NL and Limit profit

[CHiPS]

I found PinkSteel's post interesting - some good thoughts there.

I play $200 NL now and there are plenty of bad players at that level - but as others said "bad" is relative. I always look for some sign of bad play at a table I sit down to. If I go 30 minutes without seeing a mistake or suspect weak play then I move to another table. But I definately agree with Trail of Tears that the average player at $200 NL is better than at $50 NL.
One thing for me in making the decision to move from $100 NL to $200 NL was the rake. The standard rake is 5% up to a maximum of $3. So a pot size over $60 is raked less than 5%. At $200 NL there are more pots that get over $60, so the rake is a lower percentage. I've guessed the rake at $200 NL is about 0.50 - 0.75% less than at $100 NL (saving me a couple bucks an hour). Also, the way bonuses are cleared at many sites allows you to clear the bonus faster at the $200 NL (a couple more bucks an hour). So these are both motivating factors to move up in limits.
On the multitabling, I'd say start at 1 table when you move up and then maybe try two after you are comfortable. I did not multitable on the way up, preferring to move up in limits first. I am now facing a decision on whether to start trying 2 tables at $200 NL and I may start trying this. Many times when I play 1 table I am playing keyboards and learning vocals for band practice. So already I am not 100% engaged at the one table. If I go to two tables I'll concentrate 100% for the times I do that.

[winky51]

Thanks for the input. I will probably stick to 2 tables of a higher limit. I can fully read my opponents with 2 tables. More than that and I start missing clues. In limit I can play 4 that way no problem. Even if I miss 20% of clues I get enough showdowns with turd players that I can get a good handle on them. PT also allows me to get an update on the see flop and VPIP.

Thanks for all the input