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.