Question re: 6 seater STTs

breadmonkey

I hope I'm not wrong about this, but I think I've read quite a few posts here where people said that variance was higher in shorthanded STTs. Why is this so?

I would have thought that having only 6 players would make it easier to finish ITM since there are fewer to knock out, despite the fact that only 1st and 2nd get paid??

Norwich Fan Rob

one reason might be the prize money split, as in 6 seaters, u really need to get the win to make any decent amount. (2nd is marginally over money back).

Whereas in 9 seaters, 3rd place will double u up financially.

If u are a solid player, u can make it to the latter stages when the blinds get big more often than not, and the extra 3 players doesnt make that much difference to this fact, whereas the fact that 3 get paid instead of 2 does make a significant difference i think.

therefore, more swings are attached to 6 seater tourneys, as u need the win to boost your roll, but if u run hot and string a few of these together, your roll will rocket.

doc71

When I get the chance i play these 6 STT (20, 30) on pokerroom. I find that players seem to want to get they're chips in much faster than in a 10 STT. You can end up on the bubble with blinds be still relatively low in short time.