6 max 0.5-1 at party

[AshleyC 0]

I've been playing 6 max $0.50-$1 limit at party and have been doing well recently, my pokertracker stats are as follows:Hands: 1,447Vol Put $ in pot: 36%PF raise: 19.6%Went to SD: 31%Won $% at SD: 51%wON $ % WSF: 37%Aggression factor: 2.54BB / 100 hands: 5.69These stats are since I started playing. I feel that I've improved somewhat since and so believe that my currecnt true BB / 100 is actually about 7BB / 100. I feel that I've found a decent strategy at this level of being incredibly aggressive in position and either fold / raise pre-flop. With this win rate, should I move up to playing $1-$2 ? What win rate suggests that you're ready to move up to a higher limit?Is there much difference in the play beteen the levels and also between 1-2 and 2-4 at partypoker? Would you suggest any strategy changes? What do my stats suggest about my play?Also I've tried multi-tabling 6 max at party but because I'm involved in many hands shorthanded when I go to click on fold / call / raise on one screen it may suddenly change to the other table and I can end up clicking what I want to do on table 1 for table 2. Does any one know a way to overcome this? It's preventing me from multi-tabling. Thanks for any advice offered.

[Jordan 1]

Play 8,553 more hands at this level then move up.- Jordan

[lifelessimp 0]

Play more hands. 1.5 k hands isn't nearly enough to determine how well you are playing, etc.Lots of varience in 6-max. Large downswings probably ahead. Not saying that you're not beating the game, but you're not beating it at 7BB/100.Other than that, I know nothing about pt so I won't critique.

[Tparks86 0]

I've been playing a lot of short handed lately at the 3/6 level. The players there are still very passive, so I cannot imagine the type of game .50/1 6 max is. Unless the games are full of players that will call down ALL the time I think your Pre Flop raise % should be closer to your VP$IP. If you're going to play the hand you should probably be raising. In most cases limping in is the wrong play in a small stakes 6 max game.

[Abbaddabba 0]

Someone with a 25k+ short handed hold em sample should post their winrate graph via pokerpatterns. You'd then realize how meaningless 1.5k hands are.

I've been playing a lot of short handed lately at the 3/6 level. The players there are still very passive, so I cannot imagine the type of game .50/1 6 max is. Unless the games are full of players that will call down ALL the time I think your Pre Flop raise % should be closer to your VP$IP. If you're going to play the hand you should probably be raising. In most cases limping in is the wrong play in a small stakes 6 max game.

You must have skipped over 1/2SH then. Because the players there tend to be far too aggressive, if anything (in my experience). All of the burnt out LAGs who fail miserably at full ring seem to settle down at 1/2SH and blast away on all streets, regardless of what they hold.

[Tparks86 0]

Someone with a 25k+ short handed hold em sample should post their winrate graph via pokerpatterns. You'd then realize how meaningless 1.5k hands are.

I've been playing a lot of short handed lately at the 3/6 level. The players there are still very passive, so I cannot imagine the type of game .50/1 6 max is. Unless the games are full of players that will call down ALL the time I think your Pre Flop raise % should be closer to your VP$IP. If you're going to play the hand you should probably be raising. In most cases limping in is the wrong play in a small stakes 6 max game.

You must have skipped over 1/2SH then. Because the players there tend to be far too aggressive, if anything (in my experience). All of the burnt out LAGs who fail miserably at full ring seem to settle down at 1/2SH and blast away on all streets, regardless of what they hold.

Quite possible. It all depends on the texture of the game. If it's loose and passive then then there shouldn't be much limping. If that's not the case (and it may not be I've never played .5/1 short handed) then you're probably fine.

[Smasharoo 0]

[/b]Someone with a 25k+ short handed hold em sample should post their winrate graph via pokerpatterns.[/b]I will.Here you go:WWWWWWWWWW

[nachunja 0]

then is 5K good enough to determine a BB/100 rate?(in a 10 max)and what the LAG and OESD stand for

[TJ_Eckleburg 0]

then is 5K good enough to determine a BB/100 rate?(in a 10 max)and what the LAG and OESD stand for

10k is when you can start talking. To have a real idea for a bb/100 rate with a LOT of confidence (>95%), you need between 50k and 100k hands. Also, if the variance is higher, then the sample size needs to be higher to be more accurate, in a general sort of way. So, you need more hands for 6-max for a winrate with the same confidence in your winrate at ring, because the variance is relatively higher in 6-max.LAG = loose aggressive playerOESD = open-ended straight draw

[Actuary 3]

[/b]Someone with a 25k+ short handed hold em sample should post their winrate graph via pokerpatterns.[/b]I will.Here you go:WWWWWWWWWW

:)Abbracaddabra is right about $1/2 6 Max.right on. If you like bluff catching, go there.And, the lags attract another breed: those that calls down with Ace high... so you can value bet like crazy there

[AshleyC 0]

Thanks for the advice, im going to try and play alot in the coming weeks to try to get to 10k while maintaing success.

[TJ_Eckleburg 0]

Thanks for the advice, im going to try and play alot in the coming weeks to try to get to 10k while maintaing success.

Best of luck to you. Just remember... it's not your fault and you're still as good a player as you think you are.There will be days where NOTHING works, and everything you do will be brilliant, yet thwarted by Villain's incompetence.But oh, the heaters you can go on at a 6-max table...

[iggymcfly 0]

I'll agree that 1,500 hands doesn't prove anything. However, with that being said, I disagree vehemently with the idea that you need 10,000 hands at .5/1 to move up to 1/2. If you've got a pretty good idea that you're beating the .5/1 game, then just go for it. Both levels are really fishy, ad if you have any idea how to play poker, you should be able to beat either one no problem.If your .5/1 "bankroll" is a lot to you, then make sure you have $400, (200 BB), before you move up. Otherwise, then go ahead and move up with $200 and start doubling your profits.Moving up limits when you're using poker to make a living is a little different from deciding which micro limit game to play in your spare time.

[TJ_Eckleburg 0]

I'll agree that 1,500 hands doesn't prove anything. However, with that being said, I disagree vehemently with the idea that you need 10,000 hands at .5/1 to move up to 1/2. If you've got a pretty good idea that you're beating the .5/1 game, then just go for it. Both levels are really fishy, ad if you have any idea how to play poker, you should be able to beat either one no problem.If your .5/1 "bankroll" is a lot to you, then make sure you have $400, (200 BB), before you move up. Otherwise, then go ahead and move up with $200 and start doubling your profits.Moving up limits when you're using poker to make a living is a little different from deciding which micro limit game to play in your spare time.

Sorry... I think that's really bad advice.300 BB is the rule of thumb for ring, and 6-max is high variance (so a higher bankroll, in the ballpark of 400-500 BB, is preferred).Also, your VP$IP is way too high. 26-28 is optimal for low stakes limit shorthanded. 6-max plays surprisingly closer to 10-handed than it does to 3-handed.

[Actuary 3]

TJ:note this part:Moving up limits when you're using poker to make a living is a little different from deciding which micro limit game to play in your spare time.if its for recreation, like a round of golf, who cares about BR.We always assume its a serious endeavor for everyone.That's a good assumtpion so we don't forget BankRoll management; but nothing wrong with playing for kicks either.just trying to interpret iggy's post, I may be wrong.

[iggymcfly 0]

Actuary's got the right general idea.The point is that since the OP's playing micro-limits, he can always just reload another $200 if he loses. It's not the kind of money that's going to seriously hurt if he loses it.As a result, it's OK to play with a risk of ruin around 20 or 25% whereas you might not want that risk if you'd built up $25,000 over the course of several months.Furthermore, the micro-limit games are so easily beatable, that your winrate will present itself a lot faster than it would playing a higher stakes game. If you're playing to win 1 BB/hr, then variance will account for the bulk of your results until you've played thousands of hands. However, if you're in a game where you can average 6 or 7 BB/hr, by the time you've played 1000 hands, you'll have built up enough through skill that it will take a really cold run of cards to run through your bankroll.