This site uses cookies to improve your browsing experience. By continuing to browse the website, you accept such cookies. For more details and to change your settings, see our Cookie Policy and Privacy Policy. Close

FR vs SH

    • Wacko118
      Joined: 21.06.2009 Posts: 300
      This just something i have been wondering about. At high stakes most tables that are populated are 6max tables. This makes me think that the best regs are going to be SH players rather than FR players. If you want to win at these stakes you are kinda forced to be very good SH.

      SH obviously i feel has several advantages, you play more hands in more marginal situations which means as a player you improve a lot quicker i feel, especially postflop. Also you generate a lot more rake and therefore a lot more rakeback in the same time period. Obviously also mistakes are a lot more obvious, eg open limping, and a lot easier to punish.

      Again FR has some of its own. The variance is much lower the spots are less marginal, its fairly obvious someone raising UTG is gonna have your AJ more or less crushed every time. Also focus required is less.

      I used to play a lot of NL25 FR and since my year at uni had quite a bit of time off it and am now playing NL10 SH. I was winning player at NL25 about 3BB/100 over 20k hands. And now im about breakeven maybe a little plus at NL10Sh because at FR i never really had to work on my postflop game too much.

      Does this mean that FR is full of much weaker players even at the same limit? Would it maybe be recommended to learn to the stage where you are crushing the limit below at SH then move up to the limit above FR?

      Anyone can give me why they play what they play and why? Also whether they feel their game is softer than the other would be nice.
  • 3 replies
    • Wriggers
      Joined: 21.07.2009 Posts: 3,250
      I switched from FR to SH a few months ago, and I found that it's much easier to win at SH if you develop the postflop skills and the fish tend to migrate to SH more so they can get some action. As you said, variance it a lot lower at FR, but the potential winrates are as well. It did take me a while to adjust to the added aggression of SH play, but once I did my winrate skyrocketted compared to my FR results at the same stake (NL25).

      Example: My FR winrate for NL25 was just over 1bb/100, whilst my NL25 SH results over the past 55k hands has been around 7bb/100, and that's with running slightly below EV as well.

      As you said, at the higher limits you are forced to move to SH at some point as the FR tables seem to die down.
    • bennisboy
      Joined: 11.04.2011 Posts: 711
      I feel you almost can't compare the two really, they are almost as different as can be.

      i hve found at lower stakes though, FR tends to be populated by people 24 tabling, and just set mining.

      In my own personal opinion, SH is more about playing poker, while at FR its more about playing the cards.
    • madison79
      Joined: 06.06.2011 Posts: 63
      The reason I prefer playing FR over sh is most sites focus on SH play and that is were most of the vids are about.

      FR is also what is played at local card rooms so I wanted to learn that for when I visit a casino with poker.

      As far as nitts nut hunting it's pretty easy to steal their blinds and beat them up pretty good.

      Pick the one you feel better at.