#1
|
|||
|
|||
6 max vs. full ring games in NL
it seems that many players prefer playing 6 handed vs. full games. can someone please explain the pos. EV in this since you have to pay the blind more often. i just don't see the advantage unless one is trying to improve their game. But just a monetary motive, i see full ring NL games more profitable
|
#2
|
|||
|
|||
Re: 6 max vs. full ring games in NL
One of the main reasons I play 6 max is because I get to play more hands HU vs the fish in a setting where their much more likely to make bigger mistakes than a 10 player game.
|
#3
|
|||
|
|||
Re: 6 max vs. full ring games in NL
10 handed games are easier to play correctly because it's easier to play tightly accurately than aggressively accurately. So I'm gettin myself into a position where people are more likely to make mistakes. Except me of course!
|
#4
|
|||
|
|||
Re: 6 max vs. full ring games in NL
You play more hands in a short-handed game (by this I mean you are involved in more pots since your hand range opens up). And as you mentioned you play more often out of the blinds. However you seem to imply this is a bad thing about short games but everybody is in the same situation so it's equal.
However, since people play more hands and are involved in more pots, there are more decisions to be made. Thus, there are more opportunities for mistakes to be made. And further, since playing out of the blinds is more difficult than other positions, bad players make more mistakes there as well. A good player playing against bad players has more opportunity for profit because his opponents will be making more mistakes per hour. In summary, the shorter the table, the more the advantage goes to the player who makes less mistakes. On top of that, bad players who do not adjust to short tables will make even more mistakes. And if that isn't enough, good players who can quickly get reads on their opponents have an easier time keeping track of only five other players rather than a full table. |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
Re: 6 max vs. full ring games in NL
[ QUOTE ]
can someone please explain the pos. EV in this since you have to pay the blind more often. [/ QUOTE ] One of the myths of 6-max is that you HAVE to play more hands because you pay the blinds more often. The truth is that you CAN play more hands, because your opponents belive that they have to play more, and are playing weaker hands. So when you are in the blinds, your blinds have more equity because you are facing fewer opponents, and they are playing weaker hands, and they think that they have to steal the blinds more often, since they come around faster. |
#6
|
|||
|
|||
Re: 6 max vs. full ring games in NL
If you are a strong post-flop player, you have the opportunity to be more profitable at a short-handed table. This is true because most people play very loosely in 6-max tables with a wider range of starting hands. In addition to that, those same poeple also believe that their opponents (including you) are playing extremely loosely as well. This makes it easy to capitalize post-flop on the mistakes (and there are many) that these loose fish make because they are playing so many more hands than they should.
|
#7
|
|||
|
|||
Re: 6 max vs. full ring games in NL
In addition to what was said already, there just seem to be more bad players at 6 max.
|
#8
|
|||
|
|||
Re: 6 max vs. full ring games in NL
And hand values go up.
If you have tendency to go too far with TPTK and overpairs, this in the long run is much smaller mistake in 6max than FR |
#9
|
|||
|
|||
Re: 6 max vs. full ring games in NL
People read books. Books tell to fold hands like ATo and to play hands like 45s. Usually, that is incorrect in 6max. Until there are several good shorthanded books in the market those games will be more profitable for good players. It's as simple as that.
|
|
|