mtt Q

[aaokwitme]

Why do people play more than one table at a time? Why not just move up in limits

[formula72]

1) more money, hope you know why.
2) no need for larger bankroll
3) competition is usually easier
4) more money
5)

[sh58]

also playing many tables reduces variance, in the same way as running it twice does.

say you win 60% of sessions. if you have 2 tables open, you will win both 36%, lose both 16%, and break even 48%.

that's one way to think about it. the main point is to play more hands, which means you will reach the longterm quicker.

if you play 1 table, 4 hours a day, you will probably play about 9500-12,000 hands a month, so you can see that over this sample you will have losing months. if you 3 table for example, you will play 28,000-36,000 and it is much more difficult to lose over this sample if you are a decent player.

[jogsxyz]

Type A personality. Must multi-task.

[PantsOnFire]

Variance and bankroll.

Let's say the bankroll is $1000. If you play in a $100 SnG you are what most would consider outside of your bankroll. If you play in ten $10 SnGs at once, you are within your bankroll.

This might not seem to make sense but think variance. 70% of the time, you will likely not make the money in that $100 SnG. However, in ten $5 SnGs, you will make the money in some of them so on average your variance will be lower allowing you to do this within your $1000 bankroll.

So in general, multitabling is simply accelerating your poker playing on the time scale while still playing within a bankroll.

[PantsOnFire]

I just thought of another way of looking at this.

Let's give 1000 equally skilled players a $1000 bankroll and divide them into two teams. Once a day, one team (Team Grand) will play in a $1000 SnG and the other team (Team Dollar) will play 1000 $1 SnGs simulaneously (for arguement's sake, let's say they can play this many without any loss in skill).

After a month, what do you expect the bankrolls of those 1000 players to look like? How many of them will still have a bankroll?