If I can easily 12-table on one monitor - can I 16-table on 4?

[Lucid1]

Similarly to chisness, I 12-table the 33s and play tons of hours (I try to have 10-hour sessions daily, but take some days off every now and then)

My ROI should hopefully still be at least 15% ($5 pr tourny), but I'm not really sure yet, since I've only played about 800 33s since I started 12-tabling. (started off with an interesting downswing where I was down about 15 buy-ins over 350 tournies! (wow) - but things turned around and I seem to be on track now...

I do feel that I now 12-table as well as I used to 8-table.

I've also tried to 13-table for many hours, but since the extra table wasn't on a party skin I felt it took up more extra energy than it was worth to have it in the mix...

Anyway, here's the thing:

I do all this on one monitor... Overlap galore, but I'm used to it...

I've been thinking of getting myself one of those cool setups you guys have, and I probably will pretty soon.

Anyway, here's my question:

When I can comfortably 12-table on one monitor (without timing out or stuff like that) - will I be able to 16-table on 4 monitors?

Is the advantage of multiple monitors that big?

Has anyone of you multitablers "measured" the difference?

btw. after the new blind structure I guess multitabling might have become harder... maybe hard enough that 16-tabling is "impossible" (?)

[Maulik]

what are your reasons for mulittabling, rather than diving into the $50+5?

if you're able to play so many tables, why not make your life easier by purchasing the necessary other monitors & setup.

[raptor517]

i doubt 12 is.. comfortable.. however i dont think it would be a stretch that if 12 is cake on 1 monitor, 16 wouldnt be too tough on 4. i have talked to a few people that have tried it though, and they all hate it. good luck. holla

[Lucid1]

The reason I'm not moving up to the 55s is that they're a little more complicated (1000 instead of 800 chips), has higher competition and lasts longer.

I've played a few hundred 109s and think I can be profitable in those, but with my abc-approach I doubt I'd be able to make more than $6 - $7 pr tourny, which is not that much more than I make in the 33s, but with longer-lasting tournies and 10 times the swings...

btw when I say "comfortable" 12-tabling, I mean that in the sense that I can stand doing it for 10 hours straight without being overly stressed out... It doesn't mean I have a lot of fun doing it, though /images/graemlins/wink.gif

For now I'm happy being an abc-multitabler, though. I try to make a (to me) lot of money as quickly as possible - and am saving this to put into other investments.

(i doubt poker will be as easy as it is now for too long)

[gisb0rne]

I'd hate to be at one of your tables. Whenever I see people taking forever to act I always suspect they are multi-tabling too many.

I doubt you'd have trouble 16-tabling on 4 monitors if you can do 12 on 1.

[vinyard]

12 tables on one monitor? That's impressive. Do you just "tile" the windows and go from game to game as it beeps? Logisitically that seems like a nightmare. And I hope you are taking some precautions to avoid carpal/tunnel injuries.

As to your question, if you don't have problems managing twelve you can probably manage 16 with minimal additional hassle. I actually think adding the additonal monitors may slow you down if it takes longer to scroll across two screens than click onto a tiled window. Your ability to make reads will be better with four windows though.

[maddog2030]

[ QUOTE ]
The reason I'm not moving up to the 55s is that they're a little more complicated (1000 instead of 800 chips), has higher competition and lasts longer.

[/ QUOTE ]

You're doing pretty much what I'm doing for the exact same reasons. I'm now 8 tabling the $33s at a healthy profit, and while I technically have well beyond the bankroll I originally planned for myself before moving up to the $55s, I'm not as enthusiastic about doing so for the reasons you listed. I also consider myself on the weak side skill wise so I know it would take a lot of extra time and devotion to becoming a successful player, both at and away from the table. This isn't necessarily a bad thing, but it is time consuming and I'll have a lot more time during the school year. For now, I'm just focusing on my ABCs and multitabling skills (things that are easy to do while still making money). I'll decide later if the move up is worth it.

[ QUOTE ]
For now I'm happy being an abc-multitabler, though. I try to make a (to me) lot of money as quickly as possible - and am saving this to put into other investments.

[/ QUOTE ]

You took the words right out of my mouth. Right now I have a well paying internship, so I'm considering using my poker winnings to leverage myself in some investing oppurtunities. Subconsciously, I don't even consider my poker money real money. It's just kind of a number to me.

Once school starts back up I might use it as some income then, but for now my summer internship covers everything I need plus more, so my poker money just sits there (except for when I cash out to pay for poker related things). I've driven it up to a few grand since I've gotten out of school and haven't touched it otherwise.

[ QUOTE ]
(i doubt poker will be as easy as it is now for too long)

[/ QUOTE ]

Definitely.

[UMTerp]

[ QUOTE ]
12 tables on one monitor? That's impressive. Do you just "tile" the windows and go from game to game as it beeps? Logisitically that seems like a nightmare.

[/ QUOTE ]

http://home.comcast.net/~umterp/12table-3.jpg

I'd attempted more than 12 on one monitor, but I start to have problems keeping up if I get shorthanded on more than half of them at once. I don't have any problems with 12 though.

[Iamafish]

People have 20-tabled on one monitor.

[TWINUNO]

Is it possible for me to 4 table on my 15 inch sony lcd monitor?

[elonkra]

[ QUOTE ]
(i doubt poker will be as easy as it is now for too long)

Definitely.

[/ QUOTE ]

Could you two briefly explain/elaborate on this?

[Mr_J]

"My ROI should hopefully still be at least 15%"

It's probally gonna be harder to hit this than you think, and if you do then you should be thinking about moving up to the $55s anyway.

"When I can comfortably 12-table on one monitor (without timing out or stuff like that) - will I be able to 16-table on 4 monitors?"

Sounds like it. Yeh the big monitors make a huge difference. I just got another 1600x1200 and 8tabling is now easier than 6tabling w/ overlap (simply because I can watch all the tables now). Will upgrade to 12 myself soon, that way I only need to put in a few hours a day /images/graemlins/wink.gif

"that 16-tabling is "impossible""

The hard bit will be when you have a good run and get down to 12 bubbles at once. It's probally easier to play 16 continuously than in sets because of this???

"I try to have 10-hour sessions daily, but take some days off every now and then)"

Be careful you don't burn out. Also don't think "working" that much is healthy. The key is balance (work a little, play hard).

[Mr_J]

"I try to make a (to me) lot of money as quickly as possible - and am saving this to put into other investments."

That's alright then. I'm doing the same thing and once I've got enough capital, it pays like an atm and I work 15mins to 2hrs a day (I used to work these hrs, which is what makes playing poker for 2+ hrs really hard).

[smb394]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
(i doubt poker will be as easy as it is now for too long)

Definitely.

[/ QUOTE ]

Could you two briefly explain/elaborate on this?

[/ QUOTE ]

I'd be willing to bet that the argument follows something along the lines of a higher rate of marginal improvement for poor players relative to good ones.

[Scuba Chuck]

Out of curiosity ...

Does Lucid1 = Lucid Yoda?

If so, welcome to the forum.

[astarck]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
(i doubt poker will be as easy as it is now for too long)

Definitely.

[/ QUOTE ]

Could you two briefly explain/elaborate on this?

[/ QUOTE ]

I'd like some elaboration as well.

I do see online poker dying out (either lack of new people and/or poker population gets better) , but not for at least a few years. With all of the TV ads and WSOP attention I think online poker will continue to grow for a little while longer, then maybe stall out for a period of a year or two.

You will always have the current 14-16 yr olds who want to play when they are 18-21. So as long as poker is "cool" you will get an influx of new players, and most of these players are little fishies.

[chisness]

as raptor says, 16 tabling sucks

especially with the extremely annoying difficulty in joining a new game on the party skins and the lower blinds during hu play (push fold not really optimal strategy every time now), 16 will be too much

not to mention, it's nice to have available space for im'ing, web surfing, poker lobbies, spreadsheets, etc. -- also, you don't want to go totally insane from it, even if it would mean slightly higher profits

12 tabling on 4 monitors is easier than on 1 monitor in some ways -- you can easily see all action on all tables, but you'll also have tables 2 feet away from each other, so it can be easy to forget about some

as for measuring the difference, try to find out what the maximum roi's people are getting either 4, 8, or 12 tabling -- i'm really not sure but something like 20% is probably doable with 4, 17% with 8, and 15% with 12, making 12 the clear favorite (though mine is only a bit over 10%)

if you're hitting 15% 12'ing, then you'd have to get 45% 4'ing and 22.5% 8'ing, neither realistic

in my more applicable case, i'm getting ~10% 12'ing, so if i could get 15% 8'ing then i'd be better off (in terms of ease and comfort, though getting in another monitor would mean more rakeback)

[Lucid1]

ty for all your comments.

[ QUOTE ]

Could you two briefly explain/elaborate on this?


[/ QUOTE ]

As of right now playing poker is so "easy" that I think a robot could make at least 10% ROI without paying attention to anything and strictly playing formulaic. (Not that I've tried this, but my play is so near "robotic" that I'm guessing this must be correct)

I seriously doubt this situation can last.

Whenever there's an opportunity anywhere to make "easy money" it's only a matter of time before the "holes are clogged".

In the dot com era everyone was making "easy money" - daytraders, websiteowners, etc.. Everyone "knew" things couldn't last forever, but very few anticipated exactly how quickly things would collapse... I used to own a bunch of websites back then - and I remember the days of the crash: On some sites I was making $10 pr 1000 pageviews one day and $1 pr 1000 pageviews the next...

I might be wrong, but I've already noticed that games are gradually getting tougher.

I used to play NL50 and NL100 cash games for about half ayear until about 12-13 months ago (at Party).

They used to be FULL of fish that raised all-in preflop with hands like 56s... It used to be easy to find many tables with average pots sizes of $70 and more on the NL100 tables... ($90+ was nothing unusual)

I don't really pay much attention to the cash games anymore (I like and understand tournies better) - but they seem tougher than they used to (the average pot sizes are MUCH lower, and there's more sharks pr fish) (?)

Although it's impossible (to me, at least) to guess how long the golden opportunity of online poker will last where tons of nOObz call a level 1 all-in with 84, or fold decent hands to squeeze into the money and stuff like that - I'm guessing that it won't last for many years, and that the change will be quicker and less gradual than most people anticipate.

Of course, I hope I'm wrong /images/graemlins/smile.gif

(the best players will be able to make money either way... but abc multitablers like me will probably get heavily reduced profits later on.)

Either way, it might still last for another couple of years, and I'm no prophet /images/graemlins/smile.gif


[ QUOTE ]
"My ROI should hopefully still be at least 15%"

It's probally gonna be harder to hit this than you think, and if you do then you should be thinking about moving up to the $55s anyway.

[/ QUOTE ]

Yup, you may be right.. I've been making about 15% ROI over a few thousand 33s while 8- and 10-tabling, but it's possible that I'm no longer able to do that (too early to say) while 12-tabling and with the new structure.

I've been doing some changes to my strategy that might not necessarily be for the better prior to my last 1500 or so tournies. (I became a little less agressive and going for 3rd a little more often than I used to... My ITM has gone up because of this, but my % of 1st have gone down. Overall my ROI is about the same, though.. I'm not sure yet whether I've become too "weak-tight" or not... I might start doing more "spite calls" on the bubble again /images/graemlins/wink.gif

With the new structure I can't just shove my chips all-in and will have to pay more attention in the 3-way and heads-up situations.

Which to me - sucks - since I prefer making easy decisions when I multitable...

Anyway,

[ QUOTE ]


Be careful you don't burn out. Also don't think "working" that much is healthy. The key is balance (work a little, play hard).

[/ QUOTE ]

You have a point. I haven't fully decided what schedule to be on yet.

I'm taking a vacation in about 3 weeks and will probably play 10-hour sessions daily until then. When I come home I might either go the "all-in" route and play like a madman until next summer - OR - I'll try to lead a normal, healthy balanced life... Not decided yet /images/graemlins/smile.gif

(The reason I feel I'm "in a hurry" to play so much is that I feel the current "easy money" phase won't last for too long - and I'm planning on doing other business-related things down the road (and therefore need investment capital)

[ QUOTE ]

Out of curiosity ...
Does Lucid1 = Lucid Yoda?
If so, welcome to the forum.


[/ QUOTE ]

Thanks for the welcome. Yes, that's me.. I guess I wasn't too smart when it came to disguising my screen name /images/graemlins/wink.gif