multitabling six-max question

[kidcolin]

[ QUOTE ]
I generally 2- or 3-table, and its still enjoyable. When I'm not burned out. And when I'm winning.

[/ QUOTE ]

[krishanleong]

[ QUOTE ]


Yeah, it was dumb of me to be a multitabling pro on a 15" laptop for 8 months, but i have been cheap my whole life, and its hard to break the habit.


[/ QUOTE ]

I understand the habit. When I go out for lunch I feel bad not getting McDonalds because McD is so cheap. But being cheap about poker is insane because spending money makes you more money. People who wouldn't fork over for a new moniter, playerview, porkeace, pokertracker, and other stuff blows my mind. It pays for itself several times over. You just can't afford to be cheap. It's too expensive.

Krishan

[kiddo]

Playing poker live with people I dont know is about the most boring thing I can imagine. It doesnt matter if its a lot of money or not. It just is so extremly slow.

Playing full tables online is really boring. No matter if its one or many. A bit funnier if it is at high limits, but still booooring.

Playing 1 table 6max at a level I played a lot at before is boring.

Playing many tables at levels I played a lot at before is pretty boring, but not as boring as playing 1 table.

Playing at a level I am not used to (for me its 30/60 and up) is fun. If its really high (for me) like 40/80 I can play 1 table. If its just a little higher then my normal 10/20 (lets say 20/40) I need 2 tables...

When u play at a level u are comfortable with its boring. U have to be pretty stupid to not know pretty much excatly how to play each hand. (Of course there are a lot of marginal hands but they are just that: marginal. And of course there are hands u play a in a certain way that is wrong, but u will never know this when u play, only off-table).

To make money at poker u have to play at a limit u are comfortable with. That means playing against players that are worse then u and at a limit where they cant scare u with their money.

If u dont find poker boring a lot of the time u are not intelligent enough to be a really good pokerplayer.

Most good pokerplayer are pretty intelligent and could have done something else much more interesting then playing poker online 3-4 hours/day. Its all about money and what u can do when u dont play poker.

[imported_CaseClosed326]

I like the challenge of playing 4 tables at once. It makes things more interesting. It is a shame that I suck at it. [img]/images/graemlins/grin.gif[/img]

[Victor]

[ QUOTE ]
If u dont find poker boring a lot of the time u are not intelligent enough to be a really good pokerplayer.


[/ QUOTE ]

i totally disagree. i am fairly intelligent by all measures and i always have fun playing poker. i enjoy playing quater chips with my friends. i enjoy playing with the selfproclaimed pros in vegas. i enjoy spewing at low stakes tables on party. i enjoy trying to play my best at mid and higher limits.

its something about being a gambling addict.

[twowords]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
multitabling with overlap sucks a lot of ass. I've been 3 tabling over a 1024/760 res for months or something (and 4 tabling over two of those screens) - but its still way more fun. two tabling with overlap isn't that bad at all.

[/ QUOTE ]

I don't understand why people handicap themselves while playing poker. Why haven't you bought a moniter that supports 1600x1200? They cost less than $200. I have 2 I don't even use any more.

Krishan

[/ QUOTE ]

I've been 4-5 tabling 5-10 (6 max) on 1024 x 786 with ridiculous overlap. I mean it's a 15" laptop.

I sort of have not know anything else and I am used to it after many months. Krishan, your post makes me wonder if this is a big oversight on my part. I also figured a fancy resolution monitor would be expensive, not under $200. Ugh, thoughts?

I don't like waiting on other players to decide, but I don't want the tables beeping and flashing at me constantly. My solution is the high-speed 6-max tables on PokerStars. Each table runs through about 100 hands/hr, so I can two-table relatively comfortably and still get in 200 hands/hr (equivalent to four-tabling full ring in my experience). I make an effort to think about each decision carefully, though, because I can easily slip into multitabling autopilot mode, which is what burns me out. I enjoy the thinking and getting as much experience as possible, but I don't want it to turn into a video game.

I have dual monitors, so I put one table on each screen, or sometimes both on one, but there is slight overlap. They are LCD screens, and I'm stuck at 1280x1024.

[krishanleong]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
multitabling with overlap sucks a lot of ass. I've been 3 tabling over a 1024/760 res for months or something (and 4 tabling over two of those screens) - but its still way more fun. two tabling with overlap isn't that bad at all.

[/ QUOTE ]

I don't understand why people handicap themselves while playing poker. Why haven't you bought a moniter that supports 1600x1200? They cost less than $200. I have 2 I don't even use any more.

Krishan

[/ QUOTE ]

I've been 4-5 tabling 5-10 (6 max) on 1024 x 786 with ridiculous overlap. I mean it's a 15" laptop.

I sort of have not know anything else and I am used to it after many months. Krishan, your post makes me wonder if this is a big oversight on my part. I also figured a fancy resolution monitor would be expensive, not under $200. Ugh, thoughts?

[/ QUOTE ]

Huge oversight. You will see the value once you go buy one. Sunday circulars advertise a crt monitor than handled 1600x1200 every week. Check best buy, staples, office depot. Both of mine cost 150 but 200 is pretty standard. I used them for a year and a half but bought a 2001FP recently.

Krishan

[yanicehand]

I used to 4-6 table 6max and get a lot of enjoyment out of it. I was earning 32% rakeback on the skins and making a very large sum every month just from rakeback. I was rarely concerned with improving my game or moving up in levels based on profit from the tables, as my rakeback would ensure several thousand a month.

Now that the party's over, I've realized that my 4-6 tabling isn't 1/2 the fun it used to be, but not for most of the reasons expressed here. The added frustration of trying to have multiple sites open, trying to select decent games, etc, has made it more of a hassle than anything. I've resorted to 3 tabling again, like i did to build my initial roll before rakeback took over my life.

You hear it a million times so it becomes cliche, but play what you're comfortable with. Try it out and see what happens. There's no harm in it, because the 1600x1200 monitor you use will be well worth it even without poker. I dual monitor with a samsung lcd and a laptop on a stand and it really just makes things clear, presentable, and efficient - 4 tables on one screen, 2p2 on the other, or homework on one and AIM/2p2 on the other. It's a great way to multitask in general.

I love this quote from p. 288 of King Yao's book:

"There are many possible distractions playing online poker that you do not have in a brick-and-mortar poker room, including surfing online, writing and reading email, watching television, and reading a book. (If you are playing online poker as you read this, STOP. Either play the game or read the book. Don't do both at the same time!)"

I was playing online when I first read this and cracked up.

I've since joined the school that multitasking is bad for being a good poker player and have quit doing it mostly.