Full Ring vs. 6-Max
 

I notice alot of people, seemingly more than not, take part in 6-max over full ring. I like the speed of 6-max but I have been playing full ring for about 6 months now using the normal Tight/Aggressive strategy and I'm afraid to give 6-max a try with it as the hands wont come often enough to overcome the blinds from my perspective.

I know this is a pretty broad topic, but in general -- what's the difference in terms of adjustments? Just widen your hand variety slightly?

Also, why do people tend to enjoy 6-max more? Moreso for clearing bonuses it seems.

Re: Full Ring vs. 6-Max
 

Glad you brought this up. When I first started playing poker I thought 6-max was a great idea. It ensured more action, by virtue of being required to play more hands (not in terms of larger pots, per se). However, the variance is an absolute b*tch. I find myself, much more prone to tilt, when it's shorthanded as opposed to full ring...not sure why this is, but I think it has to do with the variance swings (easier to get pissed about one guy consistently cracking you when it's SH...less likely full ring).

Plus, I think more money is to be had playing full ring. Not even considering the variance, when you can build pots with your monsters by virtue of getting more callers full ring, your monsters are more +EV with full ring.

In short, without an adequate bankroll, playing 6-max can make you go broke pretty quick.

Just my two cents...

Re: Full Ring vs. 6-Max
 

[ QUOTE ]
I know this is a pretty broad topic, but in general -- what's the difference in terms of adjustments? Just widen your hand variety slightly?

[/ QUOTE ]
When I was really looking into it a while ago, the best advice seemed to be play it like 10 handed, where UTG in 6-max is the equivalent of MP2 in fullring with everybody in front of you folding.

So you play a wider variety of hands, and raise on a more regular basis.

Re: Full Ring vs. 6-Max
 

Ive been playing full ring for quite a while. Ive always played pretty tight so I didnt think 6 max would be good for me since the blinds would eat me up.

Over the past 6 months Ive been slowing turning slightly more LAGgy out of neccesity of moving up in stakes.

When I got up to $5/$10NL I realized that it was going to be necessary to play 6 max because there are very few full tables at higher stakes.

So I moved back down to $1/$2 and started working on 6 max. I have to say that what Im seeing is nothing short of amazingly bad play.

Evernyone thinks they have top play more hands because of the blinds coming around faster, except that most people are already playing too many hands so now the people who might be at 28% VIP at full ring are at 45% at 6 max. They will play TP with no kicker os even middle pair like its the nuts.

There is much more bluffing and all kinds of other craziness. People are calling my 5BB raise with T7, J5, A2 and any number of other hands.

I get much much better and quicker reads since people are playing so many hands and getting past the flop alot more.

I expect the variance to be higher although so far my SD is only 35BB / 100 hands which is pretty normal for full ring and I expect is quite low for 6 max.

I have been resisting playing 6 max for a long time and I wish I had made the switch a long time ago. I n longer need to sit and wait for the one big hand to get my money in with. I can out play people instead of playing top hands and hoping I dont get outflopped. Im loving it so far and plan to move up after another 10K hands or so.

Re: Full Ring vs. 6-Max
 

[ QUOTE ]
I notice alot of people, seemingly more than not, take part in 6-max over full ring. I like the speed of 6-max but I have been playing full ring for about 6 months now using the normal Tight/Aggressive strategy and I'm afraid to give 6-max a try with it as the hands wont come often enough to overcome the blinds from my perspective.

I know this is a pretty broad topic, but in general -- what's the difference in terms of adjustments? Just widen your hand variety slightly?

Also, why do people tend to enjoy 6-max more? Moreso for clearing bonuses it seems.

[/ QUOTE ]

Playing 6 max is just more fun. Playing full ring is much more of a grind, whereas playing shorthanded offers the opportunity to not only play more hands, but also is much more stimulating post-flop. In addition, you maximize the time spent playing against bad players, which usually results in more profit. Finally, due to the nature of being forced to play more hands, these games often attract those players willing to gamboool, making them some of the juiciest games available.

peace

john nickle

Re: Full Ring vs. 6-Max
 

[ QUOTE ]
Glad you brought this up. When I first started playing poker I thought 6-max was a great idea. It ensured more action, by virtue of being required to play more hands (not in terms of larger pots, per se). However, the variance is an absolute b*tch. I find myself, much more prone to tilt, when it's shorthanded as opposed to full ring...not sure why this is, but I think it has to do with the variance swings (easier to get pissed about one guy consistently cracking you when it's SH...less likely full ring).

Plus, I think more money is to be had playing full ring. Not even considering the variance, when you can build pots with your monsters by virtue of getting more callers full ring, your monsters are more +EV with full ring.

In short, without an adequate bankroll, playing 6-max can make you go broke pretty quick.

Just my two cents...

[/ QUOTE ]

hmm,,, well, first of all, while the variance in these games is higher than full games, it doesnt speak to the profitibility of them. Ev in poker comes from spending time playing against bad players. Short handed games offer the most opportunity for this. Finally, while there are larger pots in full games, the point of poker is to win money, not large pots.

peace

john nickle

Re: Full Ring vs. 6-Max
 

i agree. short handed limit though scares the [censored] outta me. NL ring 6 max is the fun

Re: Full Ring vs. 6-Max
 

[ QUOTE ]
I didnt think 6 max would be good for me since the blinds would eat me up.

[/ QUOTE ]

[ QUOTE ]
Evernyone thinks they have top play more hands because of the blinds coming around faster

[/ QUOTE ]

the reason to play more hands and play aggro is not bc the blinds come faster. it is bc you have position on the butto and co so much more.

your observations about ppl playing foolishly is spot on tho. it why sh is so much fun.

Re: Full Ring vs. 6-Max
 

[ QUOTE ]
Plus, I think more money is to be had playing full ring.

[/ QUOTE ]

completely wrong. if there are 2 bad players at a fullring table you make a certain amount. if there are 2 bad players at a 6max table it should be obvious that you make more.

edit: extrapolate a little further. what is the most profitable form of poker? heads up with a bad player.

Re: Full Ring vs. 6-Max
 

[ QUOTE ]

So I moved back down to $1/$2 and started working on 6 max. I have to say that what Im seeing is nothing short of amazingly bad play.

Evernyone thinks they have top play more hands because of the blinds coming around faster, except that most people are already playing too many hands so now the people who might be at 28% VIP at full ring are at 45% at 6 max. They will play TP with no kicker os even middle pair like its the nuts.

There is much more bluffing and all kinds of other craziness. People are calling my 5BB raise with T7, J5, A2 and any number of other hands.


[/ QUOTE ]

How would compare the cash swings from full ring to six handed?

What type of bankroll do you suggest for 1/2?