|
#1
|
|||
|
|||
Re: Sets vs. Continuous
I seem to get better results when I play in Sets. IDK maybe too small of a sample size.
|
#2
|
|||
|
|||
Re: Sets vs. Continuous
I used to play sets of 4, after a while I switched to continuous. It isn't much harder, if at all, and it increases your hourly rate a bit.
|
#3
|
|||
|
|||
Re: Sets vs. Continuous
[ QUOTE ]
I used to play sets of 4, after a while I switched to continuous. It isn't much harder, if at all, and it increases your hourly rate a bit. [/ QUOTE ] But, because you eliminate the hassle of dealing with the lobby and playing tables at widely different levels, sets of 6 or 8 are just as easy to play as 4 continuous IMO and increase your hourly rate even more. |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
Re: Sets vs. Continuous
[ QUOTE ]
sets of 6 or 8 are just as easy to play as 4 continuous [/ QUOTE ] I agree that 6 in sets is probally no harder than 4 continuous. To the guy you replied to, going from 4 tabling sets to continuous is easier (ie you suffer less of an roi drop, less inefficiency etc) than doing the same for 8+ tables. |
|
|