What is so special about 6max?

You’re very welcome…

@1Warlock @dayman @love2eattacos

Could you guys please read Sarah’s question and try to answer it ? Thanks :slight_smile:

Why might 6max be preferable to 9max?

  • The pace of play is faster than on a 9max table. You see more hands per hour. Less waiting around.
  • If you think that you’re a better player than the others on the table, you get more opportunities to push that edge.
  • Fewer multiway pots. Particularly here on Replay, you’ve a better chance to get heads up and play poker instead of whack-a-flop.

Thanks for your answer tacos !

@Sassy_Sarah To me, it seems that his answer ressembles a lot to mine (my first post), and I think that he covered most advantages. So if I didn’t answer your question because you think I didn’t understand it, it’s the same for tacos…I doubt we both didn’t understand your question because we’re idiots, so maybe your question is unclear if we didn’t answer it correctly, or you’re just not satisfied with the answers we’re giving you even though Tom Dwan and all poker gods will say the same to you ?!?

Short-handed poker is less about trading coolers than full ring is. It requires players to be active, regardless of whether they have a top-3% hand or not. To be successful, you need to be able to play wider ranges. You can’t just rely on making huge hands with the hopes someone has another hand good enough to pay you off with.


Perfectly true, thanks !
You guys prefer 6-max by far here on RP, right ? What about IRL ? :slight_smile:

In my case, 6-max on replay is by far my favorite and same IRL, but the difference between the two is not as big though…

I have been playing short-handed poker IRL for quite a while. In my area, the most common private games were 1/2 full-ring or 5/10 short-handed, deep stacked. I chose to play the later and it became my preferred format. 6-max tables are the most common ones online so that worked out nicely for me once I jumped in that pool.

Whatever floats people’s boats, right? Nothing wrong with playing full-ring if that’s your thing. You can make a decent return nut-hunting these games, especially at low stakes. Most live players don’t have much of a choice if they play in the casinos.

ADDED: I find that the 6-max games are a good compromise between forced activity and manageable pace. More demanding than full-ring but doesn’t wear you down as fast as HU play. Most people, myself included, can’t play HU for hours. Its exhausting on every level.

I see, cool ! What is your area if I may ask ?

I agree, and it’s one of the main reasons which makes me like 6-max more. HU is horrible hahaha : against a donk, you’re debating every hand whether he’s playing OOL in this hand or not, etc…, and against a good player it’s just constant difficult spots where you have to go through everything…
But HU is cool though, you learn so much in these games, but you’ve got to pay a price for it :sweat_smile:

1 Like

The fewer opponents on the table the more pronounced the skill advantage will be. You play more hands per hour and you get in more spots HU or 3 way. Most players do not correctly adjust their ranges going from FR to 6 max. 9 max with a lot of loose players becomes more about nut peddling and while profitable can become quite boring.

I think most tables are started by better players and that is why you see more 6 max the higher you go.


To turn it back on you @Sassy_Sarah, why do you FR is better or why do you prefer FR?

1 Like

Well, I learned 9max, 9max is what I watched on TV, 9max is what I play in Bar tournies, 9max is what we play in home games, and 9 max is what I played in vegas and won @, along with 9max MTTs. I’m gonna guess next comment goes like this… Well, Sassy if you’re such a 9max expert, why is your bankroll so lacking… is it?

Dayman I am frustrated cause I wanted to know why top players prefer 6max, and I also took a jab @ those who play below thier means… add to that comments like “Still hate you BTW” or “encouraging players to play below thier means”, caused me to back off my own thread. I also wanted to learn something in the process.

If this really has nothing to do with the # of players on the table, and more to do with Bankroll, buyin size, bet sizing, unrestricted tables, or other things… then by getting enough information… its possible, for those to be the only logical reasons left, therefore I switch my approach to what needs to chg or my opinions.

I’ll be honest here Dayman, the ppl that I have a hard time beating in MTTs, play a much better game than most of the sub 1000 players do playing Rings… sure there’s a few exceptions, and I certainly dont mix it up with the sub 50 players usually due to bankroll issues… but there’s a clear pattern of more 6max than 9max above 1k/2k, and sure seems true that Hagia/Tasman is a trap level for anyone moving up the ranks, when its either 2/4k or 20/40k. ( Forcing players to not use propper bankroll mgmt or play in uncomfortable situations )

People think I don’t know the advantages of a stack on the final table, and as players are busted, that makes it that much easier, for the chipleader, to “run” the table … Which is the exact same adv as someone using thier BR in the same fashion on a ring table and less players have same effect. @least in a SnG or MTT, you earn your stack and the right to pressure others… not just pull out a CC, load up 10m, and go bully the players who buyin for 4m. Or maybee you got 500million, and its fun to go shakedown the 4m players.

Was I asking a rhetorical question - NO … Do I want insight - YES
but when I ask a 2 part question, directed @ elite players, I hope to gain information I do NOT already have. Just like those threads that end up kinda above my head, I had hoped this 1 to attract that same level of detail and discussion.

2 good ways to learn something is … either learn something you didn’t know, or learn why something you do know , needs to be re-evaluated or changed.

Dayman, this might be an unintended consequence, of the playerbase ( not sure which part ) that lobbied Replay to go to an unrestricted format. Replay used to be bankroll restricted, and now its all unrestricted ( so Ive been told ). While I see merit in both types, I don’t see merit in it being 1 or the other.

Add to the Dayman, that when someone starts a table, really there should be a min # of players before cards are dealt. More players might join rather than staying on a waiting list for another table, because they also don’t wanna play as Warlock put it, short handed. So say a 9max wouldn’t start without say… 5 players min. So when ppl say, ohh just go start a table, its usually never that simple.

1 of the biggest reasons I stay’d @ replay was cause there was soo many things to play. I never had to wait more than 5 minutes to get in a game… but now that I have a decent bankroll, I virtually have very little to play. It forces me to play rings, because as I have said to many ppl… its not fun if there’s no juice ( risk ). There’s no point in me playing a 15k MTT unless its part of a current promotion, and I can’t just wait 2-3 hours for the next 1m MTT twiddle’n my thumbs.


1 Like

I wasn’t going to read past this @Sassy_Sarah, I had a comment typed up but deleted it to read the rest of your post. It is a bit confrontational though.

I think most of the guys here are answering your question honestly.

are both these @ValueFish, I know the former is but haven’t seen the latter. I said in the PM I replied to that for some reason there seems to be a lot of tension between the two of you and it’d be nice if you both could work it out. Or just avoid commenting to each other. Still hate you btw is out of line and deserves an apology.

I apologize but I don’t really understand what you’re asking or saying here. Could you please clarify?

MTT’s compared to Ring games is apples to oranges and they require different skill sets. Your opinion is yours but I will strongly disagree with this statement. I know how the MTT’s play on Replay and I believe I know how you could come to your conclusion though.

I had this same obstacle moving past 2K/4K. There are 5/T tables, I don’t know why they aren’t running as often but you and everyone else has the ability to sit at one and start the table. No one on Replay is forced to play outside of whatever it is that they would consider proper bank roll management.

Sassy, bankroll should never be an advantage in a ring game. If it is, it’s because there is a player or players who are playing outside there bank roll. If someone wants to play bigger than there bank roll can sustain them through down swings or variance then that is their choice and the consequences are theirs and theirs alone.

I covered this in the last little paragraph. Same thing.

My bad. I can not answer for anyone but myself. So, I have a very limited amount of time that I can play and so sometimes I play as low as 2K/4K. Not very often but I do. This is mainly due to game availability. If nothing bigger is going or all the tables are full and no one is joining a table I’ve tried to start I’ll play smaller. My bank roll does not give me an advantage on those tables though. I play up to 50/100 mostly but am shot taking the 100/200 sparingly and that’s not going so well.

That’s something for the Replay suggestion box. I personally wouldn’t like it, but meh. To each his own.

Sorry again, but this is a you problem really. I play 15K’s occasionally and I play for the sport/competition. If it doesn’t do it for you then that’s on you. Ask Replay for more of the bigger buy in tours. Don’t know what else to say. Cheers Sassy :slight_smile:

I don’t intend to get sucked into this. I have only seen VF say he hates me, and I know he was just kidding. I also know that there are people who actually hate me, but they should know that I don’t care. I’m so handy with the ladies that I am quite used to guys hating on me, so nothing new there.

I mentioned that 6 max MTTs would require more dealers in the real world, and Alan25 pointed out that 6 max rings would make less rake. I have no idea why stuff happens on Replay the way stuff happens on Replay, so I have nothing more to add, sorry.

1 Like

FFS, of course I was joking. Sassy, instead of judging some comments made by me that you misunderstood, just read my replies instead of wasting my time, it’s frustrating, really.
I can understand that it may have been misunderstood by some people, but when writing it I didn’t think about that. MY bad…
So you understand it, he (and me too actually) is constantly just messing with me, joking with me. All I write to him in a bad way is intended as a joke.
I guess we can finally close this thread and this question that has been answered ten-tousand times, right?!

SPG, don’t talk nonsense, everyone likes you. I may be the one who likes you the most, but that’s not important :blush:

1 Like

I think I prefer 6-max tournaments, for all the reasons listed here but in particular:

Quite a lot of (imo) badly loose aggressive players on the low high-stakes MTTs (50k-250k) will consistently overbet or overvalue their hand strength heads up, call you down with what ought to be a range disadvantage, until you first show a stronger made hand at showdown and dent their chips.

The best adjustment I know is to really have a range advantage, so you’ll have equity on more flops and be more likely to stack them, than go from say 45 to 25bb’s folding, into the middle stage of a tournament, making the problem worse.

When there are two or more players like that in a 9-handed MTT, the variance is too high to continue with enough of my range post-flop to make my usual style enjoyable. I just sit around waiting for spots, or play small multi-way pots which aren’t as satisfying.

Having some Run Good™ when everyone’s deep at those tables can be really profitable, and you can call them fairly wide as they get short, though.

It needs much less drastic adjustment 6-handed, as you can play a lot more hands, float and fold a bit more easily while the blinds are small.

That’s the thought process I was having today anyway.

It could be flawed and I’m open to suggestions… :slight_smile:

I enjoy the psychological side of poker and that adjustment all but nerfs it :thinking:


Originally NYC. When I 1st started going to private games, there were some great clubs in the city. I was lucky enough to play at the Mayfair Club before it went away. There were some legendary players there. Played at the Ace Point and 72nd Street clubs as well before they were closed ~2005. Now I move up and down the East Coast.

I had a few epic days of poker this weekend (and into the week because we didn’t want the game to end). Short-handed, with minimum effective stacks of 250BB. When I get some time, I’ll have to relate some of the more interesting parts of this particular game. Lets just say it isn’t pleasant to be stacked with top set (KKK) in a 4-bet pot when you’re that deep. Just a sick, sick, nasty hand.


Ouch, guy who 3-bet light and turned the straight or some other crap ? Haha, don’t say too much. Looking forward to hearing from this !

Lets just say the game was “active”. Not insanely so but I’d say at least 1/3rd of the pots were 3-bet or more. Deep stack games are like this, with the strange twist of seeing very few all-ins preflop, even with AA vs KK. With 100BB stacks, getting it in preflop with a monster can’t be too bad a decision. Getting 250BB+ in before the flop is another matter entirely :slight_smile:

Yup ! I often look at some Live at the bike footage, and it’s horrible that some players just don’t look at their stack and think : “Damn, I’ve got a nice bunch of chips…maybe better to calm down a bit”. Anyway, going in with top set doesn’t seem that bad lol…

9 max has the advantage of taking in much bigger pots with fewer hands played…so if u know how to play and adjust to both than u can get the same amount per hour or even more chips per hour on a 9 max, i play both 6 or 9 depending on availability, i prefer 9 max on high rings because my larger pot sizes outweigh the smaller pots with more hands won in 6 max and i like more competition on the table having 3 more players. if u know how to build a large pot well knowing u will take it at the end then 9 max is also very profitable like 6 max. high sit n goes i prefer 9 max but it takes forever to play 250k or 500ks as far as filling a table so i have been playing much more 6 max for those buy ins as those are the only ones i play and actually fill after awhile…the 100ks a flooded with players playing the most games for best weekly 20 so i avoid most donks playing those. as far as MTT dont have a preference…the 6 max i like cause the deeper starting stacks but the 9 max with lower buy ins allow much more players killing each other off much faster which makes the tourney get into more seriouse playing mode faster. all in all i will play either on all game types but there deff are advantages and disadvantages to both so just play whatever u feel is better for u to adjust to. over time of playing both then u will know which u are more profitable at most of the time. separate from this tho, may i ask u what chip package u bought going from 0 to 10 mill in 1 minute lol, then turn around and lose all to donks on a table…u shoulda doubled or trippled up to 30 mill and not zero losing all…theres a thing called bank roll mgt and another called donk mgt. :slight_smile: cheers