|
|
|||||||
| View Poll Results: Which is tougher? | |||
| 10,000 or more hands of breakeven poker |
   
|
45 | 44.55% |
| Vicious downswing up to 100 BB in 300 hands or less |
  
|
56 | 55.45% |
| Voters: 101. You may not vote on this poll | |||
 |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
|
#1
07-21-2005, 03:33 PM
|
|||
|
|||
6-max vs Full Table
|
|
#2
07-21-2005, 04:01 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: 6-max vs Full Table
i guess i am not the only one who voted for full table, full table, then 6-max.
kind of weird that 6-max is easier to beat, yet i wouldn't recommend people starting out there.
|
|
#4
07-21-2005, 04:47 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: 6-max vs Full Table
IMO, a newbie is better off starting off at a full table and playing tighter than 6-max requires. Once you have a good feel for the game move to 6-max because it is more profitable if you are a decent player.
|
|
#5
07-21-2005, 04:52 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: 6-max vs Full Table
full table for the win
such...cheap...big hands! I used to hate the loose passive 10 max games until I got a decent strategy together I can win in 6 max in microstakes too but 10 is just a joke and there's less variance
|
|
|
|
Linear Mode
