FR vs SH

Originally posted by houlajk
hi, i heard somewhere that at full ring games at some point you cant make more bb/100, so its capped. For example at FR NL100 you can only achieve 8bb/100 but no more, so its more profitable to learn 6max and play it ? Thx

Hi, houlajk
I don't see how it is possible to draw a hard-and-fast maximum win rate like that.

I don't know about "learning" 6-max.
Every time the first 3 positions at a FR table fold, you're playing 6-max

I don't know if it is more profitable in general, but it certainly has more action.

All the best,
--VS

Originally posted by houlajk
hi, i heard somewhere that at full ring games at some point you cant make more bb/100, so its capped. For example at FR NL100 you can only achieve 8bb/100 but no more, so its more profitable to learn 6max and play it ? Thx

If we move up higher in stakes, obviously there will be a bigger reg to fish ratio compared to lower stakes. That said...

1. At micros, we can find 2-3 fishes on six-man table, but it is still possible to find 4-5 fishes on fullring. So why limit ourselves to a fewer-fish SH table when we can find a bunch of them on a single full ring table (ironic though because I play SH, the reason I prefer this format is it's easier to remember fewer people)
2. However, as we move up, our concern will be to sit down on tables with fewer regs to limit our competition against fewer fish pool, so we are better off playing SH than FR.

Just a thought. I could be wrong though since there are a lot of other factors affecting a player's winrate.

Originally posted by spreeboy

Originally posted by houlajk
hi, i heard somewhere that at full ring games at some point you cant make more bb/100, so its capped. For example at FR NL100 you can only achieve 8bb/100 but no more, so its more profitable to learn 6max and play it ? Thx

If we move up higher in stakes, obviously there will be a bigger reg to fish ratio compared to lower stakes. That said...

1. At micros, we can find 2-3 fishes on six-man table, but it is still possible to find 4-5 fishes on fullring. So why limit ourselves to a fewer-fish SH table when we can find a bunch of them on a single full ring table (ironic though because I play SH, the reason I prefer this format is it's easier to remember fewer people)
2. However, as we move up, our concern will be to sit down on tables with fewer regs to limit our competition against fewer fish pool, so we are better off playing SH than FR.

Just a thought. I could be wrong though since there are a lot of other factors affecting a player's winrate.

Spree, are you talking about at high limits on FR since there are more regs on the table the odds of a Reg 3betting your Isolation raise vs fish is more?

But as said, in SH tables, Regs are always prepared to playback vs you so...... doesn't it break even or something?

Originally posted by Evante

Originally posted by spreeboy

Originally posted by houlajk
hi, i heard somewhere that at full ring games at some point you cant make more bb/100, so its capped. For example at FR NL100 you can only achieve 8bb/100 but no more, so its more profitable to learn 6max and play it ? Thx

If we move up higher in stakes, obviously there will be a bigger reg to fish ratio compared to lower stakes. That said...

1. At micros, we can find 2-3 fishes on six-man table, but it is still possible to find 4-5 fishes on fullring. So why limit ourselves to a fewer-fish SH table when we can find a bunch of them on a single full ring table (ironic though because I play SH, the reason I prefer this format is it's easier to remember fewer people)
2. However, as we move up, our concern will be to sit down on tables with fewer regs to limit our competition against fewer fish pool, so we are better off playing SH than FR.

Just a thought. I could be wrong though since there are a lot of other factors affecting a player's winrate.

Spree, are you talking about at high limits on FR since there are more regs on the table the odds of a Reg 3betting your Isolation raise vs fish is more?

But as said, in SH tables, Regs are always prepared to playback vs you so...... doesn't it break even or something?

Hmmm my thoughts about this is something like this...

1. At 2NL, there are more fishes compared to regs, so we can assume that everytime a player is added/sits at our table, the higher the chance that the new player is a fish. So the more players at the table, our overall edge will likely increase because the number of bad players increases.
2. At 1000NL, there are more regs than fishes, so everytime another player sits down at the table, he will likely be a reg.

Therefore, I thought that at the micros, we can focus on finding juicy tables with as many bad players as we can, so it could be FR over SH. On the other hand, we can shift our focus on tables with lesser competition once we reach high limits, so I thought SH is softer than FR at this point.

it all depends of your play style

Originally posted by spreeboy

Originally posted by Evante

Originally posted by spreeboy

Originally posted by houlajk
hi, i heard somewhere that at full ring games at some point you cant make more bb/100, so its capped. For example at FR NL100 you can only achieve 8bb/100 but no more, so its more profitable to learn 6max and play it ? Thx

If we move up higher in stakes, obviously there will be a bigger reg to fish ratio compared to lower stakes. That said...

1. At micros, we can find 2-3 fishes on six-man table, but it is still possible to find 4-5 fishes on fullring. So why limit ourselves to a fewer-fish SH table when we can find a bunch of them on a single full ring table (ironic though because I play SH, the reason I prefer this format is it's easier to remember fewer people)
2. However, as we move up, our concern will be to sit down on tables with fewer regs to limit our competition against fewer fish pool, so we are better off playing SH than FR.

Just a thought. I could be wrong though since there are a lot of other factors affecting a player's winrate.

Spree, are you talking about at high limits on FR since there are more regs on the table the odds of a Reg 3betting your Isolation raise vs fish is more?

But as said, in SH tables, Regs are always prepared to playback vs you so...... doesn't it break even or something?

Hmmm my thoughts about this is something like this...

1. At 2NL, there are more fishes compared to regs, so we can assume that everytime a player is added/sits at our table, the higher the chance that the new player is a fish. So the more players at the table, our overall edge will likely increase because the number of bad players increases.
2. At 1000NL, there are more regs than fishes, so everytime another player sits down at the table, he will likely be a reg.

Therefore, I thought that at the micros, we can focus on finding juicy tables with as many bad players as we can, so it could be FR over SH. On the other hand, we can shift our focus on tables with lesser competition once we reach high limits, so I thought SH is softer than FR at this point.

spree you have skype? i want to ask you something, add u as friend

request accepted