Shorthanded or Longhanded?

[_BMW_]

I have recently read in a interveiw with a professional online cash game player that he feels playing shorthanded gives him a better advantage over his opponents than playing longhanded against the same quality opponents;

"I prefer to play shorthanded because you get more hands. Your edge can be a lot bigger, even though it is easier not to have an edge."

Is this true? Because I often have wondered this myself, I feel uncomfortable waiting for premium starting hands or waiting for it to be folded to you whilst on the button or the cut-off, so you can play a AT offsuited or JT suited. I tend to have to leave the table if I've been there for an hour but dealt average to poor hands and have a break or I start playing certain hands in certain positions when I should NOT.

So unless it's a super loose table where you know when get dealt AA or KK you will be paid off nicely, I hate waiting for strong starting hands - which you have to do when playing longhanded, only for everyone to fold pre-flop.

I like to see flops with suited connectors or play small pairs in early positions and usually that what I do when I'm winning playing Longhanded - No Texas hold'em... but when I'm not winning or have doubled my buy-in, I tend to play very tight poker pre flop.

Should I turn my attention to play short handed or at least spend time playing it at lower limits?

EDIT; atm I'm playing 10 No Limit...

[a500lbgorilla]

I hate waiting for strong starting hands - which you have to do when playing longhanded, only for everyone to fold pre-flop.

Then raise more hands. Don't need AA to make everyone fold!

[drtofu66]

I like to see flops with suited connectors or play small pairs in early positions and usually that what I do when I'm winning playing Longhanded - No Texas hold'em... but when I'm not winning or have doubled my buy-in, I tend to play very tight poker pre flop.

Should I turn my attention to play short handed or at least spend time playing it at lower limits?

If this is how you prefer to approach the game (and there's certainly nothing wrong with it if you're winning), then full ring is better for you IMO. Playing suited connectors and small PP's OOP will be difficult in SH games where the preflop/flop aggression is cranked up. You usually won't have the odds to chase your draws, you'll pay too much to try and hit a set, you are less likely to get paid off when you do hit, and being passive will get you eaten alive by the blinds, the LAGs, and the TAGs.

If you want to play 6max, it's imperitive that you start at the low limits. A successful run at FR 50NL is no guarantee for success when switching to 6max 50NL. The approach to SH poker is different and I'd recommend that you figure that out starting out at the low limits again, just as you did when starting at FR.

[a500lbgorilla]

also, the edge in shorthanded isn't that you can play more hands. It's that you do play more hands with the bad players at your table.

[_BMW_]

Thanks for the advice...

I suppose it comes down to the saying, the grass is always greener on the other side.

[a500lbgorilla]

nah, in this situation the grass is definitely greener at 6 max. theoretically, if you're the best player at your table... as you remove people, your winrate should increase.

So, best player at 10 max table < best at a 9 max < best at a 6 max < best at heads up (as far as winrate is concerned)

I stated the reason above, you play more hands against bad players giving you more chances to flex your prowess.