True viability of multi-tabling?

[Lawrence Ng]

[ QUOTE ]
While it's true that you're making mostly rote decisions while multitabling, you still have to be able to process a lot of information simultaneously and make quick decisions. For an experienced multitabler, the B&M game is almost like playing in slow motion. You can make certain decisions without thinking, because you've seen them hundreds of times before. You can then devote your energy and attention to player reads and thinking about your lines of play much more indepth.


[/ QUOTE ]

This is very true. Playing online, especially through multi-tabling has helped with the technical play so much that when I hit the cardroom I am able to seriously focus on the more intricate aspects on individuals that can only be done on live games..ie reads and emotion levels.

Lawrence

[sin808]

[ QUOTE ]
In my experience, multi-tabling 3 tables makes it impossible to truly know the players at each table.

[/ QUOTE ]

For others this isn't necessarily true. I usually only play 2 tables at a time (occasionally 3 or 4). I have just as much of a read on the players at 2 tables as I do on one. I'm sure there are some that play 4 that are the same. It is commonly accepted though that by playing 4 or more tables you do give up a little bit of winrate at each table, but it doesn't exceed the gains of playing at that extra table.

[Sponger15SB]

[ QUOTE ]
From time to time while i have a sec in between hands of the 6 tables I'm playing, i'll do a serach on my name and get off the low pot size tables and find some other tables.

[/ QUOTE ]

ah crap that is a really good idea, can i use that?

normally i just look at all the tables and find mine, but this is much easier

[pfkaok]

[ QUOTE ]
ah crap that is a really good idea, can i use that?

normally i just look at all the tables and find mine, but this is much easier

[/ QUOTE ]

Yeah, i just figured this out about a week ago, then I felt really dumb for having to always look thru the whole list before... it especially sucked at 2-4 and 3-6 where there's like 1000 games going. With that, and playerview I think you can easily add a few more games.

[emonrad87]

[ QUOTE ]
anyone else share a simliar viewpoint on multi-tabling?



[/ QUOTE ]

Hell no. And many people on this forum make a much higher hourly rate MT'ing than the majority of people make at "real" work.

[talkinghead]

[ QUOTE ]


3. In addition, I think it limits the opportunity to really and truly improve your play against a normal ring game.

[/ QUOTE ]

This is a good point, I believe it to be so and I'll explain why.

To beat games you've got to make good betting desicions,
these desicions are based are largely based on observations. While some of these observations can be made by programs mentioned elsewhere in this thread ( a players VSIP etc) others, such what an opponents check on the flop after a pre-flop raise usually signifies, are missed when multi-tabling. How can you read hands and get those narrow value bet desicions the right way when making four at the same time?

That much is obvious, no one can argue, without deluding themselves, that better desicions can be made from concentrating on one single table, than on four simultaneously.

My point is, to improve yourself, you need practise in making the best desicions. If you make a mistake you will likely miss it and likely make it again. Quality over quantity everytime.

To someone who wants to improve their game I would urge to not give in to the tempatation of playing more tables for more action/excitement.
For those who say it increases the win rate and are only concerned with the cash, fine, good for you. But are you multi-tabling at $15/$30 (Party player) and if not why not? Perhaps the old game needs some work.

[Ian J]

[ QUOTE ]
With that, and playerview I think you can easily add a few more games.

[/ QUOTE ]

Playerview?

[bonanz]

this thread is so stupid. i believe it to be so, let me tell you why.

i would guess that most of the people arguing against multitabling have

1. tried it for a short amount of time if at all

2. had poor results

[ QUOTE ]
While some of these observations can be made by programs mentioned elsewhere in this thread ( a players VSIP etc)

[/ QUOTE ]

non-multitablers seem to think that those who do multitable are mindless zombies just clicking away not paying attention to anything. that multitablers rely on helpful programs, otherwise they might lose. fyi player view and gametime are new within the past 3-4 weeks. people played a million tables before that and won...

[ QUOTE ]
others, such what an opponents check on the flop after a pre-flop raise usually signifies, are missed when multi-tabling.

[/ QUOTE ]

absolutely incorrect

[ QUOTE ]
How can you read hands and get those narrow value bet desicions the right way when making four at the same time?

[/ QUOTE ]

it's pretty easy, but you are correct that some desicions become tougher, but you are also very correct in that they are narrow. which is why your win rate may go down slightly


[ QUOTE ]
My point is, to improve yourself, you need practise in making the best desicions.

[/ QUOTE ]

i find this statement highly ironic. by practice you mean...play more hands?

[ QUOTE ]
To someone who wants to improve their game I would urge to not give in to the tempatation of playing more tables for more action/excitement.

[/ QUOTE ]

multitabling is not for everyone. and there may be an argument that beginners should not multitable. but if you try it and find it is not for you, that does not make it hurtful to everyone. there is no shame in not being able to multitable well, even though reading these boards, new comers may get the impression that multitabling is "the thing to do"

howerver to argue that multitabling hurts your continued learning of the game is absurd. to argue that it is hurting already winning players who are multitabling and winning more is also absurd.

[BigBaitsim (milo)]

I find fewer than 4 tables boring. 6 is perfect, but I sometimes play 7. I tried 8, but that suddenly seemed like too many.

As to winrate, I can assure you it is possible to earn 3+BB/100 while multitabling 2/4 and 3/6.

[MicroBob]

This is kind of a silly thread that turned out to be a worthwhile read (well....what I read of it anyway).

1. I didn't know about the 'populate' aspect of game-time window (I just downloaded the latest patch today....so maybe this wasn't a feature before). I was always entering the players in manually and it was a REAL PAIN IN THE ASS (when I bothered to get around to it).
This alone made this thread worthwhile.

2. jwombles seems to have learned a bit from some of the posts in this discussion.
I still don't precisely understand how he says he is a losing player when multi-tabling but is also making 1.5BB/100 or something.

Obviously 1.5BB/100 on 2 tables is much better than 2BB/100 on 1 table.


3. I saw a reference to 'genius' regarding 6-8 tablers in one of the posts. It's true you have to be a better than average player of course....and you have to be fairly sharp. I know people who are just flat-out astounded to see me 2-table and can't understand how I can read the boards on both tables so fast.
But I hardly think the word 'genius' should apply to 6-8 tablers.
I don't think many of us really consider ourselves 'geniuses' just because we can play 6-8 tables (obviously astro is excepted here as he is well aware of his own true 'genius').

I prefer 4-6 tables....and will occassionally do 8. but when I do 8 I actually have to think which includes turning off the TV, not surfing 2+2, etc.

As I write this post I am playing on 4-tables on my 'other' monitor.
I don't say this to brag....I say it because for some it just isn't THAT difficult.
On one of my tables I have a couple of goof-balls with VPIP-40ish and PFR from 10-17.
There's another guy with more reasonable number but I have a note on him that he has previously re-raised (non-blind steal) with K4o so I'm kind of watching him too.
Another guy is VPIP-20, PFR-3 (so I know his raises likely represent group-1 hands....or close to that anyway) while the guy to his left is VPIP-28, PFR-20.

Anyway....with all the stats I have on these guys (and some of my own personal notes as well) I think I have reasonable reads on my opponents (if I can finally get something other than 62o).

I'm just playing 4 full-tables right now (one of them is a NL tourney so I have to keep that straight of course).

I know of at least one player (and suspect there are a few others) who not only play 8-tables....but do so on the 10/20 6-max tables (where decisions come MUCH faster).
The player I'm thinking of is
This is beyond my capabilities right now....but if I really focused on it and improved my 6-max game I suspect I COULD do it if I really wanted to. But it would still strain my capabilities and this is the level where I would DEFINITELY be making mistakes (like timing-out on some tables....not seeing that the board paired-up, etc).


Finally....to the original poster.
It sounded like you were thinking of going back to playing 3 tables to see how well you could do at it again.

You should really try just playing 2-tables for awhile first.
There's no reason to jump from 1 to 3 tables.

If/when you get to a point where 2-tables becomes kind of 'routine' and you are really comfortable with it....THEN think about adding in that 3rd table and grow from there.
Before you know it you might be 12-tabling at 6-max with the best of them.


Anyway, thanks for the tip on the game-time window everybody.
It rocks!!!

And I'm glad this turned out to be not as silly a thread as I initially thought it was going to be.