Full ring vs 6max

[MadMojoMonkey]

I think that rake is a constant structure, x% of the pot up to $y.

I'm guessing that in 6-max, the fact that you're playing more hands makes the rake hit your BR harder.

Also, playing at the micro / low stakes means that the $y is never reached, so the same rake % is coming out of every pot. Whereas at higher stakes, the $y in rake can be taken out of the smaller pots, leaving unraked monies in the big pots.

EDIT:
Full ring plays slower, so you'll probably want to open more tables to keep up the pace and avoid boredom.

Whether there are more or less fish at FR or 6-max depends on the site and the trend at the time. It's gone back and forth over the past few years.

The 3 extra seats on a FR table are after the BB. The range you play for 6-max UTG is your MP2 (or whatever you call the seat before the HJ) range in FR. So the 3 extra seats are tighter ranges than anything you'll be comfortable with at first. (Folding KQs and AQo UTG is still a little hard for me, but when I don't, I'm in tough spots.)

As I pointed out to Cobra recently, there are some epic odds being offered to the SB in limped pots, so really figuring out how to take advantage is a fun project.

[rong]

I think that rake is a constant structure, x% of the pot up to $y.

I'm guessing that in 6-max, the fact that you're playing more hands makes the rake hit your BR harder.

Also, playing at the micro / low stakes means that the $y is never reached, so the same rake % is coming out of every pot. Whereas at higher stakes, the $y in rake can be taken out of the smaller pots, leaving unraked monies in the big pots.

It's because you get 6 hands per 1.5bb as opposed to 9 hands.