# of tables question for the forum

[Vehn]

I'd like to say I can play 5 easily and without losing any details but since I've started doing that I've been getting killed so dunno.

[Victor]

most of you are saying you could play more tables on party than stars. is this bc stars deals the hands faster? so maybe you are seeing the same hands/hr with less tables. this would increase winrate, no?

i would prefer to play less tables and see the same amount of hands. yall feel the same?

[milesdyson]

i never played party much. i have been 4-tabling stars 10/20 basically in the evenings. table selection at that game is fairly meh. almost all the decent guys play 3 or 4 tables, and there are usually like 10-15 running. hard to find good seats at 4 tables

[Guruman]

I max at 2 tables and play lots of 2-4 handed when I can.

2 tables of 2-7 tripledraw is still very difficult for me when it goes 2-3 handed.

[donger]

[ QUOTE ]
most of you are saying you could play more tables on party than stars. is this bc stars deals the hands faster? so maybe you are seeing the same hands/hr with less tables. this would increase winrate, no?

i would prefer to play less tables and see the same amount of hands. yall feel the same?

[/ QUOTE ]

Stars software sucks with stealing the focus, note-taking, etc. Same thing with AP. I'll be trying to manage four tables and take notes and other tables keep yanking my cursor away, the notebox disappears, etc.. Party was really friendly and didn't force tables down your throat when it was your turn to act the way some other sites do.

[The Funky Llama]

hey bro,

u can turn off stealing focus by going to advanced multitable options.

[Victor]

donger, i think notes are fairly worthless.

[DrSavage]

[ QUOTE ]
donger, i think notes are fairly worthless.

[/ QUOTE ]

strongly disagree

[MAxx]

i usually aim for three. i think when I start playing more than four, I focus too much on my actions and dont have time to access all my opponents tendencies. i may be alright on 6 tables if i were able to stay on the same 6 tables...but I am constantly hopping around, which messes it up more.

I think I also would rather play two 30/60 tables than 6 10/20 tables anyway. You may say that I could try 6 30/60 tables, but I'd just say I'd rather play two 180/360 tables.

I think it really comes down to knowing yourself and your strengths and weaknesses more than anything else.

[HOWMANY]

[ QUOTE ]


For me, 3 seems perfect and leisurely and 4 can feel really panicked. Playing 4 (esp with a few 3-4h), I'll get in a mode where I start making bigger and bigger attention related mistakes because I'm trying to dismiss each table too quickly, afraid I'm falling behind the action.


[/ QUOTE ]

This describes me perfectly. At this point I think that allowing myself to play more than 3 tables of shorthanded is a leak, as I can remember many, many times when playing 4 handed lead to not nearly enough attention to any of the tables and tons of stupid mistakes piling on top of each other, resulting in break even sessions that should have been small winners and losing sessions that should have been breakeven. I cannot recall a single time this has happened 3 tabling. This was a lot more noticeable on Stars than Party, I honestly don't think I even had a winning session 4 tabling Stars, but that's over less than 15k hands so it doesn't mean much I guess.

NL I 9 tabled full ring with no problem at all on 1 monitor, but I was basically a nit nut peddler, so it shouldn't be too hard.

Non-holdem sort of depends what I'm playing, I can pretty much only handle 2 different games at once and depending on what they are my max is 3 or 4 for full games and 2-3 for SH/HU.