How did your winrate handle playing more than 4 tables??

Just curious to get some thoughts and ideas on playing more than 4 at a time, i've been 4 tabling for quite a while and am about to take the plunge into 5,6,7 and 8 table madness (gradually /images/graemlins/cool.gif).

Did any of you guys suffer noticeable drops in your winrate when you added the 5th and 6th? And was it a long term thing or just temp whilst you got used to it?

Any special layouts or anything, i've got a dell 20" which fits 4 perfectly and have been experimenting adding the others in a plus shape on top which seems to be ok, until i can justify getting another monitor

Did anyone tighten up substantially in order to do this, or has it been fine with your normal game.

[ctv1116]

Basically if you can eliminate accidently folding the best hand (or worse, letting yourself time out when you've got the nuts), your winrate shouldn't suffer much. If you're playing 4 tables blind without reads, 8 tables won't seriously affect your winrate, since its probably next to impossible to get reads on 72 different opponents.

[BigBaitsim (milo)]

Timed out on the nuts last night while 7-tabling. Was paying way too much attention to a flopped set of Kings that lost to a rivered straight and when I turned back to my nut flush draw (that hit on the turn while I was distracted), I saw them fold while some jagoff typed in the inevitable "zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz."

[lacky]

I'm up to 6 tables of 5/10 6 max, about 400 to 450 hands per hour with no real problems, no noticable dropoff. In my opinion you should get the 2nd moniter first as it makes it far easier. Not only can you maintain the no overlap you have now, but you also don't have the lobby's and pokertracker popping up over the games. Makes a huge difference IMO. If the dell 20" is their flap panal I'm envyios, but you can pick up a 19" crt for under $200 to get you started.

Steve

[TazQ]

I went from 4 SH 5/10 tables to 8 5/10 SH tables. The drop in BB/100 wasn't as big as I first expected. I pretty much played on autopilot at that limit anyways so not much changed aside from noticing the horrible LAGs. I was getting over 700 hands/hr. I didn't adjust at all, I just jumped from 4 to 8 in one day.

No special setup, just using those nice Dell 2001 FPs. If you're going to go dual LCDs, try and pick up a video card that has dual DVI outputs. There are some nice Nvidia 6800 GT cards out that have dual DVI support. If you're on a budget, you could just buy two $30-50 video cards.

[astroglide]

you actually managed to time out SITTING AT THE DESK? you shouldn't be playing that many tables, and deserve all the "zzz"s that you get.

[BigBaitsim (milo)]

[ QUOTE ]
you actually managed to time out SITTING AT THE DESK? you shouldn't be playing that many tables, and deserve all the "zzz"s that you get.

[/ QUOTE ]

Yeah. I have trouble when I get too many playable hands at once. I end up focused on the one hand and miss one or more others. This happens fairly rarely, though. It cuts into my EV a bit, but not enough to not play. I did cut back from 7-8 tables, and now play 6 most of the time, which I find more managable.

[astroglide]

if 7 causes a full timeout i think 4-5 would be best. maybe 4 ring games and a tourney?

[BigBaitsim (milo)]

I suck at tourneys. I just get focused on one thing and forget the rest. I've been known to time out when three-tabling (although very rarely). I'll apologize in advance if I do it while at your table.

(BTW, did we sit at the same 3/6 last night?)

[astroglide]

i don't play 3/6

[RED_RAIN]

[ QUOTE ]
i don't play 3/6

[/ QUOTE ]

hehehe

[BigBaitsim (milo)]

I thought not, but I recalled you posting some 3/6 stats from PT last month. Old stats perhaps?

[sthief09]

[ QUOTE ]
I thought not, but I recalled you posting some 3/6 stats from PT last month. Old stats perhaps?

[/ QUOTE ]


really old

[bdk3clash]

According to PokerHorse, he was actually playing one game of 18/36.

[Sponger15SB]

[ QUOTE ]
According to PokerHorse, he was actually playing one game of 18/36.

[/ QUOTE ]

LOL way to bring back some good memories bdk3clash

[MicroBob]

[ QUOTE ]
In my opinion you should get the 2nd moniter first as it makes it far easier.

[/ QUOTE ]


agreed.

i went to my local hole-in-the-wall computer fix-it and used-parts shop and bought a cheap-o monitor for $50. haven't gotten around to splurging for anything more spectacular.
the cheap-o monitor isn't really that great but it gets the job done....and it is still MUCH MUCH MUCH better than trying to play more than 4 tables on 1 monitor.


I play 4-5 tables at a time typically. and sometimes just use the 2nd monitor for the 'other' stuff (2+2, p-tracker, e-mail, etc).

my win-rate isn't very different when play 3 as opposed to 6 tables typically.
usually it isn't that much of a difference in concentration for me though.

when i'm playing 3 tables i'm usually doing other stuff also (surfing 2+2 or watching the game on TV, etc). when i'm up to 6 tables i'm more focused on the games and am sure to shut out most of the other distractions.

since i read and am responding to your post now you can assume that you caught me in 3-table mode.

[Piers]

I find six games more tiring than four, there is not so much time to relax and wriggle your right hand. But as far as I can tell my results don’t suffer. I think above about two, each extra game does not have that much effect.

I have just splashed out on the 23”HP flat screen – its in the post. With three UB and three Prima/Ladbrokes plus three others I am hoping to be able to get up to nine games on the single monitor with no or minimal overlap. I find it difficult to cope with playing across multiple monitors.

I don’t tighten up so much as streamline my play.

I've started playing more than four and the diffence is not at all what i expected, i imagined that it would be alot tougher but the ease into 5 and 6 tables happened quite quicklyand no noticable change in info/play. I coped ok with 7 and 8 but it is definately alot more tiring than with 6 and less, and i noticed concentration dropping after 90 minutes or so, but that could just be from lack of experience with it. But for the moment i think i'll stick with six.

I haven't had to change my play either which is good, except expieriencing a nasty 175BB swing but i am sure that's not related to the extra tables. I am worried that i'm not picking up on any mistakes in play as easily as i did beforehand, but pokertracker helps with that.

[sthief09]

[ QUOTE ]
According to PokerHorse, he was actually playing one game of 18/36.

[/ QUOTE ]


think I'd go to hell if I bumped that thread?