[SteveL91]

[ QUOTE ]
I think your perspective is wrong. Thinking in terms of how many hands you need to play leads you to focus on playing as many tables as possible, instead of on playing each hand to maximize EV. I don't know what your year is or why it needs salvaging, but I think making sure you're focusing on making the right decision everytime is way more important to your profitability then making sure you're squeezing out those extra 100 hands an hour. I know that personally there's a significant drop off in my bb/h when I try to play over 4 tables.

[/ QUOTE ]

I play as many tables as I feel up to that are good. There are times where I'll only play 4 because that's all I feel up to at that time, or because the others don't look worthwhile. There are also times where I feel sharper and can handle 8 or 9 without a problem. Keep in mind that I'm bouncing between .50/1 and 1/2. I suspect I wouldn't have the same comfort level with playing 6-9 tables were I playing similar limits as you play.

While I appreciate the sentiment, I think you're taking me too literally: I'm the world's worst grinder, and I doubt I'll come close to whatever number of hands I pick. It's just a way of trying to motivate myself to get hands in. I've been pretty lazy all year, and haven't really wanted to play all that much. Now when I feel like playing, I'm just trying to make the time count. I honestly don't know how much of an effect playing 6-9 tables has on my win-rate, but I know if/when it becomes too much, I just cut it back until it's manageable. Usually, I play 4-6; rarely do I feel like stretching things anymore than that.

Not a big deal, but I thought I'd try and explain my position a bit better.