Please help me explain how multi-tabling can be profitable...

[jackaaron]

I'm am trying the hardest I can to explain to one of my best friends how multi-tabling is SO much better than playing just one table.

First, he says you won't have the focus or ability to read. But, I get him to at least admit that if he's good enough to run over one table, he could do four. We're thinking positive here...but, even then, he says, "No, even if I could do it, I wouldn't because...and this is the kicker...

"You have 4 times the amount to lose, and you're 1 player against like 40 people."

Of course, I say, "No, you're 1 player against 8, 4 times." Then we go through all these freaking analogies, and so on, and he still doesn't get it. I tell him that you are pretty much just playing to make +EV moves all the time, and it isn't like a tournament where you have to consider the blinds escalating, and so on.

He says, if I know you're the mathmatician out there 4 tabling, I can beat you any day of the week. I tell him, you're probably not getting into the hand with the math guy where you're going to make much off him...he's either going to raise you with something, or fold to you with nothing.

Then, I tell him that 4 tables is really nothing. I've seen Gank 20 table before, and he goes nuts. Seriously. He actually gets red in the face and says, "THERE IS NO WAY SOMEONE MAKES MONEY AT 20 TABLING UNLESS THEY KNOW WHAT THE CARDS ARE. NO WAY. YOU CAN'T EVER CONVINCE ME THAT SOMEONE COULD DO THAT PROFITABLY."

So, I really am at a loss on how to describe to this guy how multi-tabling is more profitable, and I think it's important to be able to. If I can't accurately explain why, then there's something wrong.

Can someone help? Remember, this guy has many, many retorts, so keep that in mind, and believe me when I tell you I HIGHLY appreciate any help that you give me with this because it's irking me to no end.

[beavens]

i like multitabling because i can see more hands per hour.

the more hands i see, the more hands i'll play and hopefully the more hands i win.

when i 2-3 i can also still keep focus on the people i'm playing with and take notes, etc.

i get bored 1 tabling.

[tagtastic]

You need to make smarter friends - those who simply cannot conceive of someone who can do something they are incapable of are the saddest individuals. Reminds me of my days playing online fps games - those who chose not to believe that I could aim & shoot w/ such speed & precision simply dismissed me as a cheater and moved on. Now those mousing skills have a new purpose - cold, hard cash. [img]/images/graemlins/laugh.gif[/img]

Chicotime's video of 4-tabling shows a pretty accurate representation of how I play (although I play more tables, he plays a similar game to mine and makes good non-nit plays). Show your friend that video (or I'm sure there's others w/ alot more tables, I know that one has some decent play).

[jackaaron]

[ QUOTE ]
i like multitabling because i can see more hands per hour.

the more hands i see, the more hands i'll play and hopefully the more hands i win.

when i 2-3 i can also still keep focus on the people i'm playing with and take notes, etc.

i get bored 1 tabling.

[/ QUOTE ]

Playing more hands does not necessarily equate to making more money, and telling someone that you multi-table because you would be bored with just one table will not convince them that it's a profitable strategy.

I'm trying to come up with a viable explanation as to why it's more profitable for a good player. This dude feels that he is a very good player (and I actually think he is as well), and I want to be able to explain why he'd make even more by multi-tabling.

[jackaaron]

[ QUOTE ]
You need to make smarter friends - those who simply cannot conceive of someone who can do something they are incapable of are the saddest individuals. Reminds me of my days playing online fps games - those who chose not to believe that I could aim & shoot w/ such speed & precision simply dismissed me as a cheater and moved on. Now those mousing skills have a new purpose - cold, hard cash. [img]/images/graemlins/laugh.gif[/img]

Chicotime's video of 4-tabling shows a pretty accurate representation of how I play (although I play more tables, he plays a similar game to mine and makes good non-nit plays). Show your friend that video (or I'm sure there's others w/ alot more tables, I know that one has some decent play).

[/ QUOTE ]

Look guys, I really appreciate your attempts, but telling someone that doesn't beleieve something can happen that other people do it will not help. I suppose I could show him videos, but it's more about this...

Conceptually, there has got to be something fundamental about this that can be explained in such a way that it pretty much can't be refuted unless you have absolutely no common sense whatsoever. For example, I can explain the fundamental concept that you shouldn't drive on the opposite side of the road on a busy highway because approximately x percent of the time, you're going to get into an automobile accident.
I ought to be able to explain how a solid player can make more money on 4 tabling that he can doing just 1 table.

[DoomSlice]

Why do you care if he plays more than one table?

Maybe instead of multi-tabling he just needs to move up? Although you might be making more money playing 4-10 tables at a time, he is almost definately improving his actual poker ability at a faster rate than someone who multi-table grinds all day.

[dbitel]

I think it does depend on your style of play. I can imagine that if you're a maniac LAG that has to base most of his poker on reads, then multi-tabling I can imagine must be very tough.

However, I play at low limits, I consider myself a tight player and I think very little of my profit comes from making great reads. If i get the same hand against a similar player, I'll probably play it the exact same way both times. Against good players this is obviously not the way to do things, but at $100 buy-ins, there are very few good players. So if i play poker just on the strength of my hand, it really doesnt matter how many tables I play at once.

I think the key thing is that multi tabling might decrease your BB/100 slightly, but if you're playing a lot more hands, you're still making more profit by multitabling. eg. say you have a 4 BB/100 winrate if you 1 table and a 2 BB/100 winrate if you 4 table, then it is clearly more profitable to 4table as in an hour period, on average, you are winning more money.

As for not having reads, you can still make notes and use PT and game time to help work out what kind of players you are up against.

[wslee00]

Well, let's ask this - does your friend think that he can make money by being at a table with minimal reads? Basically, just playing solid poker and avoiding marginal situations? If the answer is no, then he won't be successful multi-tabling. If the answer is yes, then you will be making 4 times your current win rate 4-tabling, since 4-tabling is basically making solid poker decisions with minimal reads since you are constantly switching between tables.

I'll have to put a disclaimer on this saying that I've been mostly multi-tabling small stakes ($100NL) on party. Don't know if this strategy works at higher limits. It's just that there are enough donks at the $100NL level to play your ABC poker and show a nice tidy profit.

[iash]

[ QUOTE ]

As for not having reads, you can still make notes and use PT and game time to help work out what kind of players you are up against.

[/ QUOTE ]

I agree. Even without notes and PT, I still think an observant player can get decent reads on players when multitabling 3-4 tables.

Let's assume after an hour of play at 4 full ring tables, you've probably been sitting with maybe half of these guys for almost the entire time? How hard is it to maintain reads on 18-20 guys?