Two-table for sanity, or one-table for reading people?
 

Overall I haven't played much, and I just started playing again after a few months absence so my skills are very weak. At the table I find myself slow to figure out odds, and frequently unable to make a play I'm confident in. My mantra is "lose most of the time, but win big the few times I do", and I dutifully put my chips in even though I'm often gritting my teeth. Furthermore, my memory for players is very poor.

Even though I could probably use the time to think, one-tabling is too slow between hands and I can't bother to play when I'm so bored. However, at two-tables I haven't been able to remember players at all.

So, should I attempt to play one-table, and try to focus on remembering players' plays? With such a high turn-over, is it at all worth it?

Or should I play two-tables while I learn the nuances of the game mechanics, and build my skills?

I'm leaning towards two-tabling, because I think it'll be easier to remember people and their plays once I have a larger body of knowledge in memory with which to stereotype them. (I'm using my vague notions of how memory works here.) That is, it should just be easier to learn to remember players and read them once I know the rest of the game.

If one-tabling is too boring no matter what, I'll just two-table so I can play the game.

Re: Two-table for sanity, or one-table for reading people?
 

[ QUOTE ]
Overall I haven't played much, and I just started playing again after a few months absence so my skills are very weak. At the table I find myself slow to figure out odds, and frequently unable to make a play I'm confident in. My mantra is "lose most of the time, but win big the few times I do", and I dutifully put my chips in even though I'm often gritting my teeth. Furthermore, my memory for players is very poor.

Even though I could probably use the time to think, one-tabling is too slow between hands and I can't bother to play when I'm so bored. However, at two-tables I haven't been able to remember players at all.

So, should I attempt to play one-table, and try to focus on remembering players' plays? With such a high turn-over, is it at all worth it?

Or should I play two-tables while I learn the nuances of the game mechanics, and build my skills?

I'm leaning towards two-tabling, because I think it'll be easier to remember people and their plays once I have a larger body of knowledge in memory with which to stereotype them. (I'm using my vague notions of how memory works here.) That is, it should just be easier to learn to remember players and read them once I know the rest of the game.

If one-tabling is too boring no matter what, I'll just two-table so I can play the game.

[/ QUOTE ]

Do you use pokertracker/gt+? Use them if you're going to play more than one table and can't remember the players. You may want to re-evaluate your game if you're getting bored only playing one table, but If you are having trouble remembering players and your game is rusty I would not recommend playing more than one.

Re: Two-table for sanity, or one-table for reading people?
 

or even making as many notes on players as possible on paper so you dont have to remember anything.
or pt

Re: Two-table for sanity, or one-table for reading people?
 

[ QUOTE ]
I'm leaning towards two-tabling, because I think it'll be easier to remember people and their plays once I have a larger body of knowledge in memory with which to stereotype them.

[/ QUOTE ]

If you are failing to remember people at one table, an extra 10 players at the same isn't going to help you. Multi-tabling will cure your boredom, though requires you playing less-than-optimal poker on either table.

If you aren't a winning player, multitabling will cause you to lose your money twice as fast.

Re: Two-table for sanity, or one-table for reading people?
 

Stick to one table. Add more tables once you are comfortable with one table.

If your skills are weak right now, and you are having trouble keeping up with the action and players at just one table, playing two tables will be an absolute disaster for you...

Re: Two-table for sanity, or one-table for reading people?
 

I dont think you really want to play on line poker.
You maybe playing because your bored and cant find anything
better to do.
Many people play on line because its has become the in thing in some quarters.
Just a thought as your post read to me as if you are striving for somthing to concentrate on.