Multitabling SnG/ring mix 3 and 3?

[RoyalSampler]

I have seen a lot of discussion on how many tables people play. With my new PP account combined with UB I'm starting to stretch my legs a little.

I have found PP 4 SnG's started at the same time is not conducive to good play and started me off badly (-ve). Their interface is terribly impaired, although 3 UB SnG's was very easy.

I've $300 more ($100 down) bonus dollars at UB I'm working on so I want to play UB rings to work them off. So last night I played 3 UB ring and 3 PP SnG's for a nice $110 [img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img]. The SnG's started at the same time and I just joined a new when knocked out or finished. This felt comfortable although still a little short on attention for the SnG's.

I found 3 UB rings along the top of the screen and 2 PP SnG's real nice, because then the SnG's didn't overlap at 1600*1200. This was the best, but maybe giving up some earnings?

So you guys that play 8, what is your mix? Is it much easier if you stagger the starts? I think staggering is a bother because it protracts your play time.

The big difference for those who haven't tried this is that ring games are homogeneous. Every table has the same blind, roughly the same number of players and roughly the same number of chips (this can be managed by rebuying low stacked tables). 8 SnG's [img]/images/graemlins/blush.gif[/img] wow, you could have 2 HU where you push with A4 and 3 where you fold AQ.

Anyho, love some responses. Here is a preemptive bump... BUMP. Don't make me bump again [img]/images/graemlins/mad.gif[/img]

[RoyalSampler]

Aw comon, bump bump