6 handed PT strat and stats

I've been thinking quite a bit about 6 max play lately. Mostly this is because I've been playing it that much. I found Absolute's 6 max games are much softer than it's full ring play, and I can never seem to run out of bonus there. I also found myself helping another 2+2er make his first foray into 6 max play, and every other day or so we seem to get a post here about people feeling lost at 1/2 6 max. While I'm a perpetual student of 6 max, and poker in general, I have managed to learn a few things and compile a pretty good deal of information from the forums here, specifically about taking those first few baby steps.

About a month ago, someone posted a poll in both HUSH and small stakes (sorry, lost the link) asking if people thought learning full ring or short handed play was more difficult. The overwhelming response from both forums was, to the surprise of virtually no one, that people thought learning 6 max play was more difficult. One poster chimed in, though, with a comment that rang very true: every full ring player encounters situations resembling 6 max play every single time they play, but a 6 max player will never see many situations from full ring. A similar thesis was also discussed by Ed Miller in his April 2005 article on preflop play in short handed situations. He argued that the commonly stated idea, "In shorthanded games you pay the blinds more often, so you have to play more hands to compensate," was incorrect. Instead, he stated, "Playing in a shorthanded game is theoretically no different from playing in a full game where some players have folded. Being under the gun in a four-handed game is the same situation as being one off the button in a ten-handed game where everyone has folded to you."

When people talk about short-handed situations, they are frequently talking in the same breath about all the adjustments you need to make: how you need to be more aggressive, how you need to defend your blinds, how you need to find value in marginal hands, how A high has showdown value, how you should never open-limp, how all these maniacs will 3-bet with anything, etc. All these things are true, for the most part, but there are two major undertones here that are incorrect: one, that 6 max play is significantly different from full ring play, and two, that these are things you shouldn't be doing in full ring play.

Those two thoughts, I believe, are the two biggest issues that people have when they start out in 6 max play, myself included. Short-handed play gets filed in their heads as a completely different game, and people walk into it looking to make radical adjustments in their play. Sensible, winning 2+2ers will do things like try to steal against loose blinds with J2o, call down with Q high, defend their big blind from a tight player with 93s, and 3-bet a turn check/raise from a passive player after a scare card drops when holding second pair. Most 2+2ers wouldn't dream of doing these things in a full ring game, and yet it happens all the time when you put a good player at his first 6 max table.

Six max play is still poker. Repeat that. Six max play is still poker - the same game we know and love, and know how to beat. Pot odds still apply. Bottom pair is is not the nuts. Turn check/raises on paired boards from passive players still tend to mean sad things for AA. Sets can still get cracked. Sometimes, yes, the other guy does have the flush. Never forget the things you learned from SSH and from the thousands of hands of full ring you've played up to this point. The same fundamentals still apply. Any experienced 2+2er should be able to sit down at a 6 max table and make NO adjustments from their full ring play and still be successful. All he or she needs to do is play every hand as if it was folded to MP2.

That's the real trick, though, and that's the reason why people talk about all the adjustments you need to make. People are making adjustments to 6 max play because they are lacking in important concepts from full ring play. That is also why most veterans say playing 1/2 6 max is crucial before moving up to 2/4 and beyond. If you're lacking in one of the "adjustments" you need to make, you are an incomplete poker player, even strictly in terms of full ring play.

Therein lies the beauty of 6 max play. It brings to the fore concepts that you can ignore in full ring play and still be a winning player. For example, in full ring play, you check a garbage hand in the BB after the CO open-limps, the button limps, and the SB folds. On the flop, you hit second pair on a ragged flop. The natural inclination of many full ring players is to just check/fold and not give the hand a second thought. You don't have to when playing full ring. You'll get paid off well enough when you make it to the river holding the nut flush and the pot is still five handed to make up for the very slim EV in the previous hand. When you're playing short-handed, however, there is no way you can possibly get paid off as well as full ring when you hit something good. Therefore, you had better start finding value elsewhere, or else those blinds are going to eat you alive.

Many more concepts come out to play like this. Preflop strategy changes because open limping is a no-no, just like it is for later positions in full ring (check out Ollie's hand in the second thread, too - not only his good play, but his last sentence). Reads, real reads, become more important, because you'll find yourself heads-up with the same people more often. Hand reading becomes more important because you have to know when your bottom pair has some value. Unimproved overcard and underpair (and more underpair) play become more important because you'd better be extracting some value here as well. It's a big part of your win rate. When you find yourself playing in the blinds 66% more often, you'd darn well better find a good way to minimize your losses, given that everyone loses money from the blinds. The thing is, these situations come up in full ring as well, but people are too used to taking the easy route and folding. As NPA said in one of the articles I linked above, "...you guys are hesitant to play marginal hands in spots that are profitable but uncomfortable. Yes, you aren't thrilled that you have unimproved ace-king in a big pot, but that's what you got, and you have to make the best play with it. It seems that some of you don't want to make the correct play because it MIGHT (note caps) leave you with a "tough" river decision." Playing 6 max forces you to make the tough decisions and play correctly in the uncomfortable spots that you may have been avoiding because of how much of your winnings comes from the sum of all the marginal situations you encounter. The best part, though, is that the ability to play in these marginal situations in 6 max play will do nothing but improve your full ring play as well. Just remember, though, that there's still a difference between a marginal hand and a truly awful one.


With the ever increasing popularity of 6 max play in these parts comes an increasing number of questions about the proper stats to have for 6 max play.

The problem with stats is that having stats in line with typical values does not necessarily imply good play, nor does having stats out of line with typical values necessarily imply bad play. However, seeing that your stats are out of line can give you a quick diagnosis and a place to start looking for holes. Hopefully the information I've compiled and put in here will be used as a beginning, not an end, for improving play.

------------------------

VPIP and PFR: These are easily the stats about which the most questions are asked, and the answer is farly imprecise. Following this starting hand chart will get you to about 23-25/14-16 or so, and that's pretty reasonable. If that feels too loose and too aggressive, you could consider tightening up somewhat until you get more comfortable, but if you're playing any tighter than 22/12, you're probably passing up on too many profitable opportunities. Some of the most experienced posters in HUSH play as aggressively as 30/20. This is pretty much the recommended maximum, and this is not recommended for players who are just getting started in 6 max play, or especially for those still fairly new to hold'em in general. The last thing to keep in mind is that you don't want to be playing 30/12 or 21/20. Your VPIP and PFR should increase (or decrease) cooperatively.

Given the same set of opponents, you should be playing exactly the same preflop as you would if it was folded to MP2 in a full ring game. If you find there are differences between the two, you may want to consider adjusting your play as appropriate so that the two match. While differences in your reads of the players at the two different games may dictate somewhat different plays, it's not anything fundamentally different between the two versions of the same game we know and love.

VPIP from SB: This stat varies from about 25% to about 40%, with 35% being a pretty happy medium. The tighter numbers often come from people playing in 5/10 6 max with a 2/5 blind structure. Naturally, you should play tighter in that case, and tightest of all in a 1/3 structure at 3/6. For 6 max play, you're going to have fewer opportunities where there enough limpers to make completing 72s a good idea (fewer limpers = lower implied odds), but you can complete some traditionally dubious hands for high card strength against one really bad limper.

Folded SB to steal: Typical values for this are around 85%, give or take 5%. When you're defending your SB against a steal, you almost always want to 3bet to take the initiative back, and to hopefully fold the BB rather than offer him 5:1 on the call. The set of hands you'd raise preflop is, understandably, the set from which you'd usually select hands for 3betting in SB defense. Given that typical PFR values will be 10-20%, having your fold SB to steal roughly equal to 100% - your PFR% is pretty reasonable. Again, if you play in a game where the SB is not equal to half of the BB, then this number should decrease somewhat. You have relatively less to defend.

Folded BB to steal: The decision about whether or not to defend your BB depends on a lot of factors, primarily what range of hands the theif is raising (does he even steal, or is this raise legitimate?), your read on the theif's postflop play, and how comfortable you are with defending. Having this be at 70% is not a bad place to start out your 6 max play, but getting it down to 60% or so would probably be better. You can play a lot of hands getting good pot odds, especially since the theif's hand range will be large. If the SB comes along and offers you 5:1, you can really open up. Some veterans have this stat below 50%, but, again, that's not recommended for players new to 6 max play who might be less familiar with defending their blinds. A lot of the difference between your VPIP and your PFR comes from defending your BB - you won't be limping much.

Attempt to steal blinds: Following the above chart will get you to about 30% or so, which, again, is pretty reasonable. As you get more comfortable and get better reads on your opponents, you can increase that somewhat (or decrease, if appropriate). Much above 40%, however, and even the worst players will start to catch on to what your doing.

Aggression factors: Postflop aggression factors for 6 max play will tend to be higher than for full ring play, but not too much higher. They should also generally decrease by street. Flop aggression will tyipcally be between 2.5 and 3.5. Any higher than 3.5 and you're probably overplaying (looking for autobetting after PFR in bad situations is a good place to start if this describes you) and/or playing fit or fold. River will typically be between 1.5 and 2.5. Much higher than that, and you're probably folding too many winners. I've seen some posters with stats that look like 3.5/2.5/1.6, and other similarly successful posters with stats that look more like 2.9/2.7/2.5. It's not entirely clear which style is more profitable due to sample size issues, but both can be quite profitable. I guess you guys can debate the merits of each style in this thread if you have an opinion, or especially some data. I'd be especially curious to hear from people who've played both styles: not only to hear which they prefer, but also what they did to their postflop play that resulted in the transition.

This stat, though, is one to be particularly careful with. Don't increase or decrease your aggression for stats' sake. Look at hands and learn when to choose your spots.

Went to showdown: Marginal hands will tend to have more value when there are fewer players involved. Expect to show down more hands. A value of about 32 is probably about as low as is reasonable, and 40%-ish is about the ceiling. Typical values are 35-38%. As you add hands, this may decrease slightly, but if you're only adding hands that you end up folding before showdown, it's time to rethink about adding those hands. Also, if you play aggressively enough (and/or against tight enough opponents) that many hands don't make it to showdown, this will tend to decrease.

Won $ at showdown: This stat should be pretty much in line with typical full ring stats: 50-60%. Your marginal hands that you end up showing down will have more value, but they're still marginal. If this number is too high, you may be running hot or not showing down enough marginal hands. If it's too low, you may be guilty of calling down with jack high and need to review which hands are marginal, and which are still trash, even at 6 max.

Position Stats tab: Primarily make sure that you're getting looser and more aggressive preflop as you move from UTG to the button. The actual numbers are not particularly important if your main stats are in line, but that general trend should certainly be there.

Misc. Stats tab: Krishan Leong did an interesting study to estimate how hot or cold you are running. He looked at the data from many good players Misc. Stats tab to come up with percentages of how often you should win with each kind of hand, and roughly how often you should get a straight, flush or full house (1 in every 200 hands or so, and this has little to do with the quality of your play). Rather than rehash his entire post here, take a look at it yourselves. Make sure that when you're looking at your stats here, you have the "Show Only Hands That Were Not Folded" box checked. Looking at this information can be reassuring that you're not all that bad at poker, as well as keeping you grounded if you're running unsustainably hot. Playing at the microlimits (his data is from 5/10+), you may be able to sustain somewhat higher W$@SD percentages with your various hands, since you'll get to showdown more often with people who are more willing to show down losing hands, but they probably won't be all that much higher in the long term.

Win rate and standard deviation: Well, I guess I'll put something in here about win rate. It's simultaneously the most important and the least important stat. Be happy with anything above 0, naturally, but I'll include how to calculate with what confidence you know you are a winning player. This applies to all poker, not just 6 max, and it has been covered elsewhere, but I'm including it here for completeness. First, get your standard deviation per 100 hands from the Session Notes tab ---> More Detail. Divide that value by sqrt(N/100), the square root of the number of hands you've played divided by 100. That gives you the uncertainty (standard error) of your win rate, i.e., the accuracy to which you know your win rate after having played this many hands. As you can tell, it'll take quite a while to converge to within even as much as 0.1. Anyway, divide your current win rate by your uncertainty. This result, which I'll call Z, can be taken to a normal distribution table, like this one. Enter your Z into the "Below" box, and that's the probability you're actually a winning player. For the lazy ones among us, here are the cliff notes: Z = 1, there's an 84% chance you're a winning player, Z = 2, 98%, Z = 3, 99.999%, and Z = -1, 16%. As you can see from those numbers and a little figuring on your own with your standard deviation, it doesn't take all that many hands to know for near sure that you're a winning player. It should be equally apparent, however, that it's relatively likely for a winning 2+2er to have a negative Z over a reasonable stretch of hands.