[Grisgra]

I'm going to stop replying to threads like this eventually, because it probably hurts my long-term win rate . . . but in my opinion you should 2-3 table a limit, no more, and then move up as fast as reasonably possible. I think that *most* people do not learn as much when 4+ tabling, or even 3+ tabling, because they are not observing hands that they are not participating in.

Why 4+ table 1/2 when you could be 2-tabling 3/6? Why 4+ table 3/6 when you could be 2-tabling 5/10? Why 4-table 5/10 when you could be 2-tabling 10/20? And so on.

Eventually, you may reach a limit (i.e., 4+ tabling 5/10) that you aren't interested in getting better or making more money, and just want to coast on the very respectable win rate you can knock out at said limit. Not the way I think about things, but . . .

As far as learning rate goes . . . like I said, player reads become more and more important the higher you go in limits, and your ability to make those reads suffer when you play lots o' tables. At least, they suffer for 90% of players. Finally, let me note that when people post in HUSH about horrible downswings or horrible plateaus, said posters are almost always 4+ tablers. I don't think that this is a coincidence.