8-Tabling vs. 4-Tabling

[WarDekar]

With the other thread about 8-tabling $11s going on I thought I'd bring this up. For someone on a very limited bankroll, which is better: 8-tabling $11s or 4-tabling $33s? Say someone has $500 for their BR. Clearly, they don't have an adequate BR for $33s long-term, but there's still a reasonably good chance that they will build up to a managable BR without ever having to worry about it. We are assuming the player is a winner at $33s and $11s (obviously) longterm.

Clearly, 8-tabling the $11s is going to have much much less variance. I guess the question is, what is someone's ROI going to be 8-tabling $11s compared to 4-tabling $33s? I would think you could sustain a decently higher ROI at the $11s even 8-tabling, and since you're playing twice as many SNGs in the same amount of time you're probably going to end up making about the same hourly rate, won't you?

[raptor517]

8 tabling 33s is going to have MORE variance than 4 tabling 33s. with only 500 i recommend 4 tabling the 22s. holla

[ZeeJustin]

[ QUOTE ]
8 tabling 33s is going to have MORE variance than 4 tabling 33s.

[/ QUOTE ]

This is only true in the sense that 8 tabling will result in slightly worse play, and as your winrate goes down, your variance increases.

Mathematically, if 8 tabling does not change your play or your results, adding extra tables will not affect your ROR at all.

[lorinda]

8 tabling 33s is going to have MORE variance than 4 tabling 33s.

Read again, read again!

Edit: OP is interested in 8 tabling _11s_ vs 4 tabling 33s.


Lori

[WarDekar]

Yes, 8-tabling $11s vs. 4-tabling $33s is my question, I guess it could be applied to 8 $11 vs. 4 $22s, or 8 $22s vs. 4 $33s. My main point is though I think that since you can get a better ROI in $11s than $33s by far, it might be better for your hourly rate to 8-table $11s rather than 4-tabling $33s. This would also lower your variance a TON.

[Irieguy]

This is a pretty straightforward math problem.

The payouts at the $33's are 3X bigger than the $11's. So, in order for your hourly rate to be better playing 8-$11's vs. 4-$33's, your ROI would have to be more than 1.5X greater at the $11's.

Is that a typical ROI difference, ie 30% at the $11's vs. 20% at the $33's? I don't think so, based on the fact that many players are earning 20% while 4-tabling the $33's, and nobody is 8-tabling the $11's for 30%+. (If they were, they would have moved up already.)

It's likely that it's pretty close, but the hourly rate for anybody this would apply to would probably be better at the $33's.

Variance is the question. It will be lower playing 8 $11's, and the reason why has been discussed at length many times. So, personally, if I found myself with $500 left to my name and no income in sight (a relatively likely scenario for me 1 day after the WSOP this year) I would 8-table the $11's.

Generally speaking, you want to play at the highest level you can beat and bankroll, with as many tables as you can handle. Obviously you can use your historical stats to calculate exactly which combination is likely to yield you the best hourly rate, but it won't be different than this generalization very often. Bankroll fluctuation is usually the primary consideration for a player who moves down and maximizes tables-played.

Irieguy

[WarDekar]

Would you agree though that there are plenty of people capable of playing $33s for profit but with an ROI of significantly less than 20%? If you earn only 15% ROI at the $33s you need only 22.5% ROI 8-tabling the $11s to get the same results, which is attainable.

The reason I bring this up is because someone below said that you shouldn't 8-tabling $11s - you should move up from 4-tabling $11s to 4-tabling $22s, etc. and then add tables later, but I disagree with this. While it's true you might not learn as much during the process, if what the player is concerned with first and foremost is profit right now 8-tabling $11s has to be a viable option, even before 4-tabling $22s doesn't it?

[Irieguy]

[ QUOTE ]
Would you agree though that there are plenty of people capable of playing $33s for profit but with an ROI of significantly less than 20%? If you earn only 15% ROI at the $33s you need only 22.5% ROI 8-tabling the $11s to get the same results, which is attainable.

The reason I bring this up is because someone below said that you shouldn't 8-tabling $11s - you should move up from 4-tabling $11s to 4-tabling $22s, etc. and then add tables later, but I disagree with this. While it's true you might not learn as much during the process, if what the player is concerned with first and foremost is profit right now 8-tabling $11s has to be a viable option, even before 4-tabling $22s doesn't it?

[/ QUOTE ]

Yes.

Irieguy