FR vs 6MAX pros and cons.

Discuss....

This is a serious thread, I really want to know.

I only play Full Ring and have never played 6max. In fact when a 9 seat table drops to 7 players for one orbit, I leave the table.

From what I hear 6max is way more aggressive than FR. I like FR because I play very tight and like to wait for good starting hands and will patiently fold across 4tables over and over. When I am playing well (which is some of the time) I am really waiting for my opponents to play poorly and take advantage of their mistakes.

It sounds like 6max is an action game with more bluffing, 3betting,4betting,etc. So I guess choosing one over the other would be a personal preference. If you are itching to play and like the adrenalin rush go 6max. If you can grind for hours, go with Full Ring.

6-max is a lot more aggressive, and is very, very good for learning postflop plays. Since, you get to play postflop a lot more than FR, you will soon learn the value of position and several techniques like whether one should c-bet, float a villain's c-bet, etc. It is a lot more swingy, but in a way, more profitable too if you know what you're doing.

As FX and cazique already stated, 6-max is way more aggressive, more position plays, you can't just sit there waiting for your premium hand playing ABC poker, gotta gamble a bit there playing/raising with suited connectors, Ax suited, suited Broadway cards.

Whereas, Full ring are much more ABC, waiting for your text book premium hand raising 3.5BB PF with it, not getting a lot of action unless another playes has a monster in the hole. Not that FR games are always boring but sometimes when the whole table plays ABC, no one's ready to play unless they have a big hand, it gets kinda boring.

cazique said:

6-max is a lot more aggressive, and is very, very good for learning postflop plays. Since, you get to play postflop a lot more than FR, you will soon learn the value of position and several techniques like whether one should c-bet, float a villain's c-bet, etc. It is a lot more swingy, but in a way, more profitable too if you know what you're doing.

Click to expand...

This sums it up well. I think you get much more play and experience from 6-max, and makes you make decisions more often then playing FR. As the blinds come round quicker, you play more hands and can't really just fold fold fold

Agreed. depends on what you want to do with your time. If you just want to grind out slow win and like the tight play (like me) I would advocate FR. I've played both and won and lost at both. 6 max gives you the opportunity to learn different skills including aggression and floating. It certain can be fun. I generally shy away from it only because I know it takes much more concentration to play well and sometimes I want to play my more natural tight style. Both games are profitable when played well. Good luck.

IMO learn to play at 6max, and if you do find later you want to move to FR you'll know a lot more about hand reading/post flop lines than most FR players do

There are no cons to 6max. It's the nuts.



Coming from someone who only ever plays 6 max

I just switched from FR to 6 max this month. I will have to say it fits my style way better then FR did.

In FR they always have the nuts. With 6 max they only have the nuts like 80% of the time, lol.

Just play what fits your style of poker, one isnt better or worse then the other.

6 max ftw because tons of people have no idea how to play it, 9 max makes it easier for the regular fish because he can now wait for a better hand longer, 6 max you can take his blinds a lot easier and he will have to play back at some point or you will keep doing it. there are a lot more moves to be done at 6 max, especially in position and it is no nice when it gets to blind vs blind action.

if you don't mind waiting 20 hands go for full ring.

full ring is not even a real game, only pussies play it

show you skill at short handed.