6-max or full table?

[bweiser8311962]

Since I've been playing on Pokerstars - about a week - I've stuck exclusively to the 6-player tables. I have a friend who has won a ton of money at 6-max tables (and tournaments) and I thought I'd give it a try. I've found I like it, though I find myself having to switch tables regularly because of people dropping off.

So I'm wondering: Why do you like 6-max, or full? Since I can't put my explanation into words yet - other than success - I'm wondering what people see as the advantages and disadvantages.

Good luck on the tables.

[Allinlife]

please use the search function

[bweiser8311962]

[ QUOTE ]
please use the search function

[/ QUOTE ]

thank you for your well-thought response.

[Sephus]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
please use the search function

[/ QUOTE ]

thank you for your well-thought response.

[/ QUOTE ]

people don't want to discuss the same things over and over and over and over.

[Bob Moss]

6 max is the [censored]. Playing 2 tables at a time, it's never too long between hands I can play. I feel like to get a reasonable number of hands to play per hour, you'd have to play 4 full tables or something, and then you'd have no chance at having reasonable reads.

B

[Cased Heel]

More action/less boring.

Easier to label opponents and remember.

Easier to spot patterns.

Easier to blind steal.

More intimate for trash talking (And I love trash-talking) [img]/images/graemlins/laugh.gif[/img]

[TheWorstPlayer]

6max is neat.

6-max gives more action because you can play more hands, but you pretty much nickel and dime most of the time. full ring games are slower but you tend to win bigger pots when you do catch a hand.

[TheWorstPlayer]

Is that true? What evidence do you have?

[nietzreznor]

I play the 6-max on stars as well, it seems like most of the maniacs and calling stations have found there way to 6-max as well, while the full ring games usually seem populated with weak-tighties.