MSS 6 Max

  • 13 replies
    • kennyclr
      kennyclr
      Bronze
      Joined: 31.07.2010 Posts: 37
      I'm curious with this too, as I found some sites has more 6max tables and it makes playing mss difficult to find tables.
    • conradmafer
      conradmafer
      Bronze
      Joined: 10.09.2010 Posts: 161
      Anyone plays 6 max MSS? Are the charts from 9 max articles good for 6 max if we cut first 3 positions? And what would be other differences in gameplay?
    • patszerdonk
      patszerdonk
      Bronze
      Joined: 19.05.2011 Posts: 834
      When I was trying 6max for 1st time, I tryed to cut 3 early position from the chart and use it. Its not work. 6max at average is more loose game than (9-3)max. Maybe because there are less player at the table so its easier to read opponents, and then make adjusments. BU play and steal are very important.
      I think basically preflop chart is useless for 6max.

      This is my own opinion/experience, so very subjective.


      Regards,
      PD
    • Elroch
      Elroch
      Bronze
      Joined: 08.02.2011 Posts: 150
      I am surprised that there should (in principle) be so much difference. Each hand of poker is an isolated opportunity to attempt to achieve profit. Therefore if you get a FR hand in MP2, MP3, CU, BU, SB or BB with all players before MP2 folding, the only difference from a short-handed game should be the (very subtle) card removal effects. Primarily there is fractionally more chance of getting an ace because if one of the early position players had an ace, there would have been a fair chance their hand would have been playable. Given that the large majority of hands with aces in would be folded by good players in early position, this effect is not very strong at all.

      By this logic, any FR system should need very little modification at a SH table.

      But if players play differently, this refutes this argument.

      One thing I noticed was that strategy.com recommended opening ranges for middle position were more different between FR and SH than I would have expected - the main difference is more suited connectors and less pairs in FR. I can't understand such a big difference, especially since both suited connectors and small pairs are speculative hands that play well in pots with several players.

      Perhaps someone can explain the magnitude of these differences to me?
    • DoigteurFou
      DoigteurFou
      Bronze
      Joined: 16.08.2007 Posts: 1,529
      Things are not that simple. In full ring you pay 1,5BB to see 9 (or 10) opening hands, which is 0.15BB/hand, whereas in shorthanded you pazy 1.5BB to see only 6 hands which is 0.25BB/hand. Which means playing a hand in shorthanded is an amazing 66% more expensive.
      With that in mind, you can easily understand why cutting down the first 3 positions is not enough for a starting hand chart to be playable. If you want to have the very same ratio of hands played to cost of a hand, you have to cut the first positions, AND to add the hands not played at those positions (for example 4% UTG+1, 5% UTG+2, 6% UTG+3, that's 15% hands more to play) into the hands you play in the remaining positions. But doing that you will keep the ratio balanced for a full ring game and not take into account that each hand cost 66% more.
      That's why stealing is so important in shorthanded games. Each time you steal blinds you buy 6 more hands to see. If you steal enough, you will not have to play too loose UTG and MP, which are the worst sits both pre and postflop.

      This explains why shorthanded games are looser. This also explains why heads-up are extremely loose compared to SH as well.

      Here's something interesting: in elephant I take basic values for TAG play in SH and FR (in the "beginner" screen):
      FR: VPIP 14, PFR 10
      SH: VPIP 22, PFR 14

      VPIP is around 57% higher and PFR is 40% higher (however I'd play more about 20/17 in SH personally if I played TAG). This reflects quite well the fact that hands are 67% more expensive. There are allways differences to theory, since the game is much led by the blind steals and resteals than in FR, so the VPIP and PFR are not proportionnally growing (since the main goals to obtain money are not the same)

      About 6-max MSS, the spanish community has things about it, they even have a forum about 6-max MSS, with analysis boards and stuff. My spanish is not really good but I'll improve :)
    • BadeaCelRau
      BadeaCelRau
      Bronze
      Joined: 15.10.2010 Posts: 2,122
      ^ Nice explanation

      You have to open up a lot and adapt to opponents. Cutoff is played in different ways depending on the button, the button is played in different ways depending on the blinds. 3bets/resteals are a lot looser. Look for Verneer's guide(book :D ) to the micro limits in the BSS section. It's about bss but it teaches so much about ranges and opponent adaptation.

      Also, this is the standard range advised by Gilder1987 (the mss sh coach of the spanish community) :

      Openraise
      UTG : 66+,A8s+,KQs,A9o+
      MP : 55+,A7s+,KJs+,A8 +,KQo
      CO : 44+,A5s+,KTs+,QJs,A6o+,KJo+
      BU : 22+,A2s+,K7s+,Q9s+,J9s+,T9s,98s,87s,A4o+,KTo+,QJo
      SB : 55+,A8s+,K9s+,QTs+,J9s+,T9s,98s,87s,A7o+,KTo+

      3bet - 4bet
      Villain is in
      EP: TT+ AQo+ AJs+ - QQ+ AK+
      MP: 99+ Ajo+ Ats+ - QQ+, AK+
      CO: 88+, ATo+A9s+ - JJ+AK+
      Bu: 66+, A8 + A6s+ - TT+ AQ+ Ajs+(careful with AJs, check your history with the villain)
      SB: 55+ A7o+ AXS+ Kjo+ Kts+ - Ajo+ 99+ Ats+

      But as he says himself, ADAPT. I hope this helps ^^
    • patszerdonk
      patszerdonk
      Bronze
      Joined: 19.05.2011 Posts: 834
      Things are not that simple. In full ring you pay 1,5BB to see 9 (or 10) opening hands, which is 0.15BB/hand, whereas in shorthanded you pazy 1.5BB to see only 6 hands which is 0.25BB/hand. Which means playing a hand in shorthanded is an amazing 66% more expensive. With that in mind, you can easily understand why cutting down the first 3 positions is not enough for a starting hand chart to be playable. If you want to have the very same ratio of hands played to cost of a hand, you have to cut the first positions, AND to add the hands not played at those positions (for example 4% UTG+1, 5% UTG+2, 6% UTG+3, that's 15% hands more to play) into the hands you play in the remaining positions. But doing that you will keep the ratio balanced for a full ring game and not take into account that each hand cost 66% more. That's why stealing is so important in shorthanded games. Each time you steal blinds you buy 6 more hands to see. If you steal enough, you will not have to play too loose UTG and MP, which are the worst sits both pre and postflop. This explains why shorthanded games are looser. This also explains why heads-up are extremely loose compared to SH as well.


      I do not agree. The 66% is too high ratio. We must consider:
      1. At 3 early FR position we must thighten up our opening range because we facing more opponents.
      2. At later than these 3 positions it could be there is a reaise behind you.
      With these 2 points alone, we can see that the should be lower than 66%, (I guess between +5% to -5%).

      BTW, the point of "Elroch" post above was not this. His point was (sorry, correct me if I'm wrong): we can play SH the way we play FR with 3 earlier position fold. So we can use strategy and the preflop chart from FR.
      And if we compare it at the preflop chart, basically its true.

      for example, let's see the pokerstrategy open raising chart (see it at Equilab. I think we have it too at silver or gold section... I myself do not access to it yet :) )


      PS.COM SH Open Raising Chart (ORC) - Standard:
      MP2: 22+, ATs+, AJo+, KQs, KQo (11.01%)
      MP3: MP2, ATo, KJs, KJo (13.12%)
      CO: 28.21%
      BU: 45.40%
      SB: 24.28%

      PS.COM FR Open Raising Chart (ORC) - Standard:
      MP2: 66+, AJs+, AJo+, KQs, KQo, 87s+ (10.41%)
      MP3: MP2, 55, ATs, ATo, KJs, 76s (12.67%)
      CO: 25.79%
      BU: 38.16%
      SB: 23.08%

      We can see that both charts have practically equal ratio.

      I stealed this problema and bring it to NL BSS discusion forum (sorry Elroch :D ) but alas.... there have been no response so far.
      PS.COM Starting Chart: small pocket pair or suited conector. Which is better?
    • BadeaCelRau
      BadeaCelRau
      Bronze
      Joined: 15.10.2010 Posts: 2,122
      Raising suited connectors from EP in both MSS and BSS is recipe for disaster. You very rarely hit and it's hard to take your opponent's stack out of position.
    • DoigteurFou
      DoigteurFou
      Bronze
      Joined: 16.08.2007 Posts: 1,529
      0.25/0.15 = 1.67 => each hand cost 67% more to play in SH, you may agree or not, you can't counter this number which is real.
      What you can argue about is the need to play 66% more hands in your opening chart. I gave a few things about my point of view, however I did not forget to mention that:
      1- each time you steal you win 6 free hands to play, virtually lowering the average cost of a hand
      (and it is easier to steal since there less players to play before you preflop, I did not say this but it was obvious to me)
      2- in shorthanded, the blind battles is much more important than in FR, and this results in different kind of play when transposed to the reality

      From those two things, one may think (and rightly so) that with a enhanced blind steal strategy, he wouldn't have to open his range too much (and certainly not 66% more)

      I also took the numbers from the pokerstrategy elephant, and only for average TAG style because:
      1- I am not a pure TAG player, I have a more lagish approach to the game (even if I'm not loose enough to call myself a LAG, don't have the handreading skills yet to open my game that much)
      2- By the time I played FR (and was a real TAG), I did not have a tracker. I am therefore not really aware of what good stats for TAGs are in both variant.

      However if you think about the +67% i ranges, you basically go from a 12/8 FR player to a 20/13 in SH, which is not shocking (most pure tags I see in SH are between 17/15 to 14/12, and if you think about it it is basically an adaptation of the ranges to avoid having too much limps. You play a little bit less hands, but you raise more which means that in average you will play with more money/hand by being 17/15 than 20/13, which goes in the same direction than the enhanced average cost of each hand)

      In my opinion, you can use a FR chart to play SH, but you have to add more steals to your range, and more resteals.

      With your examples: the differences in percentage per position is:
      UTG +0.6%
      MP +0.45%
      CO +2.42%
      BU +7.24%
      SB +1.2%

      With the cumulated percentages, you will in average play 11.91% more hands compared to the FR chart. If we take those numbers proportionnaly to the initial FR, we have a ratio of 1.108, meaning that we play 10.8% more hands. this is double of the number you assumed (5%)

      But if you look well in my posts, I did not say that playing SH with a FR chart is not possible. I only said that you have to play around 15% more hands to have the same balance of hands played / turn of table, and I added that this should be correct if the hands had the same average cost, however this is not true (once again, each hand cost 67% more money).
      If I take those numbers, it is easy: In 10 hands played at a table, you will pay 2.5BB in a SH table and play in average 1.22 hands (number calculated by simply adding the percentage ranges of each position, not counting BB's range, which may change things a little bit since you will be on BB more often as well. However it is quite hard to calculate). On a FR table in 10 hands you will pay 1.5BB and play in average 1.31 hands.

      The numbers show a great difference. On a FR table each time you play a hand it has to get back 1.15BB (= 1.15BB/1.31 hands), whereas on a SH each hand has to get back 2.04BB, almost the double.

      What those number prove, in my opinion, is simply that cou can't play SH as if you were playing FR.
    • pzhon
      pzhon
      Bronze
      Joined: 17.06.2010 Posts: 1,151
      Originally posted by DoigteurFou
      Things are not that simple. In full ring you pay 1,5BB to see 9 (or 10) opening hands, which is 0.15BB/hand, whereas in shorthanded you pazy 1.5BB to see only 6 hands which is 0.25BB/hand. Which means playing a hand in shorthanded is an amazing 66% more expensive.
      No, this is a common misconception akin to the sunk cost fallacy. What happens on other hands does not mean it's a good idea to lose money on this hand. If the dealer is confused and always makes you the CO, or always UTG you should play whatever range is profitable from that position. You should not adjust based on not having to pay the blinds.

      One difference between full ring and shorthanded is that you face different opponents. Shorthanded opponents see more blind-stealing, and therefore they tend to respond better to blind steals. Full-ring opponents are often very bad at defending blinds, and may give late position raises too much respect on average, which means that in full ring games, if you know what you are doing, you may be able to steal with a wider range than shorthanded. If you are new, it's ok to play the overly tight survival strategies found in some of the hand charts, but if you want to maximize your profit you should take advantage of this opportunity.

      Another difference is that you don't have as many people limping from early position in shorthanded games because early position does not exist. UTG 6-handed is in middle position. (Yes, some people call it early position, but you are supposed to disregard all of the FR advice for early position.) So, if your main profit in FR game was punishing players who would limp in with A5o or Q8s from 5 off the button, you may need to find another source of profit.

      Fewer pots are multiway in 6-max games. This means shorthanded players are less used to reading the strength shown in multiway pots. Sometimes it's clear to fold TPGK or an overpair after a continuation bet in a multiway pot, and shorthanded players are not used to making folds like this.

      Getting back to the issue, you expect to lose more in the blinds in full ring since there are more player who can be dealt a good hand while you are in the blinds. So, the times you hit the blinds are more expensive. This is mostly balanced by the amount you gain by finding profitable hands to play in early position. You can't simply count the hands per blind posted, since hitting the blinds is not the same in full ring as it is 6-handed.
    • pzhon
      pzhon
      Bronze
      Joined: 17.06.2010 Posts: 1,151
      What those number prove, in my opinion, is simply that cou can't play SH as if you were playing FR.
      If your strategy is sound, you can. When I play FR and SH at the same time I don't pay close attention to which tables are which. The main difference is that I will have different reads on an unknown FR player than an unknown SH player, but few players stay unknown for long.

      By the way, this common misconception is even worse in tournament play, where even some well-known poker theorists say that if the blinds will go up then you should panic and push really widely now. So, you are in good company. However, that the blinds will go up next hand does not greatly affect the risk:reward ratio from risking your whole stack to steal the blinds on this hand.

      Make the play that wins money on this hand. Don't worry about how rapidly the blinds will hit you.
    • patszerdonk
      patszerdonk
      Bronze
      Joined: 19.05.2011 Posts: 834
      Hello pzhon,

      Nice to see a coach participate in this discusion :D
      Can you please response to "Elroch" post above? which is better small pp or sc for low level ( 0.01/0.02 limit) ?

      At other thread a diamond member said that it does not really matter because these hands only for "balancing" and we can even play only value range (big starting hand?) because balancing does not matter at this level.
      How do you think?
    • pzhon
      pzhon
      Bronze
      Joined: 17.06.2010 Posts: 1,151
      When hands have a value close to 0, it doesn't matter much whether you play them or not. So, you could try playing all of the marginal suited connectors and dropping the marginal pairs or vice versa and you would not see a large difference, particularly against unobservant opponents.

      Pocket pairs do not rely on position as much to get paid off or to draw cheaply, and they more frequently outflop overpairs. Suited connectors more often flop draws which can be valuable for semibluffing if you can find good opportunities for that, or you can draw with implied odds. You also more often end up with busted draws which can be the best bluffing hands on the river since you aren't wasting any showdown value. I think playing suited connectors well is more complicated than playing pocket pairs well, so I think it's reasonable for beginners to focus more on pocket pairs.