The difference between a 9 player table and 10 player table

I was posed an interesting question by a friend of mine so I figured I'd post it on here. What is the difference between a 9 player table and a 10 player table?

The most obvious difference is random hand strength. Since their are 163 total random hands and an incomplete hand is approximately 33% more likely than a pair preflop, you can expect a random hand strength of top 21 hands at a 10 player table and top 24 at a 9 player table. This means at a 9 player table, the opening range is going to be expanded slightly to a few less powerful hands than needed at a 10 handed table.

So with this, I explained that if you are early and playing tighter than normal then your range should expand based on the # of players at the table (which most good players know).

What other differences can you guys think of that are necessary to know that could affect play?

where do you get stats of different tables

You are talking about 9 against 10 players, and put one stat regarding the pocket pairs,

do you know any other numbers? and different numbers and comparison betwen a full ring and a 6-max table?

I ask because I play several full ring mtt, but sometimes the number gets reduced because some sitting out or when somebody isousted at the final tables the number is reduced, so sometims you are playig against 6 or 7 players instead of 8,

My concern is because im trying to improve my game, trying tomake all decisions on based on math no mater the instant outcome, but the long run

if you can help, i will appreciated

it is just more people away from the button, and as you get away from the button you generally play tighter bc there are more people left to act it really shouldnt matter how many

your UTG+3 in full ring and utg in 6 max should be the same assuming same people left to act

There's a few different ways to define a game depending on the situation you want to study. Basically, it's just going to be a sequence of decisions which lead to some payoff depending on what decisions you make and what decisions the other players make. That is, your payoff depends on your decisions as well as other peoples' decisions.

adam76 said:

There's a few different ways to define a game depending on the situation you want to study. Basically, it's just going to be a sequence of decisions which lead to some payoff depending on what decisions you make and what decisions the other players make. That is, your payoff depends on your decisions as well as other peoples' decisions.

Click to expand...

Pardon !!

The more people in a hand preflop, the less value your cards will have. The more people at a table the more likely, by my limited observations, there will be a higher % of players preflop.

I think you have to play much more tight at a 10 player table. 10 players is much more people compared to 6 so you must adjust your stategy accordingly.

its different playing a 10 handed table because the range of hands you play would be smaller. Hands like a10 or even aj arent that great in 10 players tables however they are significant better in 9 handed tables. also position is extremly important, because when you are in utg there are still 9 players to act, and more players are going to get involved in the pots so you need to know the style of poker your opponents play.

jj20002 said:

I ask because I play several full ring mtt, but sometimes the number gets reduced because some sitting out or when somebody isousted at the final tables the number is reduced, so sometims you are playig against 6 or 7 players instead of 8,

Click to expand...

One of the more experienced players may correct me on this point but I think that for most poker math purposes it doesn't matter that someone is sitting out. Pre flop anyway.

If you are at a 6-max table and 3 are sitting out 12 hole cards are still dealt, so it is exactly the same as if all 6 players were live.

Obviously there might to be less players in each hand, after the pre flop betting, if some are sitting out

Henry Minute said:

One of the more experienced players may correct me on this point but I think that for most poker math purposes it doesn't matter that someone is sitting out. Pre flop anyway.

If you are at a 6-max table and 3 are sitting out 12 hole cards are still dealt, so it is exactly the same as if all 6 players were live.

Obviously there might to be less players in each hand, after the pre flop betting, if some are sitting out

Click to expand...

Don't read as much on the subject as a lot of players, but what I have read, the math deals only with your cards, the board, and the possible range of players still in the hand. The folded cards are as unknown to you as the undealt cards.

Henry Minute said:

One of the more experienced players may correct me on this point but I think that for most poker math purposes it doesn't matter that someone is sitting out. Pre flop anyway.

If you are at a 6-max table and 3 are sitting out 12 hole cards are still dealt, so it is exactly the same as if all 6 players were live.

Click to expand...

I'm not quite sure what you're referring to here...

If you are talking about your chances of getting a certain hand (say, pocket aces), then you're right. You have the same chances of getting dealt AA if you are at a table of 2 people or are at a table with 20.

However, if you're sitting at a 6-handed table and 3 of the players are sitting out, you should absolutely change the way you are playing, for mathematical purposes...

For example, if you are playing at a regular 6-handed table and all 6 players are playing, then (theoretically) you are supposed to win 1 in every 6 hands. So you should adjust your opening hand ranges to include all of the hands that you think you should play if you are trying to win 1 in every 6 hands.

However, if you are sitting at a 6-handed table and there are 3 people that are sitting out, then ultimately it is a 3 handed table. Sure, the players sitting out are going to get cards, but if they are just going to automatically fold to the big blind/raises, then they are ultimately not in the hand. So you're now ultimately playing at a table where only 3 players have a chance to win the pot, and now (theoretically) you are supposed to win 1 in every 3 hands, and should widen your opening hand ranges to include more cards than if you were playing with 6 people and only trying to win 1 in every 6 hands.

I could be wrong as well, but that's at least how I interpret it. Does that makes sense?

No difference

The only difference is that the blinds come around sooner

The difference is that nitty players preffer 10 handed tables because they can apply their nittiness with more joy

sam1chips said:

I'm not quite sure what you're referring to here...

If you are talking about your chances of getting a certain hand (say, pocket aces), then you're right. You have the same chances of getting dealt AA if you are at a table of 2 people or are at a table with 20.

However, if you're sitting at a 6-handed table and 3 of the players are sitting out, you should absolutely change the way you are playing, for mathematical purposes...

For example, if you are playing at a regular 6-handed table and all 6 players are playing, then (theoretically) you are supposed to win 1 in every 6 hands. So you should adjust your opening hand ranges to include all of the hands that you think you should play if you are trying to win 1 in every 6 hands.
However, if you are sitting at a 6-handed table and there are 3 people that are sitting out, then ultimately it is a 3 handed table. Sure, the players sitting out are going to get cards, but if they are just going to automatically fold to the big blind/raises, then they are ultimately not in the hand. So you're now ultimately playing at a table where only 3 players have a chance to win the pot, and now (theoretically) you are supposed to win 1 in every 3 hands, and should widen your opening hand ranges to include more cards than if you were playing with 6 people and only trying to win 1 in every 6 hands.

I could be wrong as well, but that's at least how I interpret it. Does that makes sense?

Click to expand...

Sort of.

I believe that your opening ranges etc... should stay the same as if all 6 players were there because the same number of cards will have been dealt, so I contend that you are not now supposed to win 1 in 3 hands you stay at 1 in 6 (I could well be wrong about this, I often am).

If at a STT 6-max and three players have been knocked out then it becomes 1 in 3.

How many times have you been at a table where a sit out is all in and ends up winning with the best hand? I see it a fair amount.

When there are 10 players the odds of there being 2 of a particular card, Ace for example, having been dealt are fairly high. The fewer players there are the longer the odds of 2 Aces gets. the fact that some of those players are sitting out doesn't alter those odds.

The problem, as always, is that you don't know who is holding the other A a sit out or a live player? That is the $64,000 question.

Henry Minute said:

Sort of.

I believe that your opening ranges etc... should stay the same as if all 6 players were there because the same number of cards will have been dealt, so I contend that you are not now supposed to win 1 in 3 hands you stay at 1 in 6 (I could well be wrong about this, I often am).

If at a STT 6-max and three players have been knocked out then it becomes 1 in 3.

How many times have you been at a table where a sit out is all in and ends up winning with the best hand? I see it a fair amount.

When there are 10 players the odds of there being 2 of a particular card, Ace for example, having been dealt are fairly high. The fewer players there are the longer the odds of 2 Aces gets. the fact that some of those players are sitting out doesn't alter those odds.

The problem, as always, is that you don't know who is holding the other A a sit out or a live player? That is the $64,000 question.

Click to expand...

Henry --- sam1's approach is the correct one in this situation. At a 6-handed table with three "sitters", you are effectively playing 3-handed and you need to widen your playing range so that it reflects 3-handed play. The fact that six hands are being dealt is irrelevant.

Good luck.

-HooDooKoo

In 9-10 men u need very good cards...in 6 men u can play very loose

Henry Minute said:

Sort of.

I believe that your opening ranges etc... should stay the same as if all 6 players were there because the same number of cards will have been dealt, so I contend that you are not now supposed to win 1 in 3 hands you stay at 1 in 6 (I could well be wrong about this, I often am).

If at a STT 6-max and three players have been knocked out then it becomes 1 in 3.

How many times have you been at a table where a sit out is all in and ends up winning with the best hand? I see it a fair amount.

When there are 10 players the odds of there being 2 of a particular card, Ace for example, having been dealt are fairly high. The fewer players there are the longer the odds of 2 Aces gets. the fact that some of those players are sitting out doesn't alter those odds.

The problem, as always, is that you don't know who is holding the other A a sit out or a live player? That is the $64,000 question.

Click to expand...

No, that's not right.

If you are going to get dealt two cards from the deck, you have the same probability of getting any given hand (say, AA) regardless of the number of people at the table. Sure, the dealer is dealing two cards to all of the other players, but since you don't know what these cards are, it doesn't make a difference to the probability for you to get AA.

As for seeing AA more at a 10 handed table than a 2 handed table, that is true. And the reason for that is simply because there are more people at the table receiving cards, so it is more likely if you see AA when you deal 10 hands than when you deal 2 hands.

But for any given person, the chances of getting AA pre-flop is the same, regardless of the number of hands you deal out afterwards to other players.

----

As for the sit-out argument, even though the sit-out-ers are getting dealt cards, what difference does it make? If they are just going to fold to the big blind/raise, does that matter?

Even if they have KK and are just going to auto-fold it, does that change how you would play? (I guess in this scenario it would, as you now know that there are 2 kings that aren't in the deck anymore.) But of course, you don't know what your opponents cards are in a real game. So the only information you have is that an opponent that is forced to auto-fold ends up folding 2 cards that you don't know what they are...how is that different than the cards not being dealt in the first place?

-----

As far as the opening ranges, that is wrong as well I believe. Imagine if your playing at a home game with you and your 5 friends. After you give each player 2 cards, you decide to deal 2 cards to your 14 imaginary friends. There are now 20 Hold'Em hands on the table, but 14 of them are the imaginary friends that are just going to open-fold to the raise/big blind. Are you now adjusting your range to the point where you are only supposed to win 1 in 20 hands?

The answer should be no. Even though there are now 28 dead cards (14 imaginary hands x 2 cards per hand), you didn't know what those cards were anyways. It would be no different than if they were still in the deck. So you're still playing your one hand against the 5 villains.

(Somewhat of an extreme example, but the main idea still holds...) Imagine if the sitters aren't there. The fact that there are receiving cards are irrelevant, because it ultimately doesn't matter what cards they have, and they are going to fold no matter what.

I have tried to respond to this several times, and failed.

My notion has to do with the frequency of PF PP's. Approximately 1 in 17 hands are PF PP's, 1 in 13 of those will be AA.

You will suffer those odds personally, but each hand (all players) will also suffer those same odds but on a group level. So, the frequency of PF PP at a 6 max table will be less than at fuller tables. Once every 3 hands (approx) in 6 max will have someone with a PF PP. That increases to a bit better than once every 2 hands for 9 or 10 seat tables.

This is where I have failed; While it is obvious that starting hands are more likely better at fuller tables, I'm not sure how to describe how to take the argument further. The difference is something close to 40% fewer better hands at 6 max. But it seems likely that between 9 and 10 seat tables we should tighten up 11% at 10 seat tables. So if, on average, your VPIP at 9 seat tables is 16%, it should be 14 or 15% at 10 seat tables.

Depending on the looseness factor of a table your AF should probably increase at the bigger tables as you will need to bet bigger to iso more.

The simple answer of MP at a 9max or 10 max table being equivalent to UTG at 6 max doesn't offer us much really useful info other than we should probably be playing position more in 6 max than 10 max.

You can see why I have failed at describing this notion several times.

Somebody fix me please!

The math above cannot be correct but I do not no how to correct it someone help please.. I may be wrong.

rugby0 said:

The math above cannot be correct but I do not no how to correct it someone help please.. I may be wrong.

Click to expand...

Which particular math are you thinking is wrong?