9-max vs 6-max: The MTT schedule and you

[MoreTBC]

I've been meaning to do this post for a long time and for anyone that reads my overly long and whiny blog you'll know this is a long time coming.

I prefer playing 9 (or 8) max over 6 max NLHE MTTs. I don't know why but I just do. Cash games, I prefer 6-max, PLO in any form I prefer 6-max but for good ol' NLHE MTTs I like the tables a little bigger. Since the introduction of the new schedule I have been playing less and less on Unibet and this is mainly due to the weighting of 6-max to 9-max in the buy-in levels I play (€2-€10) and at the times I play (5pm-9pm UK time). Below are the current offerings:-

Thats 11:4 every night. There are also no €2 9-max games and no PLO games under €10. Shout out to @Soljanov for trying to get more PLO in the schedule via his/her thread here.

In order to make this more complete I also did the same exercise for the 'nano' (€0.01-€1) and the high (€25+) to see what their split was like.

A ratio of 7:3 for the nanos, which is slightly better than the lows but still seems a little unbalanced. There are also 0 PLO tournaments at this stake.

With there only being 5 MTTs in this buy-in range you'd expect the balance to be better. Again no PLO but I don't think the demand would be high enough for a nightly unless it was promoted.

So, does any of this matter to you and if it does what would you like to change? In order to gauge if anyone cares I've created a straw poll :) It's very simple, you choose your favourite format or if you have no preference, choose that :)

6-max or 9-max

It may be the case that Unibet already has lots of data that suggests people play 6-max over 9-max but I know I personally used to just play what was available in the lobby without looking at table size. I would expect casual players just look at the buy-in and GTD and choose from that rather than go into the specific MTT lobby and check the structure and table size. This screws with the data a little and all the high GTDs are on the 6-max games so casual players head towards them. I think if you simply swapped some of the bigger GTDs to 9-max there wouldn't be a difference in the entrants, but I'm just guessing on that :)

Based purely on how the MTTs look from the screenshots above here are some some suggestions for changes to the low schedule:-

• Change the Event Horizon or Titan to 9-max
• Change the Gorsky to 9-max
• Change the €10 PLO Shooting Star to 6-max (I think 9-max PLO is silly)
• Add 2x €2 9-max to the schedule (Shooting Star or Multiverse would be my preference but any format is fine)
• Change the PLO Singularity or Fireball to €5
• Change the Sputnik to 6-max
• Add a €5 9-max singularity

It's very easy to fire out ideas when you're not looking at everything else that's running and all qualifiers but I think there is room to balance things out a little more. Again, I don't know what the numbers are like but I would have though Unibet could put on 20-25 MTTs in the low bracket without cannibalising anything and allowing for more variety in the nightly offering.

I don't play the Nanos/Highs so I'm not going to make suggestions for changes there but if you play either and have any input fire it in here and we can all collectively give Leo a headache before the UOS starts :)

[FeelsBadMan]

Here's a crazy idea , don't change any of the tournaments @MoreTBC said to change (maybe except the plo), also please stop trying to change the Sputnik, do you even play it? it's good, it works, people like it, just the small one needs a bigger GTD to make it visible, because it's not visible to the 10R/A crowd right now. It's not that appealing to buy-in for 40-50€ just for the chance to win 100€ if you happen to win the tournament 😏 .

Instead of changing, how about adding a few more tournaments, 9max, in each buy-in range, in the dead times between other tournaments of that size. I keeps the player that just busted something, on the site, cause he can just reg something else, and besides, the new tournament schedule has been pretty light in number of daily tournaments per bi level, less tournaments than the old schedule, maybe it's time ... to ... make unibet great again :laugh:

Okay okay, if more tournaments isn't possible, maybe @MoreTBC 's changes aren't that bad, most of them seem like good ideas for balancing stuff out, still triggered about all the attacks to the Sputnik, it's my precious, it's beautiful just the way it is  👼

 

[XY]

Couldn't agree more with you! @MoreTBC
It is like reading my minds,I am a bit scared. :wow:

You see it right and cover the most.

6-max vs 9-max-think that it is going in a wrong way.Cash game players switched to 6-max due to slow game,time banks,lower profit per hour,etc.,so it became popular format,but IMO making MTT to 6-max is unnecessary and wrong.

About idea,already backed Solanov-s idea,but seeing some ideas (backed with likes) laying there "dead" for a years,does not gives me believe.

At the end,as you mentioned,it all became-take what is served or leave.

[MoreTBC]

Sorry for attaching the Sputnik @FeelsBadMan, I only put it in there because it doesn't seem to attract that many players in it's current form, maybe it just needs a push or a name change to make it a bit more special.

I also agree I'd rather have more MTTs overall rather than change the existing ones to sort the balance. I just assumed that if Unibet thought they could add more MTTs to the schedule they'd have done it by now.

[startelver]

I agree in more 9- player games.   

This has been the trend in recent years , that the poker rooms decide to go for 6-max, because they want more action around the tables. Winamax changed almost all   their tourneys to 6-max, and only kept a few normal ones.  

Why ?  Real tournament players  prefer 9 player. I am sure if you run a poll , more will be in favor of 8 or 9 player games. 

On sites like Pokerstars theres no problem choosing because they run both formats 24/7 and have the best traffic. 

But if you want to increase the MTT-traffic here , you should offer 50/50 both 6 and 9 max. 

 

 

[MrBandes]

Exactly. I am tired of 6-max too.

MORE Full Ring games please.

[pittpitt]

i prefer full ring cash game when the game is tuff and when i dont know my opponent ,because we can't regnonize peaplo..again i would opt for full ring ,it should good match up !

every game under a certain amount of $ is unplayable 6 or 9 handed

[Sect7G]

A good topic that should be revisited every few months to ensure the right balance is in place.

Grunching here but I think 6 max offers more action for the rec which is good.  6 max if played optimally is harder for the rec then 9 max.... But at 9 max worse play can occur due to boredom much more often then 6 max.

I prefer 9 mans but my wishes shouldn't really matter.

[Detru]

Thanks for the shout-out @MoreTBC 😃

I totally agree with this post even though I don't play Holdem much at all. That 9-max boynty PLO is pretty silly indeed. 9-max you have to basically fold everything from early positions and play even in position pretty tight. That is just boring with the blind structure it has and funplayers basically go broke every single time eventually.  Boynty makes it a little bit better but still doesn't save enough when the tournament lasts for 3h+ and bounties are pretty small because of the 10e buy-in. Close to the bubble difference between 6-max and 9-max is minimal but I think 6-max is the way to go when it comes to PLO.

If you want to keep 9-max PLO that Ante Up tournament would be interesting try. Fast structured and plenty of action.

Back in the day there was on Sundays "Oh my Omaha Boynty" 6-max tournament which was 25e buy-in and guaranteed 500e. Something like that would be awesome ❤️

 

[triceraatopp]

I dont agree on changing 6max mtts to full ring. On party and stars you have a hud, but without a hud the amount of tables you can play decreases with 9max which is limmiting imo.

[VikingsAF]

---

@triceraatopp wrote:

I dont agree on changing 6max mtts to full ring. On party and stars you have a hud, but without a hud the amount of tables you can play decreases with 9max which is limmiting imo.

---

Yes and no. 6-max is faster so you can play less tables, becaus eyou have to fold less...

I really disagree in decreasing 6-max games, but increasing 9-max games is welcome :)

[GothMoth]

9-MAX FTW

[Mynona]

I totally agree on too much 6 max compared to 9 max, it was my original complaint when the new schedule was set.

I particularly hate 6 max because the balancing of tables is not done the right way/optimally and its too often you end up playing on a table of 3 or 4 players max and i don't think much recreational players like this (it favors heavily the regular cash players), i know i hate it.

I prefer not to play at all than to play 6 max and the choice in the matter is much lower now than before.

Anyway, i hope @Leo-Unibet can find some solutions to this, as i don't want to force the existing tournaments to turn to 6 max if players likes them.

[startelver]

---

@Mynona wrote:

I totally agree on too much 6 max compared to 9 max, it was my original complaint when the new schedule was set.

I particularly hate 6 max because the balancing of tables is not done the right way/optimally and its too often you end up playing on a table of 3 or 4 players max and i don't think much recreational players like this (it favors heavily the regular cash players), i know i hate it.

 

---

 

This!  

Happens all the time , you end up with 3 or 4 players until the tables are balanced which could take a while.  In 9-max you will end up with 5--8 players but thats a lot better. You have time to fold and wait for the table to balance.  

 

[Leo-Unibet]

@startelver @MoreTBC @Mynona @GothMoth @VikingsAF

Guy's... I thought you liked fast action cowboy poker, I would expect  you to love the 4 and 5-betting pre flop with just air  😃
You can't do that stuff on 9-handed as much with out getting punished.  My self haven't done a 5-bet bluff, not having the nuts, in 10 years.
So I understand the craving for more 9-handed, I had asked for that myself. See what the future might bring.

*hint* It might be "some" schedule changes after the summer, I will have your suggestions in mind

 

 

[VikingsAF]

@Leo-Unibet you exactly know my playing style :D

If the shedule is changing after the summer, couldn't it be cool to make some kind of group to discuss the 'settings'?

Or make a thread with a bunch of polls where people can cast their votes? (That way members, who don't like to out their opinion, can give input aswell)

 

[MoreTBC]

It's a shame that we have to wait until after the summer for any changes to be made. Other sites are constantly reacting to player feedback and making changes but we'll have to wait until August/September for a single MTT to be changed from 6-max to 9? I can fully understand not adding extra MTTs to the schedule during the summer, especially a World Cup one, but you could at least change one or two to see if they perform differently for a few weeks.