4-tabling vs 2-tabling - Page 3

helpmeout · #21 07-05-2005, 01:05 AM

Exactly

Transference · #22 07-05-2005, 02:06 AM

I evolved playing 3 due to technological constraints. Now that I've moved to 5/10 im comfortable playing 3, but feel rushed with 4. It may be a reflection of the significant jump in stakes and that I've just never become terribly accostomed to 4 tabling, but is probably a bit of both.

For me anyway 3 is not much more difficult than 2, but 4 is significantly more difficult than 3.

me454555 · #23 07-05-2005, 02:58 PM

4 tables is a bit much, but still doable and gives you a chance to think about most of the hands

redbeard · #24 07-05-2005, 07:30 PM

I can't comment on the win rates, but I can give my experience at the 3/6 full games and the newly formed 3/6 6 max games. I had zero problem 4 tabling at the full games. It simply is a different animal than the short handed games. In the short handed game I started with 2 tables and found it to be a breeze. I moved to 3 tables and found it to be fairly easy as well. But when I moved to 4 tables I found it to be a bit of a strain. I am very demanding on my table selection and I felt as if I was spending a lot of time looking for another good table and missed some of the player dependant reads on the other three tables. Again this is a short sample size (less than a week, but it is all I have to draw from).

redbeard · #25 07-05-2005, 07:35 PM

just to simplify your blackjack v poker comparison let me say that I too played blackjack as my sole form of income and now play poker as my exclusive form of income and here is an analogy to describe the two: poker is like throwing a bullet and blackjack is like shooting it out of a gun. if you haven't played blackjack for a living pretend someone took a hammer and smashed your balls on a daily basis. The swings in one shoe of blackjack are greater than the swings in one week of poker at similar betting levels.

Carmine · #26 07-05-2005, 09:22 PM

UH, just out of curiosity. For the players that said they were playing blackjack fulltime. I assume you acquired the ability to count cards....yes?? Sorry for taking this off-topic.

cartman · #27 07-06-2005, 01:01 AM

Counting or variations of it (shuffle tracking, Ace location, etc.) are the only ways to beat blackjack in the long run (and the long run is eternal). There are tons of books out there that make claims to the contrary all of which are dead wrong (or at minimum misleading). I am not saying that a player can't be lucky and win without counting in some form. I am just saying that it is the only way to achieve a mathematical edge. Occasionally a casino will offer a game which is actually slightly in the player's favor just by playing basic strategy.

Cartman