6-max or full ring?

[NLvillain]

If you have a good rake back deal and are a tight player, full ring is a good choice. More novices are on full ring. Also, exp. nits waiting for someone to make a mistake also play full ring. If you want to play fast, aggressive and run up your BR, then 6 max and HU are more viable. Choose depending on your style and plans for poker. I find if you are a pro or want to be one with a conservative approach trying to maximize rake back or vip scheme on that poker room while protecting your bankroll, then full ring is good.

Remember, virtually every online poker room uses rake drop, not timed session fee. If there was a timed session fee, then more hands per hour is a better value.

Online poker now has such a small edge, that most consistent winners and pros rely on maximizing the rake back / vip scheme that room has to offer.

Full ring will allow you to see more hands for less. This is beneficial for NL where you can capitalize on mistakes.

 

[TeUnit]

6max should be a more loose and aggressive game generally, if you are just starting i would think full ring may be easier- but i think 6max offers a more robust learning environment

 

[FinciNeedsFood]

I've played somewhere in the region of 4million hands online now and I play both FR and 6max.

Its incorrect to say FR is more variance. 6max is way more variance and FR win rates are way higher.

8 to 10 bb/100 is easily achievable in FR but 1/2 that is good in 6max. But don;t forget your going to get in way more hands per hour 6m.

It's also not true that 6m is the same game as FR after the first 4 seats fold. It's a totally different game. In 6m max you need to call 3bets much wider to avoid exploited (IP and OOP). In FR your just never really getting exploited.

Also, FR folding TPTK is pretty standard (so is bottom set sometimes) to raises but 6m it isn.t

You need to play your whole range much better in 6m. FR regs are generally pretty weak.

 

[skrsh76]

I've played somewhere in the region of 4million hands online now and I play both FR and 6max.

Its incorrect to say FR is more variance. 6max is way more variance and FR win rates are way higher.

8 to 10 bb/100 is easily achievable in FR but 1/2 that is good in 6max. But don;t forget your going to get in way more hands per hour 6m.

It's also not true that 6m is the same game as FR after the first 4 seats fold. It's a totally different game. In 6m max you need to call 3bets much wider to avoid exploited (IP and OOP). In FR your just never really getting exploited.

Also, FR folding TPTK is pretty standard (so is bottom set sometimes) to raises but 6m it isn.t

You need to play your whole range much better in 6m. FR regs are generally pretty weak.

I like this answer. Personally I like playing FR and to condensate for low no of hands add more tables. Agreed to play much higher stakes you need to get comfortable with 6 Max bit I am in no hurry

 

[ribaric]

I'm relatively new to cash games. I'm more used to playing short stacked sng tournaments than playing deep stacked cash. I've mostly been playing 6-max and buying in with 100bb. I'll be playing .25/.50 for starters. Any input on which game might be better for me would be appreciated, thanks.

6 max bettrer cuz less players and you have more chance to win

 

[vanya384]

Best version is different for each players. If you tight player, for you better is full ring, because you less times bet blinds. If you loose player or like bluffing, for you beeter 6-max.

 

[Sil3ntness]

I think full ring is more fishy and 6 max is good for aggressive players

 

[or3o1990]

I've been playing the crap out of full ring since I've posted this and I like it. Now that I'm getting the feel of things I don't think that 6max would be to hard to adapt to. If I could play more than four cash game tables I'd start mixing them in!

 

[joe777]

With full ring you got to be careful raising with marginal/speculative hand OOP.

 

[Latamgrinder]

Play the one you feel the most confortable at, the profitability of a format doesnt depend on the format depends on the player capability to exploit the value out of that format, MTT have the highest profit ceiling of all formats but that doesnt necesarely mean anybody can beat MTTs or wants to play MTTs for a living, over the long run, there´s nothing better that grind a format you actually enjoy and feel confortable playing, wheather is FR or 6max, SNG/MTT or cash, NLHE or PLO, etc., it will also make studying better and easier, cheers.

 

[Faydar09]

6 max

 

[MrBadAss]

if you have the knowlage of the sngs short stack and you br is 1.5k i would consider 6max hyper turbo sng high limits than cash games

 

[Poker247]

It seems like there are always more 6-max tables available than FR. I get that position is better in the 6-max, but the blinds at 2NL can eat your profits if you aren't careful. I currently play FR when I can and 6-max when I need to, but I do find I need to open up my game more at 6-max tables. I guess like in everything, it is a matter of adapting to the situation.

 

[Simplex]

I like 9 handed for holdem and 6 max for PLO. I like holdem or PLO for headsup.

 

[Karozi615]

Why is this the best route?

Because in full ring you can play tight and solid and make marginal profits. In 6max you have to widen your hand range and take more marginal spots.

Late position opens are more mandatory in 6max, because you pay more blinds you have to take opportunities that you otherwise wouldn't take. When hand ranges are widened and spots become "thin" good players always triumph over fish because they are better at making decisions.


To put it simply, in 6max you have to make many more decisions, some of which are going to be extremely "close".

 

[Hirevr]

6max because you get the button more often.

 

[Sil3ntness]

Because in full ring you can play tight and solid and make marginal profits. In 6max you have to widen your hand range and take more marginal spots.

Late position opens are more mandatory in 6max, because you pay more blinds you have to take opportunities that you otherwise wouldn't take. When hand ranges are widened and spots become "thin" good players always triumph over fish because they are better at making decisions.


To put it simply, in 6max you have to make many more decisions, some of which are going to be extremely "close".

That's what makes 6 max so exciting

 

[Aces2w1n]

More hands in 6max .. more practice reading hands and practice

 

[Kekule]

Because in full ring you can play tight and solid and make marginal profits. In 6max you have to widen your hand range and take more marginal spots.

Late position opens are more mandatory in 6max, because you pay more blinds you have to take opportunities that you otherwise wouldn't take. When hand ranges are widened and spots become "thin" good players always triumph over fish because they are better at making decisions.


To put it simply, in 6max you have to make many more decisions, some of which are going to be extremely "close".

I like this answer as well. Playing poker is all about making decisions. To be a winning player you need to make more good decisions than bad decisions. The play is faster in 6max games which means you'll have to make more decisions than at Full Ring.

This makes Full Ring an easier entrance for the beginner.

Also, as others have said, you generally need to be tighter at Full Ring and a little looser at 6max.

 

[dejan85]

Im more for full table,there is more cash and game is interesting than....

 

[Vadim Kudimov]

Personally, I'm comfortable playing 6-max tables. Monitoring the situation in the order of magnitude higher than the full table. Even though the blinds are more likely to win easily. Other explanations unfortunately I do not have). It's like a personal vision of your question.

 

[Naitras]

6-max easy to play, it would be more outs than full ring

 

[KLDUFF1987]

I really enjoy playing full ring mostly because you can play tight poker and not worry to much about playing that much.

 

[arborest]

As many of you I would also like to play 6 max. I feel more comfortable in this table. Full table would be more risky imo.

 

[massagegirl]

I would think looking at the caliber of the players would be more important than how many. Table selection is so important.