6max vs full table?

[Rosie5]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
6 max is so awful for NL, IMO (at least in smaller stakes)



[/ QUOTE ]

Spoken like one who has never played 6 max in SSNL.

[/ QUOTE ]

I have and It's even more boring than full ring to me. I don't see how you could read my post and think I've never played it--You make it sound like only a few of the most daring people have tried it

I think my hourly rate is even higher for SSNL 6 max. But my scientific analysis concluded years ago that it is excessively gay.

I shouldn't have said it's awful I should say that I really dislike playing it [img]/images/graemlins/cool.gif[/img]

[ QUOTE ]
I remember someone here saying that 6 max Small Stakes NL games are the ones with the least variance and the best BB/100 possibilty.

Is this true?

[/ QUOTE ]

I think it's incorrect on both accounts, you have far less tough decisions in full ring and while your hourly rate may be higher in 6 max--the BB/100 will be higher for full usually.

I don't have any evidence to back this up except my own data which no one cares about, plus and this seems to be the general opinion of most 2+2ers.

[bobbyi]

[ QUOTE ]
I 4-table and it can get kinda frenetic, though.

[/ QUOTE ]
Stop 4-tabling then. Right now, whenever I find a soft 10/20 game, you come and sit down and ruin it [img]/images/graemlins/wink.gif[/img].