Convince me to play 6-max

[Ghazban]

I mostly play full ring NL but 6-max seems to be far more popular (based solely on the 3:1 or greater ratio of 6-max to full ring tables on Party where I do most of my playing). Give me some good reasons to change.

[jkkkk]

I started playing them about a month ago, have only played them mostly at the $25 level and a little at the $50 level but you see much more stupid play. It also allows you to get deep and dominate inferior players with superior post-flop play more often.

Its quite lucrative, give it a try.

[passion]

(1) It is more fun because you can play looser and more aggresively

(2) You can play more hands (4-tabling around 300 per hour if things are moving well).

(3) It is easier to dominate a table. The large field offers weak players protection in full ring.

It is more profitable for reasons (2) and (3).

Passion

[xorbie]

[ QUOTE ]
I mostly play full ring NL but 6-max seems to be far more popular (based solely on the 3:1 or greater ratio of 6-max to full ring tables on Party where I do most of my playing). Give me some good reasons to change.

[/ QUOTE ]

IMO, this depends a lot on whether or not you are an "image player." In full ring, people tend to make less heroic calls against you, so I lay way more tight and passive. In 6 max I can play really loosely preflop and this is usually enough to gaurantee getting 100BB stacks in with TPTK and being good.

[Tuben]

I think it is to fast. Mean i can play alot looser so i "raise", "Raise" evryhand almost think it becomes to much.
And the [censored] BB comes so fast. And it can be werry tough to play .

But well i almost only played 6max before but know i play mostly full ring.

Guess a told you some things you dint want to hear well i am sick.

[Rockatansky]

Also, I think a wider variety of styles can be profitable at 6-max.

[Ghazban]

I think my post was misleading...

I have played 6-max before (have about 12K hands in PT of Party's 1/2 6-max game, as well as lower stakes) but find full ring to be more comfortable. I can comfortably play 4 tables of full ring without missing reads but, with 6-max, I get stressed at 3 and am only comfortable with 2. As a result, I actually get fewer hands/hour total playing 6-max and find myself in far more marginally +EV situations. I also have trouble getting the correct balance of tightness and aggression necessary for a 6-handed table. I'm probably at my best 3- or 4-handed, then 10-handed, then headup, then 6-handed.

I don't believe in always staying in my comfort zone so I'm thinking maybe I should give 6-max another shot and learn to cope with the things about it that make me uncomfortable in the hopes that that will improve my overall poker ability.

[noggindoc]

It is definitely more fun. More hands, more dopamine, more excitement. More variance though, if you hate variance you might not like it as much.

[djoyce003]

I like it because there is more action, you get to play more hands, and there are more marginal decisions. The good player is typically better at the marginal decisions than the bad player, thus making this extremely profitable long term.

6 max is all I really play, I have yet to sit at a full ring table.

[unlucky513]

i've been reading your hand posts for a few months now, and i think you'd need to loosen up quite a bit for 6 max.. but you seem to be a smart guy and i think you probably could come to this conclusion on your own.