[arcfinn]

whats the difference. whats better, whats more profitable. i think its hard to say, in 10 seat, you can get paid off a lot better, but youll have a lot of callers, and opposite with 6 seaters. also, what about sng tourneys? discuss.....

[razor]

I'm a fan of a full table. I've found that poker at a 3/6 4/8 table is rarely hard work. Play is typically very loose and all you have to do it be patient and get paid off when you get a hand. Thus 10 table because the blinds come around slower. You just avoid any other solid players at the table and wait for your hands. This can be rather boring however. So if you are playing to have fun and not for the money I would go for a 6 table which would allow you more gamble for your buck.

The problem I have with SNGs is that there are just as many loose players in these, however the blinds raise and the field thins, forcing you to not be able to just sit back and get paid. Still they can be fun and I do play them from time to time.

[chris]

I think the 6-handed tables are a great invention, as it is a cheap way to practise how you play pots that are only contested by one of two other players. As this is usually the case for full mid/high limit ring games anyway, 6-handed tables play more like higher limits then they are.

I also like them because the way you play your hands make more of a difference in hands contested my 2-3 players then it does in multiway pots. In family pots it all boils down to pot odds really. Not so in heads up pots, and this gives the strong player a bigger edge then what he usually enjoys at a full table.

This also means that 6-handed games are often more challenging to play then full tables. I believe this is one reason that most really strong players prefer short handed games any day. As a matter of fact I experienced a really big online game break up, as some players refused to play a full table when it fuilled up, and left the game to start a new shorthanded game!!!

But if you like low risk middle of the road poker, full tables are for you. If you like to play marginal hands shorthanded is for you. Personally I play both, but I enjoy playing 3-6 handed the most.

[johnf]

You can afford to play much looser in 6 handed game than 10 handed games. Blinds come much quicker and there are really more skill involved in short handed games (Well, no limit anyways). You have to bluff more often and read your opponents better. Border line hands such as QJo, KJo, KTo, QTo, and AJo are suddenly great hands and you should probably raise with [some of] those hands in middle and call even with A9o or QJo even under the gun. You'll play suited connectors less cause they play better with 4+ opponents (which happens rarely in 6 handed play).

In a ten handed game you really have to wait for you cards. Unless you're on the button or the cut off and everyone infront folds and you have KT suited, you can go ahead and raise. But most of the time you'd have to stick with good starting hand selection.

[ballen]

I play mainly pot limit and no limit (low blinds) hold em...

and to play the style of play that I like - fairly loose and aggressive (like Doyle teaches)
these are the best tables.

With fewer players, you can afford to play more hands, and you don't have to be as patient.