|
#1
|
|||
|
|||
Multitabling
Ok heres something ive been thinking about, I play 4 tables normally and do ok, but I think I would do even better if I played 2 tables. I know it sounds insane, but a few things ive noticed, when I play 4 tables I make a lot of small mistakes because I dont have time to think about my decisions because im playing 4 tables. I play autopilot essentially.
I think the amount lost on small mistakes outweights the amount gained by playing 4 tables instead of 2. From what I see it seems I win the same with 4 and 2 tables, but I lose a lot more when running bad with 4 tables. Also I really dont improve my game when playing 4 tables, I rarely remember hands as I play over 1000 a day and I analyze a few, but not as much as I would like, part of the reason behind me not moving up as fast as I would like. Just something I have been thinking about. I think playing a max of 2 tables is best because I can pay full attention to not only my cards, but behaviors of others at the table. I dont know if im right though, somehow it doesnt seem right that playing less hands = more money, but it sure seems that way. I dont know if playing 4 or 2 tables is best in the end. Any comments would greatly help me with this dilemma. |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
Re: Multitabling
Try playing less tables and record your win/loss and compare it to your win/losses when you're at too many tables. IMO multitabling stretches concentration too thin and keeps you from playing your best. Frequently I find people multitabling and sit down with them and can count on making money.
|
#3
|
|||
|
|||
Re: Multitabling
[ QUOTE ]
Try playing less tables and record your win/loss and compare it to your win/losses when you're at too many tables. [/ QUOTE ] Ill try that, got any programs that could help out with this, lol, im really lazy. [ QUOTE ] IMO multitabling stretches concentration too thin and keeps you from playing your best. [/ QUOTE ] I agree with that, I can see that I dont play as well on autopilot. [ QUOTE ] Frequently I find people multitabling and sit down with them and can count on making money. [/ QUOTE ] Dang |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
Re: Multitabling
What that happens, engage the multi-tabler in conversation if you can.
|
#5
|
|||
|
|||
Re: Multitabling
[ QUOTE ]
What that happens, engage the multi-tabler in conversation if you can. [/ QUOTE ] They won't answer. Most multi-tablers ignore the chat box. They have other hands to concentrate on. |
#6
|
|||
|
|||
Re: Multitabling
Try 3 tables. I find that I can play 3 with minimal loss in attention to detail, but 4 seems to be the breaking point.
|
#7
|
|||
|
|||
Re: Multitabling
Everyone gives something up by multi-tabling, the question is if you are gaining more.
|
#8
|
|||
|
|||
Re: Multitabling
[ QUOTE ]
Everyone gives something up by multi-tabling, the question is if you are gaining more. [/ QUOTE ] This is the key. I play only big bet games at high stakes and with many good tricky players in them, so I only play 3 tables so I can give myself more time to think things out. The more tables you play the more you just have to play ABC and not play the player as much. |
#9
|
|||
|
|||
Re: Multitabling
[ QUOTE ]
Everyone gives something up by multi-tabling, the question is if you are gaining more. [/ QUOTE ] Right. Just take a your multitabling winrate. If it's above 2BB/100, there is virtually no way that 2 tabling is going to be as profitable. Now, if your 4-tabling winrate is <1BB/100, different story.... |
#10
|
|||
|
|||
Re: Multitabling
You stated you don't make money by playing less hands. Isn't this how we make money against the fish? We play less hands because we pay attention to position, raises in front, who raised in front, and who might raise behind. This forces us to play less hands, but we make more money from the hands we do play. I would play less tables if by playing four or more it cost me that edge.
But the poster who said use tracking software to guide you was 100% correct. Numbers speak louder words. |
|
|