Going back from 6max to full

[baronzeus]

yesterday i tried to play some full because SH is beginning to drag. to compensate for the slower play i played 10 tables. too bad even 10 tables of full is like watching paint dry.

[lighterjobs]

the only time i play omaha online i play 6-max but when i play lhe i play full ring. i don't feel comfortable reversing them for some reason.

[bobbyi]

[ QUOTE ]
I'm trying to play full games again

[/ QUOTE ]
Why?

[kurosh]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I'm trying to play full games again

[/ QUOTE ]
Why?

[/ QUOTE ]I figure there might be a time where I might have to play in a full game.

[lefty rosen]

Online full is for people who are afraid to play any hand worse than 99(Or so it seems at most sites these days). I love full players when a table goes to short, its fold, fold oh my god he raised under the gun leave the table............ [img]/images/graemlins/grin.gif[/img] [img]/images/graemlins/blush.gif[/img]

[naphand]

Poker is about playing profitable games.

The SH turnips would have you believe there are no profitable full games. They are wearing blinkers. If you cannot beat BOTH games for a good clip, then your game is incomplete.

Your SH experience will make you a much stronger player in full games. Once you have re-established your full credentials your SH game will ALSO be stronger.

Much advice on the SH forum is for LAGtards who do not bother reading opponents and vary their play accordingly. Certainly you can get away with non-reading a lot more in SH games, and certainly it is easier to quickly classify players SH but that does not mean the advice in HUSH is always correct; frequently it is applicable only to specific game-types (and most do not know what the difference means). SH games vary A LOT, some would have you believe otherwise. Some would have you believe 30/20 is optimum for everyone and every game.

In full games I would suggest you think on these notions:
(1) Respect raises more, unless you have a specific read.
(2) Turn CR are much more likely to mean the business.
(3) 3-bet with caution when holding less than the nuts.
(4) TP is frequently not good enough to a Turn/River raise.
(5) Steal those blinds.
(6) AQ is not a big hand to a PF 3-bet.
(7) Be willing to fold a LOT of hands (post-Flop) you would normally want to SD in SH games.
(8) Make sure you are fully aware of the odds - take into account some unlikely hands/draws against you. This is a very important area and deserves close attention/revisiting.
(9) Games are MUCH better when you have position on the worst players.

Nothing else really stands out - table selection etc.

[brettbrettr]

I think there's good in some of what you said but:

[ QUOTE ]
(3) 3-bet with caution when holding less than the nuts.

[/ QUOTE ]

Eh.

[ QUOTE ]
(6) AQ is not a big hand to a PF 3-bet.

[/ QUOTE ]

This is the understatement of the day. I'm not sure whether you should say that AQ is not a big hand against a raise (which isn't great) or AQ is complete and utter garbage to a 3-bet (which is prob closer).

[naphand]

[ QUOTE ]
(3) 3-bet with caution when holding less than the nuts.

[/ QUOTE ]

The word here is caution. I say nothing about not 3-betting at the right times. 3-betting in SH is very run-of-the-mill and pretty much automatic in many spots. This is not so in full, comparatively speaking (at least in the $5/$10 games I see). Many spots where a 3-bet is auto in SH need more consideration in full: what type of player is raising you? There are a bunch of micro-AF players who will only raise with very big hands and a 3-bet is always capped. There are also players smart enough to exploit more aggressive play (when over-used, which is easy coming from SH).

EDIT: Perhaps less than the nuts is overdoing it a bit, but I was trying to convey the comparative experience I have had returning to full games. SH people raise with all sorts - so you need to 3-bet liberally.


[ QUOTE ]
(6) AQ is not a big hand to a PF 3-bet.

[/ QUOTE ]

Indeed, I was deliberately under-stating this in an attempt to be ironic. There are some good sarcasm meters about on the forum, you may be able to get hold of one and tweak it for irony as well... [img]/images/graemlins/grin.gif[/img]

[B Dids]

[ QUOTE ]
Much advice on the SH forum is for LAGtards who do not bother reading opponents and vary their play accordingly. Certainly you can get away with non-reading a lot more in SH games,

[/ QUOTE ]

Umm... no?

Reads are a lot more important the more SH pots you're going to play. Some of the advice in HUSH tends to be lousy and too agressive, but I think your statement is WAY off base.

It isn't that rings games are more profitable, it's that short handed games are just MORE FUN TO PLAY.

In a SH game I can exploit the bad players easier, I get in more hands vs. bad players, and I don't get bored with the pace of play.

[QTip]

[ QUOTE ]
(9) Games are MUCH better when you have position on the worst players.

[/ QUOTE ]

I'm one who prefers a full table. To each his own. I like the relaxed pace...has nothing to do with not willing to get my hands dirty with marginal holdings.

At any rate, #9 on your list here was the biggest thing I noticed when I played short handed for a couple weeks a little while ago. I loved the fact that you can mingle with the fish or 2 a lot more and your seat didn't have nearly as drastic an impact as it did in a full game.