Merits of playing multiple tables

[Jeffro]

I’m seriously debating the merits of playing multiple tables.

I have been playing online for 3 years now and for the first 2 and ½ years I played strictly one table and back in the days when I started their wasn’t even an option of playing 2 tables. Wasn’t till about year and a half ago, when people started talking about playing multiple tables that I even thought about it as a viable option.

I figured now way I was going to consider two tables until I felt my skill level was very good. Well finally took the plunge at the end of last year on the Paradise 3/6 and actually increased my BB/100 hands for those 3 months. I contributed some of this to the fact that I avoided some marginal hands that I might have played out of boredom when playing 1 table.

Beginning this year I had a 5k bankroll and decided it was time to move to the Party 5/10, 2 tables at once. I had an immediate +80 BB swing followed by a -120 BB swing, have never lost $1200 playing cards and this scared the hell out of me. Well I cut down to one table and had a fairly steady climb over 2 months to +300 BB for the year. Well last week decided to try 2 tables again and over two and ½ days dropped 90 BB’s. Cut back to one table and made it back in 3 sessions.

This brings me to today. Picked up Killer Poker Online, heard it was a decent book to deal with nuances that are unique to the online poker, and after my most recent swing I wanted some reinforcement that I’m not missing something. Well to make a long story short he subscribes to the theory that palying more then one table will degrade your results and I’m not sure which side of the fence to sit on this one, as I see a lot of talk of people preaching the value of multiple tables.

So my questions are:

Where do you sit on this topic?

Do you give an edge to your opponent playing multiple tables?

Are you giving up learning the game and playing robot poker for short term gains playing multiple tables?

[astroglide]

i play 6 15/30 tables. i don't believe i'm gaining way more than i'm giving up, and i don't feel like it's an abandonment of learning.

[J.R.]

"i don't believe i'm gaining way more than i'm giving up"

Do you play multiple tables to prevent bordem, or am I misinterpeting this statement. I think I gain substantially more than I give up, hence I multi-table.

Maybe its just a matter of what "way more" means, but I consider a cumulative gain of multiple bets each hour "way more".

[astroglide]

should be amended to "do believe", heh. i DO believe that i'm gaining way more than i'm giving up. if i didn't, i wouldn't be playing as many tables as i do.

[pudley4]

I think the majority of winning players will see their BB/100hands decrease per table. The few exceptions would be players who play too many marginal (losing) hands in the first place, and end up folding these when playing multiple tables.

I think that most players who are winning multiple BBs/100 hands will make up enough by multitabling to offset the decrease in EV/table.

Everyone has an upper limit on the game they can beat. I think that an overwhelming majority of players will lose if they try to multitable at their max skill limit game. It's possible the 5/10 game at Party falls into this category for you.

Right now, due to financial considerations, I play 4 tables of 2/4, or 3 tables of 3/6. I have no doubt I could play higher, but I cannot give up the increased short-term EV for a long-term increase in skill.

[Nottom]

[ QUOTE ]
I think the majority of winning players will see their BB/100hands decrease per table.

[/ QUOTE ]

This is more of a statement concerning BB/Hr than BB/100.

Your BB/100 will almost certainly decrease by playing multiple tables unless you don't pay much attention when you play one table anyway. But as long as it doesn't feduce by a factor greater than thr number of table you are playing, then adding another table is still +EV.

For example if you make 4BB/100 playing 1 table and when you play 2 tables you only make 3BB/100 thats good becasue you are now seeing twice as many hands and are making 6BB/200 so have essentially increased your winrate by 50%.

Now if you add a 3rd table and your rate drops to 2BB/100 you are making 6BB/300 which is the basically the same as with 2 tables so its not worth adding this 3rd table.

I hope that makes sence.

[pudley4]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I think the majority of winning players will see their BB/100hands decrease per table.

[/ QUOTE ]

This is more of a statement concerning BB/Hr than BB/100.

[/ QUOTE ]

The original poster asked "Do you give an edge to your opponent playing multiple tables?"

I think the answer is undoubtedly "Yes". If you are playing JoeFish at table 1, and making 3BB/100hands when you are playing only one table, then you add in a second table, and are now only making 2.5BB/100hands at table 1, you are giving up a little bit to JoeFish (and everyone else at table 1).

[ QUOTE ]
Your BB/100 will almost certainly decrease by playing multiple tables unless you don't pay much attention when you play one table anyway. But as long as it doesn't feduce by a factor greater than thr number of table you are playing, then adding another table is still +EV.

For example if you make 4BB/100 playing 1 table and when you play 2 tables you only make 3BB/100 thats good becasue you are now seeing twice as many hands and are making 6BB/200 so have essentially increased your winrate by 50%.

Now if you add a 3rd table and your rate drops to 2BB/100 you are making 6BB/300 which is the basically the same as with 2 tables so its not worth adding this 3rd table.

I hope that makes sence.

[/ QUOTE ]

Yes, I obviously agree with this, since I also stated "I think that most players who are winning multiple BBs/100 hands will make up enough by multitabling to offset the decrease in EV/table."

[LetsRock]

My preference is to do one table at a time. Occassionally, I will play 2 at once, but even that is too hectic for my taste. I believe that I get a bit of edge from reading the table and playing it accordingly, which is nearly impossible to do when you're bouncing back and forth between tables. And it never fails that I end up with hands on both tables at the same time.

Just my take, but you can take the multiple tables concept and throw it away as far as I'm concerned. (and it really annoys me while constantly waiting for people to act who are playing multiple tables - it's just plain rude! it's really no fun watching their nic blink or the time bar drip down for 30 seconds turn after turn -uggggggh)

[astroglide]

not everyone who plays multiple tables is slow. i'm the one saying "zzzz" at my tables

[LetsRock]

i know not ALL of the zzzzzz players are multi-players, but they do contribute to the problem