Starting hands for 6max

Maybe this would be a good sticky for dalecooper or smackinyaup to write:

What are good starting hands for 6max?

When it gets down to 4-6 people, I'm playing anything that fits in the classic Groups 1-7 and maybe then some. The number of competing hands is just so low...

Group 1: any two cards
Group 2: any two cards you found in your wallet (Blockbuster, Visa, library card)

Har har! Not really. But yes, the starting requirements are a lot looser and a lot more vague than in a full ring game. I don't consult a chart - a lot of it is based on feel more than anything. At a more passive table, you can play or raise with any two high cards (A-J), any pocket pair, and any suited connectors. Suited gappers are playable as well, as are some hands like AT, A9, KT, K9 in late position. At a more aggressive table it depends how much you want to mix it up. I like to often let others drive and try to snake their chips away with implied value hands - little pairs, suited connectors and gappers. With other people raising and betting hard, those hands are potentially devastating.

I think I wrote something up recently, but for me it's about like this:

raise from any seat: AA, KK, QQ, JJ, TT, 99, AKs, AKo, AQs, AQo, AJs, AJo, ATs, KQs, KQo.

may raise or call from any seat: all pocket pairs 22 through 88. All suited connectors from 78s to QJs. All suited gappers from T8s to KJs. QJo.

call or raise in late position only: suited connectors 45s through 67s, suited gappers 46s through 79s, Ax suited, ATs, ATo, A9s, A9o, A8s, A8o, KTs, KTo, K9s, K9o, K8s, Q9s.

On the "may raise" hands, I generally would prefer to limp or (even better) call someone else's raise with them, but I will raise at times for a change-up, or in late position to steal blinds; or I might min-raise to juice the pot if a lot of people are playing. That depends on position and table texture.

Small blind... a lot of people in 6max play any two in the small blind. I don't like to, it's a waste of money. You can complete with any of the above hands, and I add in some interesting (i.e. crappy) hands at times: any suited high card/low card combo like Kxs or Axs, some suited two gappers like J8 and T7. I am more likely to complete if there are fewer people playing. If everyone folded to me (somehow), I'll complete with anything or even raise anything and try to outplay the big blind player. If 4 people limped in and you're completing with J3o though, you're pissing money away.

My range of hands played doesn't change much from game to game, but I am more likely to raise at a passive table and more likely to limp or call a raise at an aggressive table. Passive tables give up a lot of small pots to the aggressor; aggressive/loose tables won't reward you constantly like that but will pay off in a big way when you hit a monster on the flop. So my starting requirements are about the same, but I play them somewhat differently.

I also must stress that this is what's working for me - it might not work for everybody. It's a pretty loose set of hands, and at times I even add in some stuff that really looks garbagy like 24 suited. I don't recommend this if you're not used to 6max. I have found some of these weird hands useful, for table image and for the occasional busting someone out, but it's not wise to think "OK, 34 suited is playable" and start playing it from any seat, all the time. If you're just getting into 6max I'd chop off some of the lower suited connectors and most of the gappers, and play a tighter, easier game for a while until you're comfortable.

Thanks, that's a great summary.
For my party these are mostly live home games, and I generally do well at them already. I was also curious since a couple people had posted online hand histories that got quick "fold preflop" responses from other posters. So I wondered if I was nuts or the loose opponents I have were leading me to terrible habits.

In our 4-6 players games I commonly will raise over the big blind by a BB or so, just to chase out trash that would just call the thing and hit on something crazy in the flop later.

I debate the SB position a lot too, and I'm trying to cut down on calling the BB from there. You end up in lousy position with questionable cards making the "bluff or fold" decision too much.

thank again

Originally Posted by dalecooper

It's a pretty loose set of hands, and at times I even add in some stuff that really looks garbagy like 24 suited.

I knew I'd teach you something.



6 Max is all about manipulation. I will come into a table and raise some crap, take a big pot, and then kinda wait for a monster, so when I raise it...

I like the overbet on the river move too with a solid hand.

When you play lower PP like 55, is this a limp to set situation or will you actually go to showdown with it at times?

OK. Here is my long post of the day. I'm not going to give any hand charts, because I don't follow any myself. This will be a vague post, so apply it to your own games as necessary. Just remember that the main way to learn when to play what is by experience and getting a feel for the games yourself.




A lot of the hands I decide to play in 6max depend on the table. It depends on how many people are sitting at the table, how those people play, how many have limped in, and your position. The difference between one person in front of me limping or folding preflop can change whether I fold a certain hand or come in with a raise with that same hand.

If there has been a raise before me, my hand selection changes a lot. Unless I have AA, AK, QQ, KK, or JJ I give up on high card strength because its hard telling what you are up against. AT, AQ, KJ all get mucked. Instead, I play sneaky hands like 44, 67s, 88, TJs that rarely hit, but have big pot potential and set potential.

I am considering dropping the small suited connectors however because calling a 4x BB raise with them every time isn't paying off. Its hard to hit anything with them, and even if you do, its pretty easy to move the preflop raiser off of his hand unless he has AA-QQ. I feel lucky to hit 2 pair or better with SC's one time out of ten, and paying 40xBB after ten times doesn't work too well. This is still something I am working on myself, so play those how you see fit.

I do not limp preflop too often. If I come in, its usually for a raise unless its a PP or small SC. KJo, KQo, ATo and the like all get raised from any position. In late position, it depends on the players. I'll raise all kinds of crap like A7s down to 79s if there are tightasses or only a lonely limper in the pot. With the blinds coming around so often, I like to steal to keep up until I win a big pot. In shorthanded games, there are usually fewer people entering the pot, and if you simply limp, it doesnt establish anything postflop. Coming in with a raise narrows it down to 1 or 2 opponents (if any) and gives you another way to win the pot besides hitting a hand. With only 6 hands being dealt, and only 2 or 3 people seeing the pot, the chances of someone having a big hand fall compared to full ring. By raising preflop, you keep them guessing while you steal the pot.

Small blind play is opponent dependent for me. If there are a lot of loose limpers/calling stations in the pot, I will tighten up on my raising hands because all it does is make a bigger pot for you in bad position. I complete it with a wide range of suited hands, PPs, SCs, suited gappers, and unsuited connectors when there are 3+ people in the pot. Usually the crap hands hit nothing, so I think some tightening up could do some good there as well. If nobody has entered the pot, and its down to me and the BB, I either raise or fold. If its just me and the BB, he will never get a free chance to outflop me. Any PP, Ace, suited king, 2 face cards, and SCs get a raise in this spot.

Most of the players at small stakes games will notice how much you raise preflop and will get sick of you always raising. Postflop is also mostly limited to betting, raising, or folding. Sometimes, every oponent at the table will feel like they are being singled out by you because you raise them so often. They will then assume that your postflop play is bullshit as well when actually postflop is where you play TAG poker and bust them. When you hit a real hand, throw out the usual continuation bet, and run into someone who has finally decided to stand up against you, its payday.



All of this depends on knowing your opponents. If they call my continuation bets any time they have an ace high or hold an underpair, then I play tighter, raise less preflop, and wait longer for hands. Against tight opponents, you'll see my dirty little hands in every pot either betting or raising.


As for lower PPs like 55, I play these only for set value. I rarely cold call in shorthanded games. Sometimes I will of course, but this is also opponent dependent and only for small pots.


I know its frustrating hearing the word "dependent" so much, but as someone on here once said, that uncertainty is what makes this a profitable game for us.



-EDIT - This strategy applies best against tight players. When playing in extra fishy loose games, you need to play more ABC poker. Many times, your games will be a mix between loose and tight players so you will need to change your game up every hand depending on who is in the pot with you. This is common knowledge, but I don't want people to waste a lot of money bluffing into calling stations after reading this. I waste enough money doing that myself.

don't know if I can even add to what's been said already, but short hand NL will teach you that hold'em is a post flop game. I'm raising stuff like J7s with position.

I have weak-tights in one of the cash games I go to, and it just baffles them how I can play such weak hands and not lose all my money. It's very common for new players to under rate many hands that are good in short hand.

the trick to playing bad hands: Value bet, value bet, value bet!! keep the fish in the pot, they'll call simply because they are annoyed you play such weak hands and will try to "beat" you with AQ

i would just like to point out that in Smackin's reply to this post, the phrase 'depend' appeared 8 times. take that for what it's worth: 6Max is a tricky, shifty beast and you have to pay attention more to trends than to starting hand charts.

the only thing i would add to dale's post about charts is that there is a group 3: random hands. pick two of them to start out with, lately i have been going with 10/4 offsuit and a6, and raising them each and every time you get them, independent of stack size, position, etc. (of course don't raise when it's already been raised 4 times in front of you). the point is to force yourself into using aggression to your advantage even when you don't have shit for cards. it's fun once you try it, and you won't get any better until you learn how important it is.

wow this has really helped me. I think i have only played a 1000 hands playing more like you described then playing tight. My pokertracker stats for these last 1000 hands is 30 BB/100 hands i know this isnt realistic to keep up but i think it is a really good start. ( im just playing 25 dollar NL though)

Everything on the button. Top 20 utg. Top 60-80 everywhere else.

Originally Posted by EricE

When you play lower PP like 55, is this a limp to set situation or will you actually go to showdown with it at times?

i limp to catch a set in early position and raise in later position. if something like j-6-3 comes out, you can get a3s, a6s, a6, k6, etc to generally fold by being a bit more aggressive with your 55s. you imply you have the jack and it's actually been pretty profitable for me.

sets are tough to get paid off on though unless the opp catches something like a good 2 pair. pair of aces with K kicker will rarely call an all-in or very large bet on the river if you have position on them, in my experiences atleast. sets are a tricky hand to cash in on.

Wow I forgot about this old thread. I'd like to edit my first post a little. In the old one, I said that I limp small PP's to set, but now I raise all pocket pairs from all positions unless its UTG with like 5 limpers.

I do these because:
1. Get value from all the stupid crap like A9o, KTs, etc that people limp in with.
2. People rarely hit with those hands, so a continuation bet will usually just win me another pot that I wouldnt have earned had I just limped and mised.
3. Adds deception to your sets. People won't think that that innocent little 4 of hearts on the flop is actually about to cost them dearly.
4. Adds more aggression to your game. Aggression is naturally a good thing. The most successful people in all sports or jobs are the most aggressive and its the same in poker. Adding small PP's to your PFR range just increases the number of hands people see you in there raising with which makes it that much easier to get paid off.

Bump.

I've been playing 6-max for about a month or so now and just wondering if anyone has anything to add to this.

Great post... trying to switch to 6max a bit.

me too

i dont know if any of you have been reading NLT&P...but i was wondering about what you think about sklansky saying it isn't a mistake at all to limp in on the button w/ mediocre hands that have strong pottential...i.e. hands like q-8s, or 7-9 off, because when you steal the blinds you are only gaining a very small percentage (unlike limit where blinds = a much larger percentage of likely pot) of what you could possibly be gaining when you hit a strong hand. i also feel like when you limp on the button you can often enough just bet and take the pot down anyways (25-100nl) against the right opponents. i'm not really sure what i think about sklansky's advice and i was wondering what others might think.

Originally Posted by Triptan3s

I like the overbet on the river move too with a solid hand.

I adopted this play from reading gabe and Lukie's hand histories and it's worked wonders at $25 and $50 NL.

Originally Posted by dwags222

i dont know if any of you have been reading NLT&P...but i was wondering about what you think about sklansky saying it isn't a mistake at all to limp in on the button w/ mediocre hands that have strong pottential...i.e. hands like q-8s, or 7-9 off, because when you steal the blinds you are only gaining a very small percentage (unlike limit where blinds = a much larger percentage of likely pot) of what you could possibly be gaining when you hit a strong hand. i also feel like when you limp on the button you can often enough just bet and take the pot down anyways (25-100nl) against the right opponents. i'm not really sure what i think about sklansky's advice and i was wondering what others might think.

Bought it haven't read it yet. So, two things aren't clear from your post:
1) full table or 6 max?
2) open-limping or limping behind?

Q8s has "strong potential"? Compared to what, T5s?

open-limping...i believe, but he doesnt seem to distinguish between fr and 6max, you should try and find that section and read it, i am interested in hearing others thoughts.

i limp hands that will make a half decent tp in position from the button when its limped to, and anything that will make a fairly string hand so prob JTo and up i raise including pps/scs Axs etc.

I play aggressivly enough anyway, so probably raising this range into the blinds is going to create too many sitautions where im playing big pots with not a lot whcih i do enough already.

my VPIP from the button is 51.58
my VPIP from 1 off the button is 24.10

its a tiny sample size but it goes to show that
i <3 the button
iv also made the most money on the button

Originally Posted by SmackinYaUp

-EDIT - This strategy applies best against tight players. When playing in extra fishy loose games, you need to play more ABC poker. Many times, your games will be a mix between loose and tight players so you will need to change your game up every hand depending on who is in the pot with you. This is common knowledge, but I don't want people to waste a lot of money bluffing into calling stations after reading this. I waste enough money doing that myself.

i think this is probably one of the easiest and most profitable issues to correct, yet many people, myself included, simply do not. i don't pay enough attention to the table dynamic, and when i should be tightening up i seem to play loose as ever. i run good for awhile, then don't adapt my play to the table to keep the momentum going, and that's where i lose a majority of my money i think. you can't win every pot, even against rocks, and i think that's what i try to do too much. bully people that i've been bullying for the last 20 minutes or so. their bound to catch on sooner or later.

Originally Posted by johnnyBuz

i think this is probably one of the easiest and most profitable issues to correct, yet many people, myself included, simply do not. i don't pay enough attention to the table dynamic, and when i should be tightening up i seem to play loose as ever. i run good for awhile, then don't adapt my play to the table to keep the momentum going, and that's where i lose a majority of my money i think. you can't win every pot, even against rocks, and i think that's what i try to do too much. bully people that i've been bullying for the last 20 minutes or so. their bound to catch on sooner or later.

This adaptability is what it's all about imho.

What about just moving tables at this point?

I find myself running really well for the first 45min-1hour and then the table "catches on" and either I bleed chips or adapt and my win rate slows way down. If I move tables I'm able to continue a strong a win rate.

Thoughts?

Originally Posted by jobupoker

What about just moving tables at this point?

I find myself running really well for the first 45min-1hour and then the table "catches on" and either I bleed chips or adapt and my win rate slows way down. If I move tables I'm able to continue a strong a win rate.

Thoughts?

Tighten up.

Originally Posted by dalecooper

My range of hands played doesn't change much from game to game, but I am more likely to raise at a passive table and more likely to limp or call a raise at an aggressive table. Passive tables give up a lot of small pots to the aggressor; aggressive/loose tables won't reward you constantly like that but will pay off in a big way when you hit a monster on the flop. So my starting requirements are about the same, but I play them somewhat differently.

i think this part will be the most helpful for me. would you even go as far as suggesting flatting the monsters preflop against super agressive players (of course if you know that it's going to be HU) and letting him slam his head against the wall with agression postflop? or is this still too risky?

as far as playing against passive players go, i've had trouble "loosening" these players up. i generally make a lot of small pots with very good preflop hands, and by the time they notice that i'm raising more than they'd expect preflop, they've moreso "caught on" to me than they have loosened up. any suggestions? more 3betting once this happens or should i just tighten up? (like stop opening J9s from the button)

i think the strategy of being tight out of position and very loose in position is better.

surviva i havent read this thread in a few years, but i would be cautious what info you glean from some of these really old posts because games are night and day since 2005.

Do you think that's because more people are playing poker looking for "easy money" or because of UIGEA weeding out out the fishy people who don't really care enough to get around the payment/cashout restrictions?

Its just because people have improved and understand the game better.

Although I have to say I still love the structure and ideas in dalecooper and SYU's posts.