6-max VS Full Ring

[maSkraP]

As an amateur, I thought 6-max or full ring games were all-in-all, generally, the same thing. I thought these two different types of tables had only very slight differences and it's so slight that it doesn't really matter where you play. I still, in general, think this to be true. Then again, like I said before, I'm an amateur (for now :P). I have had a very brief discussion with a friend of mine who also is a regular at 2p2 who plays mid/high stakes and told me he ONLY plays 6-max. He couldn't really give me a response as to why because he was busy. I shall ask him later, but for the mean time, I would like to ask you fellow 2p2ers. What are your preferences, and most importantly, WHY do you play there?

Since my friend (who is doing very well profitably in poker) only plays 6-max, I'm going to just assume that 6-max is best in any regards (who knows, maybe some of you will convince me other-wise). But for the mean time, I'm going to try and defend 6-max. My thoughts on the benefits of 6-max is that you can generally seem to play LAG more successfully. Although in some regards TAG is very necessary, I believe in order to be a top-notch poker player, you need to change up your game instead of being a straight-forward TAG player (or a straight-forward LAG). This means steal the blinds OTB with cards garbage as A6o if the table seems to allow you to do so. I find that in full-ring games, people generally call more often to a blind-steal raise simply b/c there are more chances of people getting a worthy enough hole cards to call a raise due to the fact that there are more cards being distributed. This makes it particularly annoying because when you raise, you're goal is to generally isolate players. When you raise and there comes 3 callers on the flop, it makes it a headache to play post-flop because there are too many hand ranges to play against. Even if you hit TPTK on the flop on a full-ring game, it seems it's not as nearly as good if you were playing a 6-max game simply because you most likely would have isolated a lot more players preflop in a 6-max than a full ring.

Of course, those are only a very few examples that I put onto the table of this post and, yes, I am being generally, quite general. But the more I just typed, the more I seem to be convinced that 6-max seems to be a better table to be profitable at online poker. But I would like to hear your thoughts and passions about this. Go nuts. [img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img]

[jcl]

Well, when you move up levels you'll have no choice but to play 6max because there probably aren't more than a handful of full ring games going.

The reason people don't like fullring is that it is uber-boring. I get reminded of this everytime I go to the casino. The reason is that in fullring the cards largely dictate play (mich like limit hold'em). No matter how fantastic you are raising 57s utg in fullring is not going to be profitable. You virtually have to stick to very strict requirements in EP which makes fullring very lame.
If you don't enjoy folding, 6max is the way to go.

PS I'd say hand ranges are probably easier to read in FR.

EP raise = JJ+/AK, maybe TT/AQ
Anyone else call the raise = Suited Connectors/smaller to middle pocket pairs/big suited cards
3-bet = JJ+/AK

In 6max a 3bet or a call from the button can be anything...in other words the hand RANGES are narrower in FR but there are more hands out there

[machine]

I find c-betting the big dif in my limited 6 max experience alot more floaters and you double barrel almost never in fr where as at 6max it has to be a tool in your armour

[maSkraP]

[ QUOTE ]
Well, when you move up levels you'll have no choice but to play 6max because there probably aren't more than a handful of full ring games going.

[/ QUOTE ] Interesting, I didn't know this.

[ QUOTE ]
PS I'd say hand ranges are probably easier to read in FR.

[/ QUOTE ] Valid point. But what about postflop? Considering there are more likely going to be multi-way pots postflop in a FR than a 6max.

[ QUOTE ]
The reason people don't like fullring is that it is uber-boring. I get reminded of this everytime I go to the casino.

[/ QUOTE ] So I take it that you prefer 6max as well? [img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img]

[gregorio]

[ QUOTE ]
The reason people don't like fullring is that it is uber-boring. I get reminded of this everytime I go to the casino.

[/ QUOTE ]
If I play fewer than 4 tables of 6max I get bored. 6max is also more interesting because you are involved in more hands, have more marginal decisions to make since you have to play less premium hands and play they further, you get more history with the people at your table, etc. Fullring, I would have to play so many tables that I would never have decent reads on people, and it would just be pure robo-poker.

Also, re LAg and TAG stuff: you have to play more hands at 6max, but that doesn'tmean you have to be LAG. The same stats that are TAGgy at 6max would be LAGgy at FR.

[Bona]

These posts are expert advice and may help you. I hope so.


http://forumserver.twoplustwo.com/favlin...amp;postmarker=

http://forumserver.twoplustwo.com/favlin...amp;postmarker=

[maSkraP]

[ QUOTE ]
you have to play more hands at 6max, but that doesn'tmean you have to be LAG.

[/ QUOTE ] I think generally, if you play more hands than you are used to as a TAG player, then you are being more LAGgy [img]/images/graemlins/wink.gif[/img]. And to clarify, I wasn't implying that if you play 6-max it seems you HAVE to be a LAG player. I just simply had the intentions to state that, generally, 6-max tables offer more of an opportunity for a LAG play.

[maSkraP]

bona, thanks for the second link. Amazing source!