winrate multi tabling

[CarmeloAnthony]

Do the regulars find winning with 6++ tables or less ?

[Lego05]

What?

[Bill Smith]

[ QUOTE ]
Do the regulars find winning with 6++ tables or less ?

[/ QUOTE ]

POTD

[CarmeloAnthony]

do you find it easier winning more money with 4 tables or 6 tables+more?

[whyzze]

its a bell curve for me...

[Lego05]

[ QUOTE ]
do you find it easier winning more money with 4 tables or 6 tables+more?

[/ QUOTE ]

It's not easier to win money. You don't get magically better at poker or your opponents get magically worse if you're playing 6 tables instead of 4.


However, that said I win money faster playing 6 -8 tables instead of 4... because I'm playing more hands.



Theoretically each tables you happen will cause your winrate to go down (because of splitting your attention). However, the increase in the # of hands more than makes up for this and your $ per hour goes up. Now theoretically there is a point where if you add 1 more table the increased # of hands won't make up for the decreased winrate and therefore you would be better off (in your $ per hour) by not adding that table.



Edit: A quick note - Some people especially ones who are used to playing a bunch of tables sometimes say they play less than optimally when they're playing 1 or 2 tables because they get bored and start playing hands and making moves that they know they shouldn't be doing. This is IMO an issue of patience and doesn't really fit into what I said in the rest of my post.

[Gelford]

You winrate will be bigger with fewer tables, as you are able to make better reads.

Your hourly might still be better with more tables, as the drop in winrate is compensated for by adding more tables.


This all assumes you are a winner ... and remain a winner after adding more tables.