[squiffy]

Actually, a small side point. What I really find fascinating is that both you and daryn extol the virtues of playing shorthanded. And you seem to be making tons of money at it.

I would think, though perhaps I am wrong, that players with your level of ability would do as well or better at some kind of no limit or pot limit table.

Any thoughts on this.

I have some theories. But am not sure about it.

At a short-handed table, if you can find a fish, it is much much easier for you to profit from the fish. With a 10-handed table, even if you spot the fish, it will be harder to isolate and dominate him or her.

At a 6 handed table, if you are playing against a fish, it will be much easier for you to spot him. And you will be much more likely to be in a hand against him or her.

On the other hand. At a short handed table, you won't make as much money from straights and flushes if it is harder to get odds to draw.

At a short handed table, if you are all playing a higher percentage of hands against one another, and if you have more skill, you have more opportunities to outplay an individual fish.

But you would think at no limit 10 person table, a talented player could make even more money. Because now you have 10 people. So the chances of finding one or two fish is higher.

And when you are heads up against a fish, you can not only out play him, but force him to make statistically HUGE MISTAKES.

I suppose you could also say that with a short handed limit game, your opponent's ego may come into play. He will get a lot more frustrated and keep trying to beat you and keep dropping money.

But you could say the same for no limit. You go all in with the nuts and dare your weaker opponent to call you. Still a battle of egos.

So how come I hear so much talk about short-handed middle limits and so little talk about no limit?????????????????????