How much experience do you need for multi tabling?

[Wozza]

Absolute newbie here. Only playing funny money at the mo', but I'm ploughing through my Lee Jones and Sklansky books and look to start micro in 3 or 4 weeks.

My question is, how much experience do you need before you move up to multi tabling? At the moment, it seems inconceivable to me to even play 2 at a time. I tried it a couple of nights ago on two separate sites and could barely concentrate on obe table, let alone 2.

I'm reading that I should be counting my outs, working out my odds of filling a hand, checking the pot odds and pot equity etc et-freaking-cetera. How in God's name people manage to do this on more that two I don't know.

Is it possible, with experience, to do all that on 4 (or 8!) tables? Or are people just playing super tight and only playing the very top hands?

[coinflip]

It's probably not a bad idea to start off just single-tabling.

Once you've done that for a while, you'll notice that with a typical vpip, you're only playing maybe 1 in 4 hands, counting the blinds. Even the hands that you do play, you'll often fold on an unfavorable flop. So most of the time at each table, you'll be idle.

As you add more tables, your likelihood of playing multiple hands simultaneously is still low, but the amount of time you spend playing some hand on one of your tables increases. Obviously if you play enough tables, you'll start playing multiple hands simultaneously more often.

There tends to be a tradeoff on developing good reads on people and playing more tables. After some point it becomes largely a matter of individual taste, your goals, and comfort level.

[Pov]

Start with one. Get in the groove, then try two. You'll eventually get bored with two and start to sprinkle in three. You must be careful not to let your quality of play decline too much because you can't spend as much time on each game, but if you ease into it you may find it actually helps you focus and maybe even helps you fold that questionable hand you might of played out of boredom otherwise.

[Fredrik]

It's very much up to what you do while waiting to play hands.

I can study the other players and see how they're playing, but after 20 hands that becomes rather boring. I know who plays what cards, so I get bored and either as someone already said play hands that I wouldn't have played or do something completly different in another window. Either way, my play starts to suffer after 40 hands or so. It's kind of my personal tilt, or what you'd like to call it.

Just started to 2-table, and found that even though it gets hectic sometimes, I can keep my mind focused on playing poker all the time instead of doing constant context switching.

As of now, I like 2-tabling. 3-tabling is perhaps possible, as I still idle between hands, but I think I need to build up some more confidence before that.

As for people 8-tabling; that's just insanity. /images/graemlins/wink.gif

Just my personal experience, you milage will vary.

[KenProspero]

I'm in a similar situation with you.

Here's my take.

First, I'm not going to start multi-tabling until I am regularly beating a single table.

Second, free tables have their purpose. I'll probably go back to the free tables and multi-table there. Certainly the 'game' won't be much like what you're playing, but in this case, the purpose of playing the freebies is merely to see if you can keep up with 2, 3, 4, whatever number of tables you intend on playing.

Third. And this is the most important. Why are you multi-tabling at all? This really comes down to why are you playing poker. From what I read here, multi-tabling will hurt your ROI, but may increase your earnings/hour. If you're playing because you ultimately want to go pro or semi-pro (i.e., the income you make from poker will 'matter' in your life) then earnings/hour is obviously the key number. On the other hand, if you're playing for fun, but like the idea that you can earn 'pin' money, then the real question is whether you'll get more enjoyment from playing more than one table, or doing better at the single table you're at.

Of course, no one can answer that for you.

[Wozza]

[ QUOTE ]
the real question is whether you'll get more enjoyment from playing more than one table, or doing better at the single table you're at. Of course, no one can answer that for you.

[/ QUOTE ]

I'm not even sure that I can answer that myself at this early stage. Maybe I'll get all the pleasure I want out of one table at a time and as long as I'm not losing money, that may be as far as I'll want to go.

On the other hand, the way I see it, your bankroll could be considered your score card. Lets face it, if it's going down, then the general consensus would be that your game is slipping. If it's on the up and up, then you're doing something right (I even go on tilt to a certain degree if I take a beating at funny money...).

It must be very difficult to not want to increase your roll as much as you can. But then I'd assume that the natural progression for someone wanting to improve (and hence increase your roll) would be one table at higher stakes rather than more tables at the exisitng stakes.

[bblock99]

I agree that you need a sufficient bankroll. When you increase tables, you also increase your variance. I'd say wait until you can consistently beat one table and become bored with it, then move up to two and so on. I usually 4 table, and occasionally 8 table. One of the keys is a good setup. I have a 21" monitor with 1600x1200 resolution, so i can fit 4 tables up with no overlap, that really helps. I also have a second monitor for my other tables/IM windows, or whatever.
I'd say go with what's comfortable for you. If you increase tables, you're most likely going to decrease your winrate per table, but it should still work out to make you more money, as long as you can handle it.

[bholdr]

[ QUOTE ]
I agree that you need a sufficient bankroll. When you increase tables, you also increase your variance.

[/ QUOTE ]

no, you don't- there is no difference (other than psycological factors) between playing one table for four hours or ofour tables for one hour.

the bankroll requirements for one table vs four are the same: 300BB should do it for limit.

[Wozza]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I agree that you need a sufficient bankroll. When you increase tables, you also increase your variance.

[/ QUOTE ]

no, you don't- there is no difference (other than psycological factors) between playing one table for four hours or ofour tables for one hour.

the bankroll requirements for one table vs four are the same: 300BB should do it for limit.

[/ QUOTE ]

I assume that you mean that the variance as a percentage of your total bankroll would remain the same. But that would be 4x the dollar amount if you were playing 4 tables as opposed to one, would it not?

[coinflip]

[ QUOTE ]
I assume that you mean that the variance as a percentage of your total bankroll would remain the same. But that would be 4x the dollar amount if you were playing 4 tables as opposed to one, would it not?

[/ QUOTE ]

Nope. Your variance per hand stays the same, which is the important figure. Your variance per hour goes up, but only because you're playing more hands per hour.

[bblock99]

You are correct on that statement about variance, don't know what i was thinking when i said that. Thanks for correcting me.

[gambool]

It depends on what you want to achieve. I multi table, because I want to work my way up the limits quicker. I know that I can beat the smaller limits, and I play with a minimum 300BB bankroll. I've been playing about a month, and have moved from .5-1 to 1-2 and now 2-4.

If you are unsure if you can beat the limit you are at then dont multi table. If you are still learning the game, and you feel that one table would give you a better learning experience, then definetely stick with one table. If you dont have sufficient bankroll, just plain don't do it.

If none of the above apply to you, and you think you are ready to multi table, heres what I think:

For multi tabling, its not so much poker skills, but good table reading skills you need. What I mean is things such as:
<ul type="square">
Being able to look at a table preflop and know straight away whats going on. What position are you, whats the action.
Being able to read the board and basically figure your hand without much thought.
Being able to roughly figure the pot size with ease.
[/list]
This only comes with experience. The more you play, the more it becomes second nature. You get to the point of looking at a table and clicking an action without thought. While the action is continuing, you are dealing with the other tables. You won't need to watch the whole hand. You only need to look at the table when the action gets to you. (Although you will be making a lot of advance folds).

I'm not saying that Poker skills don't matter, they do. And I'm not saying that you never precisly figure a hand, you do. But 90% of the time your decisions is pretty much clear. There are no fancy calculations that need to be made. You will be folding a lot of hands preflop. You will be missing a lot of flops. Some of the time when you have a worthwhile hand, your decision is pretty straightforward.

Only a small percent of the time (and 10% is a complete guess) you need to think about it. A lot of the time its a clear bet/call/fold. For your draws, the pot will be either much bigger than you need, or much smaller. Only when its a close call will you need to figure your outs. Fancy or clever plays are rarely worthwhile at low limits, they are over the heads of most players. Its all about ABC poker. And this is why mutli tabling is worthwhile.

Play one table until you are comfortable, then add a table, and so on. Get PokerTracker so you can look back at your play and precisly see how you are doing (the best $55 you will ever spend). Get Gametime+ or PlayerView, and that will help. Keep reading books, visit these forums, and be patient. Good luck!

[Izenra]

The first time I played online, I played 1 table for 1 hour, then switch to 2 table after. The next day I was four tabling :P.

[Fredrik]

[ QUOTE ]

Just started to 2-table, [...]

As of now, I like 2-tabling. 3-tabling is perhaps possible, as I still idle between hands, but I think I need to build up some more confidence before that.


[/ QUOTE ]

Bah! I tried to handle 4 tables (for racking up bonus raked hands); but started to do stupid mistakes because I couldn't keep track of what happened at all the tables. My VPIP sank like a rock, PFR% even worse. I only showed aggressiveness when I could take a quick glance at the flop and see that I was ahead. No time to think about straight draws...

Basically it was a disaster...

Mad props to the people who can handle it. /images/graemlins/cool.gif