How Many 6-max Tables Do You Play?

[sthief09]

just wondering what the breakdown is. choose the number you play predominantly

[ravballz]

Usually 2 or (preferably) 3 tables. 2/4 and 3/6 on crypto.

[goodguy_1]

Full ring games I play 6-10.Moving over to 6MAX I started playing 5-6 tables..now I'm playing less only 3-4 tables.The only way I can get my winrate where I want to playing just 6MAX is to play fewer tables.

[aslowjoe]

I am just slow. I only play 3. The 4th table seems to make me lose an edge.

[spamuell]

I have been playing 4, I find playing 5 way way harder than playing 4 for some reason.

[fyodor]

I used to play 4 all the time. I was really unhappy with my results. Grisgra was the one that finally convinced me to cut back. I have been playing 2 tables for about 2 months now. Huge Huge improvement in win rate. Moved up from 5/10 to 10/20 and maintained same win rate. Last cpl days have moved back to 3 tables. I will do that for at least another month before attempting 4 again.

Thank you Grisgra

[Trix]

I´m usually playing two, but is taking a shot at 3 again as I get bored fast when just playing 2 at 5/10, but dont want to take a shot at 10/20 again yet.

[geormiet]

I find there is a big jump between 3 and 4 tables.

[Isura]

3 of 1/2 6 max, but I think I improve faster with 2. I don't see myself playing more than 3 any time soon.

[imitation]

4 when playing any limit between 1/2 and 3/6. 5/10 I'll probably cut back to 2-3 (i think 5/10 plays straight forward enough to 3 table comfortably now I am more experienced.) 10/20 bleh the best can play more than 2, I can't and I maintained a quite decent WR over 15k hands last time I was there 2 tabling so why change a winning combo.

[BigBaitsim (milo)]

I played 7 or 8 when playing full 2/4 and 3/6. I can handle 4 tables of 6-max fine, but jumping to 6 proved too much.

New Dell 2001FP really helps! /images/graemlins/cool.gif

[Grisgra]

[ QUOTE ]
I used to play 4 all the time. I was really unhappy with my results. Grisgra was the one that finally convinced me to cut back. I have been playing 2 tables for about 2 months now. Huge Huge improvement in win rate. Moved up from 5/10 to 10/20 and maintained same win rate. Last cpl days have moved back to 3 tables. I will do that for at least another month before attempting 4 again.

Thank you Grisgra

[/ QUOTE ]

/images/graemlins/grin.gif

PM me if you want an address to which to send thank-you gifts /images/graemlins/smile.gif.

[Grisgra]

[ QUOTE ]
3 of 1/2 6 max, but I think I improve faster with 2. I don't see myself playing more than 3 any time soon.

[/ QUOTE ]

Frankly, if at any point you can play 3 tables of 1/2 6-max comfortably it's time to move up. That's probably true for just about any limit IMO -- if you can play 3-4 tables of limit X and make 2BB/100+, time to move up to limit X+1.

[RunDownHouse]

I like three. Two seems like too few, and four is too many. These days I'm typically running two Abso 2/4s and one 1/2 of whatever bonus I'm working on.

[Ponks]

I've done 8 for a bit, but it was a little too much. Been doing 6 for a couple months now and it's been going well.

Ponks

[cnfuzzd]

Depends. Im quite confident i could play >8 1/2 tables for more than 2.5BB/100. 5/10, i was usually sitting at around 6 unless i was feeling particularly alert. However, i am not currently playing in the 5/106m for bankroll reasons. When i do get back in there, im going to start with 4 tables, and play that for around 15K hands, just to see how it treats me. Then we will tweak from there.

peace

john nickle

[tolbiny]

It depends on my mood, and how much i plan on playing. Anywhere from 3-6 tables. 3 is more common thatn 6, but 5 is the most often. A lot of the time when i am playing 6 a table will break and i won't open a new one. It works out nicely like that.

[ctv1116]

It's hard for me to find more than 4 really fishy tables at one time (by my standards).

[tolbiny]

what stakes do you play?

[ctv1116]

5/10. Yea, I know, every table is a fishy table, but I'd prefer to just play the 4 best tables rather than 6-8 so-so tables.

[zokbarjazz]

Since moving to 10/20 about a month ago, I have found that the number of tables I play has a much bigger effect on the quality of my play than at the smaller games. I started out with two, then added a third. After playing four for a week (which I did with no problem at 5/10) I started to notice that I was making way more mistakes and not adapting as well to the conditions at each table.

I guess it's all a matter of comfort level. I'm still not at the point where I can play 10/20 on semi-autopilot, whereas I was at 5/10, so four tables was no problem.

[bottomset]

I had been playing 4 of 1/2 .. but I have been playing 2 2/4 SH 10max games lately till i get more comfortable

[stigmata]

I think playing 2 tables when you first move up to 5/10 or 10/20 is a good thing. Its much easier to really improve your game this way. Just add the 3rd/4th table when your comfertable -- for me it took about 30k hands to add the 3rd table at 10/20.

***

I actually find 4 tables of 6-max uncomfertable. One way around this is to have 3 tables of 6-max, and 2 full tables -- this is actually easier than 4 6-max tables

[cookie]

4 when playing 1/2 6-max aka bonuswhoring

just started 5/10 6-max 1-2 tables

[sublime]

usually five. at least four.

[MAxx]

I answered 2. I used to avg 3, and would sometimes play four. After a bad run, I wanted to focus more on my game so I decided to stick to 2 for a bit. I plan on getting back to more, but 2 is so comfortable for how I like to study my opponents. I'm cool with 3, but four still feels a little chaotic for me.

Full ring, i feel I could play much more tables.

[ALL1N]

4 when it's 6-max, but now I try to stick to 3 tables of 15/30 with 2-5 players.

[Silverback]

All those of you who play 4 tables, have you all got large screens/monitors?
If so what size?

I find 2 tables is generally enough, maybe if I could fit 4 tables and see all the action on all 4 tables without them overlapping I could play more.

Importantly, how does playing 4 tables affect winrate? 6 max is very much play the player game, so how does winrate generally decrease from 2 tabling to 4 tabling, e.g you make 3bb/100 2 tabling, are you happy making 1.6bb/100 4 tabling?

[bunky9590]

I play 4 and have a 15" screen, I set the resolution up to max and have very minimal overlap.

Winrate is around 2BB/100 4 tabling. I'm really picky about games and particularly seats in said games.

[sthief09]

I used to play 6 on my laptop with severe overlap. now I play on my 2001FP but I play 6 tables so there's some overlap. I don't mind it

[SomethingClever]

[ QUOTE ]
All those of you who play 4 tables, have you all got large screens/monitors?


[/ QUOTE ]

Yes.... you ever stop by the Dell 2001 FP... er Internet forum?

[Guy McSucker]

I play two.

I remember in my early online days at Paradise in 2000 I used to think two-tabling was the mother of all poker sins.

Sometimes I try to play four and I just can't keep up. At 32 I think I am too old for this multitabling shizzle.

When my $5/10 play got to the point where two tables was easy, I moved up instead of adding a table. So far, so good.

Guy.

[Surfbullet]

I've 6-tabled the 5/10 6max since march...~40k hands, ~1.4BB/100.

Not a winrate I'm particularly proud of, but since I'm more than sufficiently bankrolled for the 10/20 I gave it a shot, but cut it back to 2 tables.

The hardest part for me about cutting back to 2 tables is that the long run takes soooo long. The last 1300 hands have taken 3 days, and I feel like I've been mired in a 65 BB downswing forever.

It's so small - miniscule even - in terms of both hands and bets, but it feels so much bigger because it takes so long to get through it...I have been playing 4 tables since I started online poker last may, so 2 feels like slow motion. /images/graemlins/frown.gif Gotta have patience!

Surf

[Jeff W]

Looks like I overestimated the number of 1-2 tablers, but I was right that 5-8 tablers are a minority.

I play 4 tables.

[mperich]

[ QUOTE ]
All those of you who play 4 tables, have you all got large screens/monitors?
If so what size?


[/ QUOTE ]

I think most of the players who 4table well either have a screen capable of 1600x1200 resolution (or higher), or 2 monitors, or both.

[ QUOTE ]
Importantly, how does playing 4 tables affect winrate? 6 max is very much play the player game, so how does winrate generally decrease from 2 tabling to 4 tabling, e.g you make 3bb/100 2 tabling, are you happy making 1.6bb/100 4 tabling?

[/ QUOTE ]

Ive never played less than 4 tables, so Im not sure. However in your example you would be making .2/100 more of course, but there are downsides. Your hand reading skills likely will not improve very quickly, and your swings will be much larger due to your lower winrate.

-Mike

[mperich]

I play 4 exclusively, but want to move to 6 once I get my 2001FPs. Who is voting 12+ is that actually true? I doubt it but if someone is plz reply.

-Mike

[afk]

2. I'm just learning. I'll play more if I want to clear a bonus faster.

[Isura]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
3 of 1/2 6 max, but I think I improve faster with 2. I don't see myself playing more than 3 any time soon.

[/ QUOTE ]

Frankly, if at any point you can play 3 tables of 1/2 6-max comfortably it's time to move up. That's probably true for just about any limit IMO -- if you can play 3-4 tables of limit X and make 2BB/100+, time to move up to limit X+1.

[/ QUOTE ]

I do feel I'm comfortably beating 1/2 with 3 tables, but I don't have enough hands (less than 30k) to assert any confidence in my true winrate. Are you implying that at these low limits it is more important to move up as soon as you feel ready, regardless of true winrate which is inevitably unknown?

[brassnuts]

I play 3 at 5/10 very comfortably. I've done 4 a few times, and it didn't seem much more difficult, but I just hit a little downswing that brought my winrate from 3.5 down to about 2.5BB/100. I'm only at about 30k hands so everything is still very volatile. Anyways, once I get my confidence level back up a bit, I think I'm going to move it up to 4 tables.

[Deraj]

I just started playing 6max at the 1/2 level (~2700 hands) and I plan on keeping it at two tables for the first 5k hands at minimum. More than likely longer I will stay at 2 tables for longer than that...it all depends on my progress and comfort level (both currently not going so well).

[ALL1N]

[ QUOTE ]
All those of you who play 4 tables, have you all got large screens/monitors?
If so what size?

[/ QUOTE ]

Got a random phillips 19" set to 1600x1200.

[ QUOTE ]
Importantly, how does playing 4 tables affect winrate?

[/ QUOTE ]

I always played 4 tables up until now, and was at 2.6 BB/100 over 82k hands at 10/20. I've just recently started 3 tabling 15/30, and haven't got enough hands to reliably tell the effect on winrate, but my prediction is that it will be slightly higher since I've also improved as a poker player and also I play shorter, the mitigating factor being that the game is tougher.

[bicyclekick]

If I'm really trying to play i probably have 6. If i'm relaxing it's most often 3 or even 1 or 2 if I'm really kicking back.

[7ontheline]

[ QUOTE ]
I find there is a big jump between 3 and 4 tables.

[/ QUOTE ]

I play 3 and can get good reads and play well. For some reason 4 gets tough for me - I'll only add a 4th if I can find one of my favorite "buddies" around.

[disjunction]

At least that's my opinion. Wouldn't a multitabler be more interested in this thread?

(this is not a putdown on the poll -- just a suggestion at how to interpret the results)

[zephed56]

I play 1 (ONE) table, sometimes two. Rarely three.

I've got a laptop with only 2 resolution settings (1024x768 and 800x600), and it gives me overlap when I play two tables. Plus, I hate how the tables demand attention (taking focus) when they don't need it, it really affects my game.

Also, I am usually trying to do something else.

[helpmeout]

1-3 depending on how I'm feeling and how many bad players are around.

I'm pretty fussy when it comes to table selection.

I also agree with grisgra that if you are beating the game playing 2 tables you should move up not add more tables.

At 15/30 full I mainly 1-2 table now, only problem is it takes so long to get a good sample size.

[turnipmonster]

I fluctuate between 2,3 and 4 depending on the quality/texture of the games I'm playing and what games I'm playing. mostly 3 tables though, 2 and 4 tabling are generally special circumstances for me.

--turnipmonster

[someday]

To the multi masters.

Are you all using PT to get reads on your opponents?

[BusterStacks]

I play 6 tables of full, only 2 of SH. Sometimes 1... occasionally 3.

[WarmonkEd]

I also play one 5/10 6max. I feel my reads and plays drop significantly when I start adding too many tables, so I'm staying at one until I get this 6max thing down.

[PokerBob]

I'm at 2. The goal is 4.

[sthief09]

no. why would someone be more apt to look and/or vote if he plays more tables?

[mungpo]

I could probably do 6 tables, but I am currently four-tabling.

[joker122]

[ QUOTE ]
I have been playing 2 tables for about 2 months now. Huge Huge improvement in win rate.

[/ QUOTE ]

couldn't it just have been variance?

[Justin A]

I play six tables of 5/10 6m and I don't use playerview.

[Stefan_K]

I play 4 tables 5/10, with playerview it's not a problem

[someday]

Justin,

wthout using gametime or playerview how easy is it to keep track, attain and maintain good reads etc?

what made you decide not to use these tools, taking into consideration the fact that many others ARE using it?

Playing 6 tables are you always just making standard moves in common situations rather than the "play the player" type poker many advocate for 6 max.

if playing 4-6 tables, and one of them starts to break can you play well say HU or 3 handed while still maintaining your play on the rest of your tables?


thanks in advance for your time, any input appreciated.
someday

[Silverback]

[ QUOTE ]
I play six tables of 5/10 6m and I don't use playerview.

[/ QUOTE ]

I bet you play really tight and you winrate is really low.

[ggbman]

I usually play 4, from time to time if i am feeling ambitious i play 6, but i suspect 4 is optimal for me.

[krishanleong]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I play six tables of 5/10 6m and I don't use playerview.

[/ QUOTE ]

I bet you play really tight and you winrate is really low.

[/ QUOTE ]

I bet it would be better with playerview and 1 mil hands in databases.

Krishan

[Subby]

I was 4-tabling 1/2 6max and getting my ass handed to me pretty regularly (half the time anyway).

So I moved up to 5/10 and cut back to two tables and am much happier. Easier to concentrate, make decisions, etc.

I *may* try and add a third table eventually, but I think I would rather just move up to 10/20 and 2-table there (if the opportunity ever presents itself...)

[beerbandit]

usually play

2 tables 6max lhe -- i usually play at a table, until it fills up and then go sit a new table -- i like to play 2-4 handed best

1 table plo or maybe some nlhe


ive tried to play three 6max, games move a little to fast and results are now nearly as good

whoever plays 12+ (zeejustin), thats amazing

cheers

[Michael Davis]

"I bet you play really tight and you winrate is really low."

Oh hell, I'll bet that if he's putting in legitimate hands Justin has one of the five best winrates at 5-10 despite six-tabling.

-Michael

[ISF]

[ QUOTE ]
I bet you play really tight and you winrate is really low.

[/ QUOTE ]
I think you would be surprised at how much a decent player can make in these 5/10 games playing very tight abc poker without many reads.

[PokerBob]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I bet you play really tight and you winrate is really low.

[/ QUOTE ]
I think you would be surprised at how much a decent player can make in these 5/10 games playing very tight abc poker without many reads.

[/ QUOTE ]

Agreed. Even with a modest win rate of 0.7bb/100 we're talking about $30/hour. Put rakeback into the equation and we're over $50/hr. Maybe I'm a simple guy, but I could live on that EASY.

[Silverback]

[ QUOTE ]
Even with a modest win rate of 0.7bb/100 we're talking about $30/hour

[/ QUOTE ]

0.7 bb/100, I dont know if thats good or bad six tabling, Id rather aim for 4/bb 2 tabling, max Id ever play is 3 tables.

Being happy with $30 an hour is one thing, but 6 tabling would be no fun compared to playing less tables and using some better poker plays, playing 6 tables is just playing on auto pilot and you end up getting taken advantage of, 6 max is about playing the players as much as the cards, you cant do that 6 tabling in my opinion, unless you are a multitabling online equivilent to what Stu Ungar was to blackjack and NL.

Id need alot more than $30 an hour if I was 6 tabling, plus with that kind of low win rate you cant think to move up limits.

Is poker meant to fun or a chore? 6 tabling is surely no fun, esepcially on a downswing, at 0.07 you would soon be a losing player.

[PokerBob]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Even with a modest win rate of 0.7bb/100 we're talking about $30/hour

[/ QUOTE ]

0.7 bb/100, I dont know if thats good or bad six tabling, Id rather aim for 4/bb 2 tabling, max Id ever play is 3 tables.

Being happy with $30 an hour is one thing, but 6 tabling would be no fun compared to playing less tables and using some better poker plays, playing 6 tables is just playing on auto pilot and you end up getting taken advantage of, 6 max is about playing the players as much as the cards, you cant do that 6 tabling in my opinion, unless you are a multitabling online equivilent to what Stu Ungar was to blackjack and NL.

Id need alot more than $30 an hour if I was 6 tabling, plus with that kind of low win rate you cant think to move up limits.

Is poker meant to fun or a chore? 6 tabling is surely no fun, esepcially on a downswing, at 0.07 you would soon be a losing player.

[/ QUOTE ]

For many people poker is about making money. If that means it's a chore, well, every job is a chore from time to time. Personally, I want to improve my game and move up. That said, if someone can 6-table and win, good for them. My win-rate estimate was extremely conservative. I am sure that there are some posters here who can 6-table and hit 1bb/100 with relative ease.

[krishanleong]

[ QUOTE ]

Is poker meant to fun or a chore? 6 tabling is surely no fun, esepcially on a downswing, at 0.07 you would soon be a losing player.

[/ QUOTE ]

Multitabling is a skill. It takes time and practice to do well. I would be bored out of my mind playing 2 tables.

[ QUOTE ]
playing 6 tables is just playing on auto pilot and you end up getting taken advantage of,

[/ QUOTE ]

This is a lie. I do not play on autopilot.

Krishan

[Isura]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I bet you play really tight and you winrate is really low.

[/ QUOTE ]
I think you would be surprised at how much a decent player can make in these 5/10 games playing very tight abc poker without many reads.

[/ QUOTE ]

Agreed. Even with a modest win rate of 0.7bb/100 we're talking about $30/hour. Put rakeback into the equation and we're over $50/hr. Maybe I'm a simple guy, but I could live on that EASY.

[/ QUOTE ]

Isn't 3BB/100 attainable 1-2 tabling the 5/10? If so, that's like $55/hr 2-tabling 5/10. Even 2BB/100 is $36/hr.

[krishanleong]

[ QUOTE ]


Isn't 3BB/100 attainable 1-2 tabling the 5/10? If so, that's like $55/hr 2-tabling 5/10. Even 2BB/100 is $36/hr.

[/ QUOTE ]

Theoretically 4 BB/100 is possible 4-tabling the 10/20. Nikla is our forum win-rate goliath.

Krishan

[Silverback]

[ QUOTE ]
Theoretically 4 BB/100 is possible 4-tabling the 10/20. Nikla is our forum win-rate goliath

[/ QUOTE ]

Nikla is a great poster, however I would still like to see some stats to support this.
Mainly because so many players think this is not achieveable 2-3 tabling.

[krishanleong]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Theoretically 4 BB/100 is possible 4-tabling the 10/20. Nikla is our forum win-rate goliath

[/ QUOTE ]

Nikla is a great poster, however I would still like to see some stats to support this.
Mainly because so many players think this is not achieveable 2-3 tabling.

[/ QUOTE ]

Feel free to ask him. I'm willing to take his word.

Krishan

[cartman]

What do you think about adding tables instead? For instance going from four 5/10(6-max) tables to six 5/10(6-max's) instead of moving to 10/20(6 max)?

Cartman

[Justin A]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I play six tables of 5/10 6m and I don't use playerview.

[/ QUOTE ]

I bet you play really tight and you winrate is really low.

[/ QUOTE ]

My stats are roughly 27/19, and I do fine tyvm.

[Justin A]

[ QUOTE ]
Justin,

wthout using gametime or playerview how easy is it to keep track, attain and maintain good reads etc?

what made you decide not to use these tools, taking into consideration the fact that many others ARE using it?

Playing 6 tables are you always just making standard moves in common situations rather than the "play the player" type poker many advocate for 6 max.

if playing 4-6 tables, and one of them starts to break can you play well say HU or 3 handed while still maintaining your play on the rest of your tables?


thanks in advance for your time, any input appreciated.
someday

[/ QUOTE ]

This is a good question. I actually use playerview for full tables, just not for 6max games. The reason is that I feel like I get a better feel for how my opponents play without it. When I play 6 tables, that's all I do. There are no outside distractions, and I really focus hard on player reads. I probably play the player more than most posters who use playerview.

Basically I stopped using it for the short games because my reads were getting lazy and I pay better attention without it.

As for your question about when tables start to break, I feel like I can play fine when one of them gets down to 3 handed, but that's a part of my game I don't feel is very strong, so I usually leave when it gets to 3 handed unless the players are especially fishy.

/Edited to add - Just so you guys dont think I'm completely crazy, Schneids did not use playerview when he was 8 tabling 10/20.

[7ontheline]

That is impressive. I still am stuck on 3 tables and definitely use Playerview a lot. I've been really improving my reads while I've been at 5/10, but I still definitely do better with the numbers in front of me. 8-tabling sans any stats? That is nuts - and awesome. Did Schneids do this all throughout his 60k challenge? I don't remember.

[tolbiny]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I play six tables of 5/10 6m and I don't use playerview.

[/ QUOTE ]

I bet you play really tight and you winrate is really low.

[/ QUOTE ]

I bet you don't know what your talking about.

[Justin A]

[ QUOTE ]
That is impressive. I still am stuck on 3 tables and definitely use Playerview a lot. I've been really improving my reads while I've been at 5/10, but I still definitely do better with the numbers in front of me. 8-tabling sans any stats? That is nuts - and awesome. Did Schneids do this all throughout his 60k challenge? I don't remember.

[/ QUOTE ]

No. He was four tabling back then.

[James282]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Justin,

wthout using gametime or playerview how easy is it to keep track, attain and maintain good reads etc?

what made you decide not to use these tools, taking into consideration the fact that many others ARE using it?

Playing 6 tables are you always just making standard moves in common situations rather than the "play the player" type poker many advocate for 6 max.

if playing 4-6 tables, and one of them starts to break can you play well say HU or 3 handed while still maintaining your play on the rest of your tables?


thanks in advance for your time, any input appreciated.
someday

[/ QUOTE ]

This is a good question. I actually use playerview for full tables, just not for 6max games. The reason is that I feel like I get a better feel for how my opponents play without it. When I play 6 tables, that's all I do. There are no outside distractions, and I really focus hard on player reads. I probably play the player more than most posters who use playerview.

Basically I stopped using it for the short games because my reads were getting lazy and I pay better attention without it.

As for your question about when tables start to break, I feel like I can play fine when one of them gets down to 3 handed, but that's a part of my game I don't feel is very strong, so I usually leave when it gets to 3 handed unless the players are especially fishy.

/Edited to add - Just so you guys dont think I'm completely crazy, Schneids did not use playerview when he was 8 tabling 10/20.

[/ QUOTE ]

When my friends and I all used to play 10/20 sixmax, datamining and playerview were non-existant. We did just fine and improved greaatly as players as a results of not having these programs.
-James

[mperich]

I don't use stats either and i find that I do just fine 4 tabling. Using stats actually slows me down personally, and confuses me.

-Mike