Printable View
Which is better? I am aware it is all up to personal preference and your type of game, but do you think it is easier to make more on 6 Max (stakes around 1/2)? What are the advantages and disadvantages of each?
I play full ring and have only tried 6 Max a few times. Why does it seem that many of the top online players seem to play 6 Max?
This question may be addressed elsewhere, but I couldn't find any discussions on it.
More hands/hour, more maniacs, more money.
Top online players play 6max because their postflop edge is maximized in shorthanded and HU play against worse players and the player base is smaller and smaller the higher you go so there aren't many full tables in high stakes usually.
I play 6 max and I find it more fun because the hands go faster and you can open up your game more. The main reason people play 6max, though, is they feel that they can maximize their $/hour by playing it. I wouldn't hesitate to change back to full ring where I learned how to play NL hold'em if I thought I would earn more there.
EDIT: I don't know how this got double posted, my bad.
Remember that in full ring, especially at medium stakes 200nl/400nl/600nl you are playing against a lot of campers (especially on stars where you seem to play the majority of your poker)
One of the things i find about stars is that when you tart opening the pot with non-standard hands you take the nits to pwnsville because they never suspect you of opening with 23s or watnot.
But certainly, a better player has a bigger edge in 6max, so if you are a comfy winner at full ring consider the move.
There is no reason not to play both. I do so frequently. I switch between full and 6max or even play both at the same time. Lately I have been playing full, but when the mood strikes me I will play 6max.
Also, depends on your game -- I find mine is better suited at full ring --- but I do make okay money playing 6max.
I find lots of bad loose players at 6-max. It seems shitty players are drawn to the game with less people, I guess they figure there's less guys to beat them. Sidenote: Try opening up a HU table at lower stakes and see how many crap players sit with you.
Full ring is better if you're more comfortable with steady camping. Players in full ring are easier to plush around. I like 6-max thought because for the most part they're just idiots. Of course I'll be singing a different tune the more I move up in stakes but as far as I'm concerned 6-max is quicker money.
For me, I have had more success at 50NL (FT) playing full ring rather than 6max.
6max is MUCH more aggressive, faster-paced game. People say the hourly rate is greater, but can easily 2-table full ring playing ~25% of hands (i.e., not a nit) while I have to really focus at 6max (lack of experience?). The variance is much greater in 6max simply because you will playing bigger pots for TP hands.
I don't think the players (at least at 50NL) are better or worse, but they are bad in different ways. Ring players (even the "good ones") are easier to read (i.e, if they raise you they have a hand).
Ring can be frustrating because it can be hard to get paid when you have a premium hand pre-flop. I find my sessions are usually long runs of small pots slowing building my stack, punctuated by the occasionally stack-off (one way or the other). Pots are rarely re-raised PF, in fact there are very few non-first-in raises.
At 6-max you need to be more aware of your image than at full ring I think. Also, you have to start finding ways to keep afloat between your monsters.
I went back tp play some full ring the other night and all the camper nits made me laugh. Honestly I found it a little boring. 6max has really helped with my read based plays dramatically.
Try playing HU games, it does wonders.Quote:
Originally Posted by Kits
I was thinking about that the other day. Might give them a go in the new year.......Quote:
Originally Posted by Galapogos