#11
|
|||
|
|||
Re: Party 3/6 changing?
[ QUOTE ]
[/ QUOTE ]I'm thinking of making the jump to 3/6 6 max, but losing 600 in a session will be the norm. There's no way I'd lose that much in a 3-6 game whether it be 6-max, full or otherwise. |
#12
|
|||
|
|||
Re: Party 3/6 changing?
Like the other posters, I think the short-handed 6 player games are where the money is to be secured; at least at 2/4 or 3/6 limits. I started playing online in 2000 and in retrospect I remember the full-table games at Paradise being substantially looser (I was still a loser at that time in my poker career). Also, I remember the full-table games at Pokerstars (.25/.5 through 3/6) averaging at least 1 big bet greater per game at many limits. On the very low levels (.25/.50) it was common to see the list filled with $4 dollar average pots and now they are a rarity.
I rarely play a full table (except NL) and instead focus exclusively on 6 handed games at Party and Pokerstars. They require a different set of skills and the section in HFAP (on short handed play) is very applicable. A cursory examination is not enough, however, IMHO. Creativity, aggression, profiling (and not a dry statistical analysis), and deception are all very important to a winning player. Also, the cards you play and in what position are radically altered from the 9 and 10 player games. I can't pretend to be an expert; just a winning low limit short-handed player (and I do not use any external aids like Pokertracker, PA HUD, Pokerstat, Poker Prophecy). I do use the built-in notes feature and take relatively detailed notes on the most salient traits of many opponents (and find this helpful). I think the action-oriented players have left the full-table games and that's a huge factor in the destruction of the loose 9-10 handed game. Not much time expires between each hand and you don't have to wait all day for a playable hand, which explains why the 'crack addict' compulsive types make these games so lucrative. Good luck, JeffreyREBT "Wherein I don't promise to make you rich without trying, or even trying very hard; I do promise to say things that will make you FEEL rich." |
#13
|
|||
|
|||
Re: Party 3/6 changing?
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] [/ QUOTE ]I'm thinking of making the jump to 3/6 6 max, but losing 600 in a session will be the norm. There's no way I'd lose that much in a 3-6 game whether it be 6-max, full or otherwise. [/ QUOTE ] That's only 100BB. If you play alot and NEVER go on a 100BB downswing, you should probably be playing 5/10 or 10/20 |
#14
|
|||
|
|||
Re: Party 3/6 changing?
[ QUOTE ]
it feels as if Party's 3/6 game has become a lot more aggro. [/ QUOTE ] [ QUOTE ] I'm seeing quite a bit more...slow playing of hands [/ QUOTE ] amusing |
#15
|
|||
|
|||
Re: Party 3/6 changing?
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] [ QUOTE ] I was talking full. Should I delve into the world of short? [/ QUOTE ] apparently the 6 max games are making the full games dry up. 6 max is not for everyone. Higher variance, more skill, but can be extremely profitable. I'm thinking of making the jump to 3/6 6 max, but losing 600 in a session will be the norm. [/ QUOTE ] Meh, it happens but if it's happening a lot you need to look at your game. I wouldn't start at 3/6 6m either. Do at least 5-10K at 1/2 6m to get you're feet wet and compare your stats to other players to make sure you don't have any oceans leaking out of your game. [/ QUOTE ] if you are competent at 2-4 and 3-6 full there is no reason you cant go straight to 3-6 short. hell, back in the day we had to go straight to 5-10 short *gasp* from what i read on here the 3-6 full game is tougher than it was back then and the 3-6 short game is easier than 5-10 so you should be more than ready. |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|