OT: My gay blog.

[axeshigh]

[ QUOTE ]
a few other players I know have similar ROIs 8-tabling, though I don't know their specific stats.

[/ QUOTE ]

I'm close to that, don't think there's a point in posting stats yet as I'm only at 1,3k sngs.

[EnderFFX]

I know how to calculate it. I'm just lazy [img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img]

[EnderFFX]

Hey it's my dream! Meanie :P

[fluorescenthippo]

nice post. however, king of the hill sucks.

[Shakespeare]

Im going to sue you for damaging my eye's.

[axeshigh]

[ QUOTE ]
nice post. however, king of the hill sucks.

[/ QUOTE ]

No idea what you're talking about and not sure if you're responding to me.

[MegaBet]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]

while i think that you would be able to do 20% 4 tabling and maybe (a big maybe) 8 tabling, i would be willing to put any amount of money that you will not be able to attain 20% 12 tabling

[/ QUOTE ]

I think its definitely feasible that you could get 20% 12-tabling. 20% 8-tabling is certainly good at the 55s, but I think that there are a decent number of players who have done this over large sample sizes.

[/ QUOTE ]

MegaBet coughs loudly.

[Messy_Jesse]

Bless you. Anyways, serously- you lose a lot going from two tables to four and four to eight, and also certainly from 8 to 20(!), but its not that much. If far-from-perfect players can get 20% 8-tabling, I'm sure that a very gifted and talented player could scrounge 20% 20-tabling. That person is not me (obviously), but it could be FieryJustice...

[curtains]

I honestly feel that I lose very little going from 2-4-8 or whatever and I think that once players get used to playing so many games, they will not lose very much either. However at some point things have to get harder. I'll find out that number soon as I started playing with 4 monitors.

[FieryJustice]

That number is 20....20 is rough.