|
TonyB73
|
05-09-2008, 02:32 PM
Post subject: FR v 6-max
|
#1 (permalink)
|
|
Flush
Join Date: Mar 2008
Posts: 414
|
|
Sorry folks, I'm sure this has been covered before, probably lots of times, but I have just had a bit of a look and can't find it so I thought I would just ask.
So I've been playing 2NL and 5NL FR for a couple of months now, one table at a time, and am doing OK. BR has tripled, BB/100 is very good and I'm hoping to make BR for 10NL in another few thousand hands or so.
Problem is that FR is a bit slow, especially with only one table. I could multitable, and did for a while, but found it difficult to get decent reads on players and as a result I was spewing too much. I think I would prefer to play one table until I actually work out how to play this game properly, and I figure 6-max might be a fun way to speed up and still keep working on my reading skills.
Is there any reason a noob like me shouldn't play 6-max?
|
|
|
Play for FREE and practice your game at...
Join the FTR Poker Forum to disable these banners and start posting!
|
|
Erpel
|
|
Full House
Join Date: Mar 2008
Posts: 605
|
|
I'm still very much a beginner and very much learning, but here are my thoughts on what it's good to do when trying to learn poker:
- Play only one table
Play deepest possible stacks
Play fewest possible opponents
Play loose
Play only one table:
You're obviously onto this already, but thought I'd list it in the interest of completeness. Learning the skills of poker require some concentration, and if your mind is split between different tables you will learn the skills worse. This goes for both odds calculations and hand reading - both things we beginners should focus on spending our concentration on instead of winning money. I have at times played multiple tables out of boredom (stupid), to clear a bonus (stupid when I'm losing at the tables) or to desensitize myself to PF high-card monster holdings (not so stupid - you need to see aces get cracked a lot of times before you intuitively understand the true value and weaknesses of the hand).
Deep stacks, few opponents and loose are all facets of the same thing:
It's very true to say that if you play an effective short stack strategy and you play tight you can be a winning player very quickly - but if you are looking to learn as much about poker as you can, I don't think you are doing yourself any favours by doing that. You play as few hands as possible - this can't be good. You do your best to play as few streets as possible - this can't be good for development either. If you set out to play deep stacks and few opponents you are choosing a game where the correct play sees you playing a lot more hands and a lot more marginal hands for more streets. This affords you many more opportunities for learning. Choosing to learn a loose strategy is an extension of this concept, but it's worth mentioning also because of this: When you get better you need to be able to adjust, change gears, mix it up etc.. but if a working loose strategy is not in your toolbox you will be limited in how much you can adjust. Learning tight play is not the biggest challenge, and can probably be learned on the side while learning a loose strategy.
Right now my normal game is 10NL where I have played FR up to four tables and 6-max up to 2 - but my preferred game is easily a single 6-max table. I normally play tight, until I find the table is just too weak tight at which time I continue to play tight except that I steal with ATC when the situation suggests it might work.
My alternate 'learning' game right now is 2NL where I buy in for 250bb and run amok playing loose. I get involved in a lot more hands and I learn a lot more about turn and river actions here.
|
|
|
|
Erpel
|
|
Full House
Join Date: Mar 2008
Posts: 605
|
|
Btw, it is no coincidence and certainly not wrong that a lot of experienced players recommend anyone starting poker to play tight. Playing tight is correct more often, and you put less of your money at stake less often leading to a more benign variance.
The point of my post is to consider what you would do if you want to maximise your learning opportunities regardless of cost.
|
|
|
|
TonyB73
|
|
Flush
Join Date: Mar 2008
Posts: 414
|
|
Thanks for the response Erpel.
So in a nutshell, your suggestion is to play deep stacked, few opponents and loose, which would clearly mean 6-max over FR. Your logic certainly seems to make sense to me. I actually think my 'natural' game would be suited to 6-max too - I'm lifetime 21/15/6, which I think is a touch looser than true TAG at FR?
Maybe a good approach for me would be to mix up the two, trying to play something like 18/14 at FR and something like 25/18 at 6-max. That might help me to develop both a tight game and a loose game, and to also learn the differences between shorthanded and longhanded play.
|
|
|
|
Fnord
|
|
Moderator
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: I'll Do You Like A Truck
Posts: 19,333
|
|
Learn 6 max ASAP.
2 tables is fine. 1 tables has too much downtime even for a crazy lagg like me.
|
|
|
|
grnydrowave2
|
|
Full House
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Showin' mah Pokemans
Posts: 651
|
|
Perhaps this is counterintuitive, but I never fully appreciated the importance of position until I switched to 6-max.
|
|
<SrslySirius> Hal Lubarsky, my nemesis.
<SaltLick> are you seriously losing to a blind guy
|
|
wesrman
|
|
Full House
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Leaf Nation
Posts: 654
|
|
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Fnord
Learn 6 max ASAP.
2 tables is fine. 1 tables has too much downtime even for a crazy lagg like me.
|
I play both. That way i can pick and choose the best tables without having to wait much, and i learn how to change up my game based on how many people are at the table.
I also agree about playing 2 tables at once so you dont get bored and try to press the action too much.
GLGL.
|
|
|
|
BigBadBull
|
|
3-of-a-Kind
Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 103
|
|
fwiw the gap between your prflp raise and vpip should be as small as posible. The bigger the gap the "weaker" the style(basically means youre limping too much). smaller gap= indicates a more agressive style.
I ran probably around the stats you are running when i started and the biggest improvement Ive made was to tighten up and play 16/14 or 14/12fr. Then when ive got the basics down and grinded a good bankroll I started experimenting with lose play.
since I play mostly 6max offcourse im going to tell you go play 6max over fr, but that does not mean that Im right. I would jsust look for whatever suits my wants and needs and play style or experiment with both and find out whats bets for you that way.
shorthanded is generally more agressive, more play involved. Ive always been complaining that there is no post flop play in full ring, so if you play 6max you might get a better feel for later street play since you'll be experiencing it more often. Obviously its faster then FR too with less people. But full ring at the same time is less vrience(however for me its the other way around, so again, it depends on your style)
|
|
|
|
donnybaker
|
|
Straight
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: not playing much
Posts: 154
|
|
I like 6-max, playing it's made me a much better player. I've read that the fewer players there are the greater the edge a skilled player has over the less skilled one. You play more hands but you're playing much more post flop poker and less preflop starting hand selection.
|
|
|
English
Deutsch
Español
Français
Italiano
Nederlands
Pусский
Svenska
05-26-2012, 03:08 PM Australia Legalized Online Poker coming up in next 6 to 12 Months
Linear Mode
