Full Tilt low stakes 6max

[dalecooper]

Hey guys - I've been away from cash game poker for a while. Since getting back online I've been mostly playing SnGs to ease myself back into poker, and build a bankroll to play with. A few weeks in, mission accomplished. So my last few sessions I've been multitabling between usually 1 SnG and 1 or 2 6max tables - .10/.25 blinds. (When my roll gets to where it needs to be I'll move back to .25/.50, which was where I was most comfortable and made a bunch of money on Party Poker.)

Here's my question though. So far these tables have not been profitable for me in any meaningful way. I would guess that I'm just a few dollars over breakeven. And I suspect it's because the players I've been seated with all seem to be decent. Is this how things are on these tables, or am I just picking the wrong games? Almost every table I've been at so far, the players all have these attributes:

- They raise in late position.
- They usually fold to any substantial 3-bet from the blinds.
- They don't open-limp much, or at all.
- They don't call raises out of position much, or at all.
- They don't seem to get their money in bad that often.
- They c-bet after raising and exercise a lot of aggression on the flop and turn.

Compared to the SnG players, they are poker geniuses. I haven't run into anybody all that great or tricky, really; but the overall level of play seems a lot better than what I'd been expecting. Most of them are playing standard TAgg poker. The few bad players I've run into are short stackers - they buy in for $10 usually and blow throw it in a couple bad hands, and leave again. I find that a lot of times the game is just the TAggs poking at each other for a while until a short stack shows up, and then it's a question of who will hit the hands first to take that player's money.

Is this really the standard on FT, or is my experience atypical? And if I'm right about this, should I change my game to take advantage of it? I've already started raising more in early position and 3-betting light (or even as a total bluff sometimes), but still it seems like I'm just trying to steal more blinds than everybody else. Frankly it's kind of boring. I miss the lunatics and total donks from Party's 6max games.

[Silly String]

Welcome to online poker post UIGEA. Fish are less abundant, competent pre-flop players are plentiful, and post flop is where the money is at.
Things just aren't quite the same, but some of it is negative variance if you are good and not out of practice. The low stakes games can still be beat easily, but the win rates are lower and therefore variance is going to be higher.

[dalecooper]

Damn, how sad is that. This honestly makes me wonder - is there better money in the SnGs and tournaments? Obviously there's more money to be won hand for hand in a cash game, but it seems like the quality of play is so much worse in the SnGs that my edge has to be higher overall. Pre and post-flop, many of those players are just awful.

[ZwiFT]

Damn, how sad is that. This honestly makes me wonder - is there better money in the SnGs and tournaments? Obviously there's more money to be won hand for hand in a cash game, but it seems like the quality of play is so much worse in the SnGs that my edge has to be higher overall. Pre and post-flop, many of those players are just awful.

There is less money to be made in tournaments

[Numbr2intheWorld]

Cash is still more profitable.

idk what else to say... just improve i guess.

[mcatdog]

This honestly makes me wonder - is there better money in the SnGs and tournaments?

For most players, IMO yes. If you're really good then cash is still better.

[Galapogos]

People have learned preflop. They still have 3 spots they are god awful at. See site name for clarification.