multi-tabling problems

[Aisthesis]

[iceman5]

[Aisthesis]

[iceman5]

ABC is a winning strategy at those stakes, but mixing it up a bit is more profitable and is more fun.

You could easily win playing 18 / 7, but 22 / 15 is alot more fun.

When youre sitting there with 98s and a known TAG bets a T63 flop, you could easily fold and move on, but raising sometimes knowing hes going to fold his QT is alot more fun.

When you raise with ATs and get a caller and then the guy leads 1/2 pot into you on a J43 flop, you can fold and forget it, but a raise will get him to fold 90% of the time. Again, more profitable and more fun.

[Aisthesis]

[Triple B]

22/15 is a bit LAG for FR for my tastes, but it should be a playable style. I played a 17/11 style when I played some FR in Sept/Oct and I'm by nature a TAG.

If you think you aren't playing your A game as you add tables, then just play 2 tables for a while to get used to it. When you get comfortable/confident with that, add one more. Rinse and repeat. I don't see why a decent player can't play profitably at a minimum of 4 tables, especially at FR (once you get comfortable with the software and with making quick decisions).

[Aisthesis]

Yeah, I actually backed down to 1 this evening (was tired anyway) and noticed that I felt MUCH more on top of various players' styles--basically having identified the LAGs before the blind even got to me rather than not paying attention to what was going on at the table because I'm looking for good tables to join their waiting lists (a lot of it actually isn't dealing with the tables that are there, but getting decent games set up or finding a new table when one breaks).

But even assuming that you only get slightly weaker playing 3 or even 4, I think the question remains of whether your optimal win-rate in dollars is going to be playing 1 or 2 at higher stakes or playing 3 or 4 at lower stakes--no doubt dependent on one's personal ability to play well and stay focussed (and creative) with more going on and more players on whom to get reads.

I do think variance is going to be lower with more tables simply because you're getting more hands. Hence, BR requirements for playing 4 tables of .50/1 are lower than for playing 1 table of 2/4--assuming that you're winning at a decent rate normally in both games.

In BB/hr., the real question, though, taking those two extremes, is whether the strength you lose due to 4-tabling is more or less than the difference in strength of the average field in those games. Just as note: If you're winning, say, 8 ptbb/100 at the 2/4 playing 1 table, then you need to win 8 ptbb/100 four-tabling at the .50/1 to be making the same hourly wage...

I think I may try 1-tabling a bit more tomorrow just to get my game back the way it should be (not on this kind of generic auto-pilot), then concentrate on 2-tabling after Xmas--and being much more serious about staying on top of reads for all the players at both tables. I think part of the problem, too, was that I wanted to quickly crank out as many hands as possible to evaluate the all-in strategy I was talking about a couple of months ago (then I took a poker break from early November until last week). So, I just played everything else much too mechanically with no real reads on anyone--possibly still a strategy that could at least win at the lower levels but not so much fun and certainly not a way to get particularly good win-rates.

[paulee]

[iceman5]

I thought you were talking about 6 max. I cant play 16 tables like some of these youngsters, but even I could play 6 tables of full ring with no problems.

Just think about how often you are folding when you play 18% of your hands. Think about how many of those 18% you actually flop something. Playing one table must be the most boring thing in the world.

You only need to watch one or 2 people per table. The rest of them are normally playing ABC anyway.

Aso, when it comes to making moves on the flop, remember that if youre betting or raising to a pot sized bet or raise, you need to win half the time to break even. When someone bets their QT into a Txx flop at full ring and you raise, they will fold alot more than 1/2 the time. Id rather do it with nothing than with TP because if they call I can give up with no problems. If they call and I have KT, its going to be a big pot and at full ring they are probably going to have my KT beat but I will have trouble folding now.

Even at 6 max, I bet flops all day long with nothing and they just keep folding. I have 82 in the BB and the flop is 663. I bet / they fold.

I have QT on the button and flop is A54. They check to me, I bet and they fold. Try it!

[Aisthesis]

[rdale]

I found my game isn't nearly as creative when MTing and that I definitely can't play more than three tables effectively. One of the things I've been doing though is looking for an opportunity to raise in the last three seats up to two limpers cards like overs, sc, pp, Axs Kxs type hands, as well the normal raising cards. That is a whole lot of raising choices but it doesn't come up as often as you would think as often someone has raised in front, there are too many limpers to try to run a play, etc. Anyways I found a general position raising rule, while it is exploitable is working out good for me to not just slide into ABC poker.

I prefer to open a few tables and drop the tighter more nitty ones, while searching for the more exploitable games. In the end I usually wind up only playing one table, sometimes two.

[gsdavid]

I think that only way you can efficiently MT is to have preset plays for each individual opponent. For example, you have 10-50 whichever different categories of players that you categorize the donks on table. The more experience(hands played you have) the more categories of players you have and thus you can plan ahead your moves on each street. Basically you play according to a scheme and you deviate from it only when opponent does something funny or you decided to make a move. So basically, the more hands you see the more decisions you can make in a instant. At one point, your preflop decisions should be 99% subconscious as well as your flop play. Only time you could spend your 15 seconds to think is when you get to turn or are playing a really big pot(its not like small ones don't matter, but those pots are more systematic. This also means that you must have all your bluffing spots premeditated too since otherwise you would be more predictable. It gets easier as you move up since you basically have 4 same ppl on 8 of your tables and 1 unknown that you need to focus your attention to.

[paulee]

[concussed]

[Stoneburg]