continuous play vs. sets
 

sorry if there is already a post covering this topic,

i play 27 turbos on stars, and im just starting to get serious in to multi tabling sngs with a goal of roughly 40 tourneys a day. i was wondering if opening a new table every time i bust up to a certain ammount, or play sets of tournaments equal to that ammount, waiting untill my entire set is finished before starting another set.

any comments about pros and cons of both approaches are appreciated

Re: continuous play vs. sets
 

i try to play continuous...you get more sngs in and stay more focused than if youre finishing up sets IMO. ill usually play sets if im just adding more tables to my repertoire or if i have time interests where i cant play continuous.

Re: continuous play vs. sets
 

ive always liked sets better because they let me focus near the bubble and ITM since I'll only be playing like 4-5 at most during these times (start with 9 tables). Also, it can be a pain in the ass to open up new tables...

That being said, if I could comfortably play continuously and keep up my ROI my hourly rate would definitely go up. Maybe something to try later in the future...

Re: continuous play vs. sets
 

the only reason i dont play continuous on stars is that i keep timing out. tables on the bubble and itm take more time+attention than lvl 1-3.

wish there was a program for Stars that auto enabled the timebank.

Re: continuous play vs. sets
 

I play sets. I need more time to think when it gets down to 5-handed and less because of ICM calculations and paying attention to stack sizes.

Re: continuous play vs. sets
 

I started continuous about a month ago and I like it a lot more than sets because I can get more play, and more $/hr.

Re: continuous play vs. sets
 

To each his own really. I imagine you maximize your ROI playing sets, but I "feel" like I make more per hour playing continuous, so I play continuous. Sometimes though it is nice to play at a more laid back pace so I plays sets.

Re: continuous play vs. sets
 

I have a problem sitting and playing for more than 90 min. I would like to play continuous, but i knid of play a mix of both... i usually start up my second set as my first is winding down depending on the # of tables ITM.... i have had issues where i had to play at a friends house and had to do coninuous because of time restrictions so i could get in enough games, but i was exausted after... You just gotta find what u like best... if you get bored easily, lean towards sets... if you can focus for a long time bust coninous for a few hours and your done for the day... if you go in and out of your house like 10-12 times a day [img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img] like me then mix em and feel confused... ??

Re: continuous play vs. sets
 

I play a weird hybrid. Mostly in sets but I tend to have them overlap so when my last HU matches are winding down I start opening new ones.

Re: continuous play vs. sets
 

Start with 8 or 9

When I starting busting out and it's too easy I add more.
If I'm timing out or in a [censored] of shorthanded spots I want til it simmers down.

Re: continuous play vs. sets
 

This is what you do...if you have alot of experience in bubble play you can play continuous. It's like playing 10 people in chess at once, you look at the board and know what to do. You also get a lot more tourneys in.

What I do on stars is I stagger them a lil. I open 6 tables, wait for the first 3 levels to go by then I open 3 more and continuously play 9. I like continuous play for several reasons, you never get bored and there's always exciting bubble plays on at least one of the tables. I'm playing standard early level game, and in 2,3,4 other tables there's cashing opprtunities. This way it keeps it fun, makes it feel like your winning a lot (if your running good), get more table in and there's always action. This takes practice though, because it can be stressful if you have 5 itm or bubble tables going and you aren't exactly instictive, imo.

Re: continuous play vs. sets
 

obv continous is the way to go once you feel comfortable with it. I started out playing sets until I realized the importance of high volume in relation to $.

Re: continuous play vs. sets
 

Sorry to bump this, but on average, how many more tournaments do you play per hour playing continuously than in sets?

Re: continuous play vs. sets
 

My guess would be 4-10

Re: continuous play vs. sets
 

[ QUOTE ]
My guess would be 4-10

[/ QUOTE ]

Oops.. I was expecting an answer like 1.5x or 2x or something.. not a number of tables, as that depends on how many you've been playing.

Re: continuous play vs. sets
 

i'm positive my results with sets are much better than cont. i recall getting stressed out during the bubble(s) and opening new tables, and that damn alert sound!

sets allow me to take short breaks and clear the head a bit. although, i'm getting to the point where the break is very short in between the end of the last one and when i start a new set of six.

Re: continuous play vs. sets
 

I play 4 at a time, and when all 4 are done....cigarette break. Then back to another 4, repeat as needed or until BUSTO.

Re: continuous play vs. sets
 

noah, this all depends a lot on how effectively you multitable, and how long your sessions are and such. the math shouldn't be hard to do for you personally though, if you think say "i'm at my average table for x minutes, but say, winning a tournament takes y minutes" you can figure out how many extra tables you'd personally play if you instantly opened a table upon busto.

Re: continuous play vs. sets
 

4-10 while 8 tabling...sorry. Basically what I do is fire up a set and keep filling in when I bust out of one until I get several tables 4 or 5 handed then it becomes a set and I let it die down.

Re: continuous play vs. sets
 

I got in about 7 games per hour 4 tabling continuous one night. I got about 6.25 games playing in sets the next. Unfortunately, that's my entire sample size in comparing the two.