[dogmeat]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
explain

[/ QUOTE ]

A more accurate statement would have been to say the more I tried to maximize the amount of my rakeback as opposed to playing fewer tables and attempting to make the best possible decision on each hand by considering all the information at my disposal has hurt my game.

I have little doubt that for me to play my very best poker, I should only play one table. Now does this mean I will earn more money if I took that path? Probably not, but maybe. If I had not taken the path of multi-tabling $5/$10 & $3/$6 to max out rake, I might now be playing one table of $30/$60 or $50/$100 and beat it for 1.5 BB/100 because I would be making much better poker decisions on average.

[/ QUOTE ]

...and this differs from your army concept how?

I don't understand the reason for you even starting this thead in the first place. Almost seems like self promotion of your site more than anything.

[/ QUOTE ]

I understand O'Doyle's situation. I've done the same type of "maximizing rake" thing at times. I play much better on a single table. However, I have played at certain sites to get the rakeback and often play up to five tables. I know I don't play as well.

I've done this at times because I know my ROR is tiny, due to the bonus/rakeback, but my expectation in actual games is low. In many ways (from a poker palyer's perspective) this makes no sense, but from a business person's standpoint, the successful lowering of risk for good results compared to excellent results is often the best option.

When Games Grid was offering their best VFP and Bonus, I knew I could grind out about $30 an hour plus my table win by playing four tables. However, even with my table win, I didn't make my hourly average in earnings. This would appear to be a mistake in judgement. I was enticed by the FREE money, but just hurt my monthly earnings. Any one disagree?

Dogmeat [img]/images/graemlins/spade.gif[/img]