits the ABC/2+2 style.

3. My style tends to be a little on the weak side. When I'm playing well, I have no problem supressing my weak-tight tendencies, but when I tilt I tend to play more weakly than usual. That's better than suffering from tilt that leads to chip-spewing over-aggression, but it's still a problem I need to work on. The thing is that I think weak play is punished much less severely in full ring than in short-handed games. So since I know I suffer from this problem from time to time, it seems to make sense to pick the game that is least impacted by it.

4. I find full ring to be much more relaxing and less stressful than short-handed. The marginal decisions that make short-handed so much fun and so interesting also lead to a fair amount of stress, at least for me. When I've played a session here and there of full ring, I'm breathtaken by how easy and relaxing it is by comparison. Part of that is that the game doesn't move as quickly, but also the abundance of multiway pots just greatly simplifies the post-flop decisions.

I'm absolutely glad I logged some time at 6max because it's unquestionably improved my play overall. I just think that for me personally, maybe full ring is a game that suits me a little better than short-handed.

I probably won't abandon short-handed play forever; it's still very nice for bonus-clearing. But whereas 95%+ of my hands since July have been short-handed, I'm inclined to adjust that to more like 60%-70% full ring from now on.

Re: full ring vs. 6-max
 

[ QUOTE ]
In Ed Miller's magazine column he suggests that anyone playing full ring games should drop down a limit and start playing the 6 max tables there . Has anyone tried this or have good stats/experience to compare these 2 kinds of games?

[/ QUOTE ]

Full ring is like cocaine and 6-max is like crack. I'm sure people have already provided some good links (you see, I'm grunching). My fear is that when I walk into a full-ring live game next week, it will be like a nice cup of coffee.

Re: full ring vs. 6-max
 

[ QUOTE ]
My thoughts on the subject.

[/ QUOTE ]

Deception's post above was the reason why I decided to try 6-max out. If you haven't read it and want to play 6-max - do it now!

Re: full ring vs. 6-max
 

To put it in a nutshell, SH games force you to play more, thus giving you more opportunity to outplay your opponents.

Deception, nice article...

Re: full ring vs. 6-max
 

I can play two tables of full ring at close to my highest level. After that my play starts slowly deteriorating because I don't have time to think out hands carefully and put my opponent on a narrow range of holdings. I often have action on another table or two at the same time and multiple decisions to make.

You play more hands at 6-max so that multi-table decision making cramps your ability a bit even at two tables.

Re: full ring vs. 6-max
 

Hey, welcome back!

Thanks for the complements all [img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img]

Re: full ring vs. 6-max
 

I think this is a great post btw jrz. It's funny when I tilt I go the other way, back to my natural laggish tendencies. Maybe that's why I prefer 6-max. There are some definite advantages to full ring though, it is definitely a lot less stressful - I've occasionally thought of switching back as well and have cleared a few bonuses at full over the past few months for a change of pace.

Re: full ring vs. 6-max
 

I am fully convinced and as evidenced by playing against miles last night, 6 max seems to be mostly an action junky almost pure luck game.

And I am the unluckiest player at it, which probably just means I suck.

Re: full ring vs. 6-max
 

After everything i've read the past few months I think, preferences aside, it boils down to this:

Six max is more profitable for good players. Some of us are not good players, and haven't yet realized it. I think the player skill continuum looks something like this:

- Awful
- Poor
- Mediocre
- Average
- Good
- Very Good
- Excellent
- BK/Schneids, etc.
- Supreme Poker Being

I think it breaks down such that Goods are winners at 1/2-2/4, VGs are winners at 3/6-5/10, Excels at 10/20-20/40, BKeids at 30/60+ (but not all levels), and SPBs at any level.

Once you reach Good, the full ring and 6max games are such that, combined with your talent, there's more profit to be had playing shorthanded.

I play full ring, b/c i'm a mediocre player.

Re: full ring vs. 6-max
 

[ QUOTE ]
I am fully convinced and as evidenced by playing against miles last night, 6 max seems to be mostly an action junky almost pure luck game.

And I am the unluckiest player at it, which probably just means I suck.

[/ QUOTE ]

it seems that way at first, it gets better once you get used to it more, and get comfortable in blindsteal, and defend situations

Re: full ring vs. 6-max
 

[ QUOTE ]
After everything i've read the past few months I think, preferences aside, it boils down to this:

Six max is more profitable for good players. Some of us are not good players, and haven't yet realized it. I think the player skill continuum looks something like this:

- Awful
- Poor
- Mediocre
- Average
- Good
- Very Good
- Excellent
- BK/Schneids, etc.
- Supreme Poker Being

I think it breaks down such that Goods are winners at 1/2-2/4, VGs are winners at 3/6-5/10, Excels at 10/20-20/40, BKeids at 30/60+ (but not all levels), and SPBs at any level.

Once you reach Good, the full ring and 6max games are such that, combined with your talent, there's more profit to be had playing shorthanded.

I play full ring, b/c i'm a mediocre player.

[/ QUOTE ]

During a bad run of cards 6 max can make you feel stupid in ways that full ring rarely, if ever, does. You tend to play more marginal cards in the blinds and late position. And you often need to call down against aggressive or crazy opponents with the thinnest of value. So when cards are missing you, you don't just sit quietly and stay out of trouble as you do in full ring, you get in, mix it up and find yourself in the middle of strange pots with nowhere near the quality of cards you're used to having.

Re: full ring vs. 6-max
 

My biggest problem in 6 max is leaving pot odds behind in the face of reads on opponents.

I think it needs to be done on occassion, but I think it explains a lot of my problems. In full ring, I have absolutely no problem dumping a hand on the flop if the pot is small and I didn't hit.

In 6-max, I'm subject to raise this same pot, simply because the preflop action is going to be a lot looser, and there's a good chance that my opponent has even less than I do.

However, I'm terrible at knowing when I should fold and when I should stay. And as many hands as I'm involved with short-handed, bad judgement can kill you quickly.

Re: full ring vs. 6-max
 

[ QUOTE ]
I am fully convinced and as evidenced by playing against miles last night, 6 max seems to be mostly an action junky almost pure luck game.

And I am the unluckiest player at it, which probably just means I suck.


[/ QUOTE ]

If you are who I think you are, I played against you. I thought you were too aggressive in the wrong spots. You called down a couple times with small pp's when I showed aggression with overcards falling. It may seem like it's luck, or laggy, but you have to pick your spots, and reads are highly important. Keep playing and gl.

edit: read the small stakes short forum, lots of goot stuff in there.