Question

I'm planning to make some changes in my play this summer.
I've been playing 25 NL 10max for over a year now and currently
running 14 BB/100 (20K sample size). PT labels me as a SLAP.
Last month I made 1400 winnings including bonuses.

My basic strategy is make a hand better than 2pr and get
paid for that. I try to minimize my losses with TPTK and not
go broke with overpairs or 2prs as well. It seems this strategy
has worked quite well according to winrate.

I have opened my games a little so nowadays I play 3-4 25NL
tables and 1 50 NL. Im going to make transition to 50NL
in next 6 months.

My question is this. Everybody in this forum seems to play
shorthanded 6max or so. I have tried that couple of times but
I dont feel quite comfortable with it. Is 6max much more profitable
than 10max?

I guess playing 6max is completely different with my strategy
at 25NL. Or could I play with my current strategy at 50-100NL
full ring and still be profitable? What is reasonable winrate at
50NL or 100NL? Is 10 BB/100 sustainable? I guess I cannot get
14 BB/100 as in 25 NL?

Stupid questions maybe but I would appreciate any comments from
you more experienced players at 50NL or 100NL.

t.

6-max is not more profitable than 10max, it has a higher variance. The swings are bigger because you are playing more hands.

the biggest advantage to short handed games is that you see more hands per hour. therefore, a skilled player will have more opportunites to make better decisions than his opponents and can accelerate his earnings. for this reason, it is much preferable to play shorthanded in a live setting when you have an obvious skill edge. however, because you can multi-table online, this is less of an issue since you can open as many tables and see as many hands per hour as you are humanly capable of.

therefore, play the game that is the most comfortable to you. for me, thats longhand. for whatever reason i am a losing player shorthanded (i become a maniac with the inevitable result of going broke).

Originally Posted by BankItPayette

6-max is not more profitable than 10max, it has a higher variance. The swings are bigger because you are playing more hands.

Ehh, I dont know how much I agree with this. In a vacuum it may not be more profitable, but I think in test it actually is. I currently play FR but am going to transition to 6max because it is more profitable. The play is softer than at fullring and you because it is shorthanded you play more hands against the fish. Yes, there are more swings, but there really is more money to be made at 6max. Just look at the tables running currently on any major site, there are many many more 6max tables than FR, this alone gives better game selection which increases profit and it is commonly accepted that comparatively the play at 6max is much softer than at FR.

One advantage of playing full ring is that the biggest mistake beginners make is playing too many hands. This mistake is especially lethal in full ring because it is more likely that someone has a monster. For this reason, the fish are playing too many hands for a full ring and you are more likely to get their whole stack. In a short handed game, the correct strategy is to see alot of flops and this lessens the mistake of playing too many hands as this is closer to optimal in 6-max. Fortunately, if you are a skilled player you can take advantage of the many post-flop weaknesses that beginners make. This is coupled with the fact that you are playing many more hands against the worst players.

Basically, which game is more profitable depends on your skill level and that of your opponents. In a FR it is more likely that several of the players will be less skilled and you can get their whole stack. In 6-max, you get to see more flops and use your superior post flop play to slay the newbies. Basically, it is different strokes for different folks...

FR is for nutcamping, 6max is real poker.. my opinion ofcourse

(little explanation: in FR you have 8 free hands per cycle, in 6max you have 4 - so in FR there is very little incentive to act. This would be completely different if there was, for example, an ante. Or in MTTs/SnGs, they raise the blinds to force you to act, a thing that is non-existant in FR. So this favors nutcamping. Another thing is that you have 9 opponents as opposed to 5, so the average hand you get is of less value - more people means higher chance someone got a good hand)

The play is softer than at fullring

I disagree with this. There is a higher proportion of good players at 6max, in my experience. This may amount to only one good player at the table in each (other than oneself, of course), but that means that 1/5 of your opponents are a threat rather than 1/9, and he's going to make a lot more plays like he does at full ring, where it's easier to avoid him.

To qualify this, I will add that if I am lucky enough to sit at a 6max table which DOESN'T have a shark on it, I am always delighted to accept that role myself. The best way to tell, in my experience, is to see how many pots are raised. If most are, I probably won't join that table. If most are limped, I am in like Flynn.

Originally Posted by jackvance

FR is for nutcamping, 6max is real poker.. my opinion ofcourse

(little explanation: in FR you have 8 free hands per cycle, in 6max you have 4 - so in FR there is very little incentive to act. This would be completely different if there was, for example, an ante. Or in MTTs/SnGs, they raise the blinds to force you to act, a thing that is non-existant in FR. So this favors nutcamping. Another thing is that you have 9 opponents as opposed to 5, so the average hand you get is of less value - more people means higher chance someone got a good hand)

I love taking nut campers money its so easy

It can't be easy.. you need to have a hand that beats their monster if you want to win any sort of money from them.

Originally Posted by jackvance

It can't be easy.. you need to have a hand that beats their monster if you want to win any sort of money from them.

You raise, they fold
You raise they fold
You raise they fold
You raise they fold
You raise, they reraise/call, you fold
You raise they fold
etc...


Of course, this relies on them being totally unaware but those guys are out there.

Originally Posted by BankItPayette

6-max is not more profitable than 10max, it has a higher variance.

To each his own, but once you move up past 100nl, the 6max games are MUCH softer than FR. The 100nl and below FR games are probably soft, but I'm pretty sure the respective 6max games are considerably softer.

Originally Posted by BankItPayette

The swings are bigger because you are playing more hands.

No, not true at all. The variance is greater in 6max because you are playing a wider range of hands and as a result faced with a lot more marginal decisions.

Originally Posted by Pelion

You raise, they fold
You raise they fold
You raise they fold
You raise they fold
You raise, they reraise/call, you fold
You raise they fold
etc...


Of course, this relies on them being totally unaware but those guys are out there.

In the example you gave there, you probably broke even. Btw, do you consider stealing their blinds to be 'taking their money'?

Originally Posted by BankItPayette

The swings are bigger because you are playing more hands.

No, not true at all. The variance is greater in 6max because you are playing a wider range of hands and as a result faced with a lot more marginal decisions.

i started to write this very exact thing, but then i realized he meant the same thing, ie, you are playing more hands (a wider range of hands), not a higher volume of hands

Originally Posted by jackvance

Originally Posted by Pelion

You raise, they fold
You raise they fold
You raise they fold
You raise they fold
You raise, they reraise/call, you fold
You raise they fold
etc...


Of course, this relies on them being totally unaware but those guys are out there.

In the example you gave there, you probably broke even.

Yes, but: if you extend that sequence so that it effectively is repeated a dozen times, eleven times it remains the same, and ONE time they play back at you, you re-raise them, get them all-in, and stack them with the one monster you do get. There you go - 60 hands and up a buyin against a weak tight Tag.

Oh, and you forgot the best bit (learned from my own bitter weak-tight experience) - they get so annoyed at you that they try to play Laggy back, completely fuck it up, choose the wrong times to get aggro and donk off three buyins in the space of 15 horrific minutes...

Originally Posted by biondino

Oh, and you forgot the best bit (learned from my own bitter weak-tight experience) - they get so annoyed at you that they try to play Laggy back, completely fuck it up, choose the wrong times to get aggro and donk off three buyins in the space of 15 horrific minutes...

Hell's yeah!

Originally Posted by biondino

Yes, but: if you extend that sequence so that it effectively is repeated a dozen times, eleven times it remains the same, and ONE time they play back at you, you re-raise them, get them all-in, and stack them with the one monster you do get. There you go - 60 hands and up a buyin against a weak tight Tag.

Dude, nice story but apart from that? I mean you just kinda assume you'll have a monster ready when they play back at you? lol..

Oh, and you forgot the best bit (learned from my own bitter weak-tight experience) - they get so annoyed at you that they try to play Laggy back, completely fuck it up, choose the wrong times to get aggro and donk off three buyins in the space of 15 horrific minutes...

As my whole game revolves around this, I know this all too well, with me being the Lagg who annoys the crap out of everyone - but I also know some people are impossible to get out of their nitty ways, no matter how much you rail on them. Today I had a total nit at the table (15/0 - yes he NEVER raises preflop) between me and a super-Lagg (50/25) and he paid me pennies. It was the crazy Lagg and the looser people that paid me good money.

Originally Posted by jackvance

Originally Posted by Pelion

You raise, they fold
You raise they fold
You raise they fold
You raise they fold
You raise, they reraise/call, you fold
You raise they fold
etc...


Of course, this relies on them being totally unaware but those guys are out there.

In the example you gave there, you probably broke even. Btw, do you consider stealing their blinds to be 'taking their money'?

I actually ment on the flop. The types of players you are talking about tend to be set hunters. Raise preflop and theyll call. Half pot the flop and theyll fold 9/10 times. Thats way more than breaking even. Not only that but sometimes when they hit the set you have something better and take a stack.

theres no real reason to fight the nits. its kinda like thinking that its super worthwhile to steal the blinds in cash games. find the loose passives, and enjoy. oh, and you can use them really effectively to run squeeze plays around. but generally, just let them be, they are harmless.

Originally Posted by bdawg56kg

Originally Posted by BankItPayette

6-max is not more profitable than 10max, it has a higher variance.

To each his own, but once you move up past 100nl, the 6max games are MUCH softer than FR. The 100nl and below FR games are probably soft, but I'm pretty sure the respective 6max games are considerably softer.

Originally Posted by BankItPayette

The swings are bigger because you are playing more hands.

No, not true at all. The variance is greater in 6max because you are playing a wider range of hands and as a result faced with a lot more marginal decisions.

I suppose I didn't explain myself too well. I was just trying to say that one form of poker is not more profitable than the other. 6-max can be more profitable. FR can be more profitable too. It all depends on the style of game you play.

And what's the difference between playing a wider range of hands vs. playing more hands?

Originally Posted by BankItPayette

And what's the difference between playing a wider range of hands vs. playing more hands?

Having more hands dealt per hr is way different than playing looser.