Two Plus Two Older Archives  

Go Back   Two Plus Two Older Archives > General Poker Discussion > Beginners Questions
FAQ Community Calendar Today's Posts Search

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old 07-26-2005, 12:13 AM
EdSchurr EdSchurr is offline
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Posts: 1
Default Two-table for sanity, or one-table for reading people?

Overall I haven't played much, and I just started playing again after a few months absence so my skills are very weak. At the table I find myself slow to figure out odds, and frequently unable to make a play I'm confident in. My mantra is "lose most of the time, but win big the few times I do", and I dutifully put my chips in even though I'm often gritting my teeth. Furthermore, my memory for players is very poor.

Even though I could probably use the time to think, one-tabling is too slow between hands and I can't bother to play when I'm so bored. However, at two-tables I haven't been able to remember players at all.

So, should I attempt to play one-table, and try to focus on remembering players' plays? With such a high turn-over, is it at all worth it?

Or should I play two-tables while I learn the nuances of the game mechanics, and build my skills?

I'm leaning towards two-tabling, because I think it'll be easier to remember people and their plays once I have a larger body of knowledge in memory with which to stereotype them. (I'm using my vague notions of how memory works here.) That is, it should just be easier to learn to remember players and read them once I know the rest of the game.

If one-tabling is too boring no matter what, I'll just two-table so I can play the game.
Reply With Quote
  #2  
Old 07-26-2005, 12:25 AM
jman220 jman220 is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2005
Location: No Poker Sept-May
Posts: 822
Default Re: Two-table for sanity, or one-table for reading people?

[ QUOTE ]
Overall I haven't played much, and I just started playing again after a few months absence so my skills are very weak. At the table I find myself slow to figure out odds, and frequently unable to make a play I'm confident in. My mantra is "lose most of the time, but win big the few times I do", and I dutifully put my chips in even though I'm often gritting my teeth. Furthermore, my memory for players is very poor.

Even though I could probably use the time to think, one-tabling is too slow between hands and I can't bother to play when I'm so bored. However, at two-tables I haven't been able to remember players at all.

So, should I attempt to play one-table, and try to focus on remembering players' plays? With such a high turn-over, is it at all worth it?

Or should I play two-tables while I learn the nuances of the game mechanics, and build my skills?

I'm leaning towards two-tabling, because I think it'll be easier to remember people and their plays once I have a larger body of knowledge in memory with which to stereotype them. (I'm using my vague notions of how memory works here.) That is, it should just be easier to learn to remember players and read them once I know the rest of the game.

If one-tabling is too boring no matter what, I'll just two-table so I can play the game.

[/ QUOTE ]

Do you use pokertracker/gt+? Use them if you're going to play more than one table and can't remember the players. You may want to re-evaluate your game if you're getting bored only playing one table, but If you are having trouble remembering players and your game is rusty I would not recommend playing more than one.
Reply With Quote
  #3  
Old 07-26-2005, 12:40 AM
mmmmmbrother mmmmmbrother is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2005
Location: 2/4? maybe next week
Posts: 383
Default Re: Two-table for sanity, or one-table for reading people?

or even making as many notes on players as possible on paper so you dont have to remember anything.
or pt
Reply With Quote
  #4  
Old 07-26-2005, 12:40 AM
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Default Re: Two-table for sanity, or one-table for reading people?

[ QUOTE ]
I'm leaning towards two-tabling, because I think it'll be easier to remember people and their plays once I have a larger body of knowledge in memory with which to stereotype them.

[/ QUOTE ]

If you are failing to remember people at one table, an extra 10 players at the same isn't going to help you. Multi-tabling will cure your boredom, though requires you playing less-than-optimal poker on either table.

If you aren't a winning player, multitabling will cause you to lose your money twice as fast.
Reply With Quote
  #5  
Old 07-26-2005, 07:13 AM
Ray Of Light Ray Of Light is offline
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Posts: 17
Default Re: Two-table for sanity, or one-table for reading people?

Stick to one table. Add more tables once you are comfortable with one table.

If your skills are weak right now, and you are having trouble keeping up with the action and players at just one table, playing two tables will be an absolute disaster for you...
Reply With Quote
  #6  
Old 07-26-2005, 07:32 AM
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Default Re: Two-table for sanity, or one-table for reading people?

I dont think you really want to play on line poker.
You maybe playing because your bored and cant find anything
better to do.
Many people play on line because its has become the in thing in some quarters.
Just a thought as your post read to me as if you are striving for somthing to concentrate on.
Reply With Quote
Reply


Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 05:12 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions Inc.