|
#1
|
|||
|
|||
Do you feel your game improves a lot playing many tables of FR?
I was playing my usual 4 tables of $200NL FR on Full tilt last night/this morning, and something happened that got me to thinking. I won a 200bb pot off a regular that tried to make a move on me, and instead of doing the normal thing which was just take the pot and keep playing, I started trash talking. Eventually we were sparring back and forth, and he critisized me for only playing 4 tables. I explained that I make 4bb/100 doing this, and we ended up actually having a pretty civil conversation about stakes, numbers of tables, etc. This got me to thinking. Perhaps I could play more and be more profitable. Putting profitablity aside for a moment, what number of tables do you feel is optimal for improving your game? I can see the advantage of playing a lot since you can get more hands in, see many different situations, etc, but the drawback is you don't get to analyze your own play as much, you don't learn to read the other's players as well, and you don't spend as much time on each hand while it is being played. Let's say for a minute that my only motivation was to get better. What do you feel is the optimal number of tables? 1? 12? Somewhere in between?
|
#2
|
|||
|
|||
Re: Do you feel your game improves a lot playing many tables of FR?
[ QUOTE ]
I was playing my usual 4 tables of $200NL FR on Full tilt last night/this morning, and something happened that got me to thinking. I won a 200bb pot off a regular that tried to make a move on me, and instead of doing the normal thing which was just take the pot and keep playing, I started trash talking. Eventually we were sparring back and forth, and he critisized me for only playing 4 tables. I explained that I make 4bb/100 doing this, and we ended up actually having a pretty civil conversation about stakes, numbers of tables, etc. This got me to thinking. Perhaps I could play more and be more profitable. Putting profitablity aside for a moment, what number of tables do you feel is optimal for improving your game? I can see the advantage of playing a lot since you can get more hands in, see many different situations, etc, but the drawback is you don't get to analyze your own play as much, you don't learn to read the other's players as well, and you don't spend as much time on each hand while it is being played. Let's say for a minute that my only motivation was to get better. What do you feel is the optimal number of tables? 1? 12? Somewhere in between? [/ QUOTE ] Optimal? The smartarse side of me says zero, and reading books. |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
Re: Do you feel your game improves a lot playing many tables of FR?
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] I was playing my usual 4 tables of $200NL FR on Full tilt last night/this morning, and something happened that got me to thinking. I won a 200bb pot off a regular that tried to make a move on me, and instead of doing the normal thing which was just take the pot and keep playing, I started trash talking. Eventually we were sparring back and forth, and he critisized me for only playing 4 tables. I explained that I make 4bb/100 doing this, and we ended up actually having a pretty civil conversation about stakes, numbers of tables, etc. This got me to thinking. Perhaps I could play more and be more profitable. Putting profitablity aside for a moment, what number of tables do you feel is optimal for improving your game? I can see the advantage of playing a lot since you can get more hands in, see many different situations, etc, but the drawback is you don't get to analyze your own play as much, you don't learn to read the other's players as well, and you don't spend as much time on each hand while it is being played. Let's say for a minute that my only motivation was to get better. What do you feel is the optimal number of tables? 1? 12? Somewhere in between? [/ QUOTE ] Optimal? The smartarse side of me says zero, and reading books. [/ QUOTE ] Obviously reading books is important, but you need to get experience sometime, which is what I'm referring to. |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
Re: Do you feel your game improves a lot playing many tables of FR?
It really depends on the individual.
-How observant are you at 1, 2, 4...etc tables? -How quickly can you learn from experience? personally, 3 tables gives me the best experience/observation trade off. |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
Re: Do you feel your game improves a lot playing many tables of FR?
Honestly, I think SH games help me more than FR. They are much more aggressive and you find yourself in more marginal situations. Reads also seem to come into play more often.
I grind out wins in FR playing 6+ tables. If I want to work on my game, I play 2-3 tables of 6max. |
#6
|
|||
|
|||
Re: Do you feel your game improves a lot playing many tables of FR?
1 and 2 if you want to bring reads and tells as your main skills at the table. You can up your winrate significantly
Above 2, it gets tough to do that properly, and need to start using stats/hud approach, at which time you may as well play 12. |
#7
|
|||
|
|||
Re: Do you feel your game improves a lot playing many tables of FR?
[ QUOTE ]
1 and 2 if you want to bring reads and tells as your main skills at the table. You can up your winrate significantly Above 2, it gets tough to do that properly, and need to start using stats/hud approach, at which time you may as well play 12. [/ QUOTE ] I think I can do the first thing HUD-assisted with 4 tables. There is still enough time to analyze every hand. I use the HUD more for weeding out the players where I would not use reads or tells. With 12 tables i become a click-o-mat and cannot use the info any more. Actually, one of the most important stats for me is No of hands seen: < 25: I do not even bother to see them, they will be used just for table averages. < 100: VPIP PFR - thats it! < 300: aggression, C-Bet tendencies, Position tendencies < 1000: River tendencies > 1000: player will be thoroughly analyzed and annotated Sometimes, I just need to see three hands and note down "DNB!" [img]/images/graemlins/grin.gif[/img] |
#8
|
|||
|
|||
Re: Do you feel your game improves a lot playing many tables of FR?
On the topic:
I am with those who say the less, the better if you want to grow as a player the fastest. The optimum is probably somewhere between one and three for the most of us. If you want to maximize earnings per hour you will have start increasing the No of tables at some point in time. The optimum No of tables at a specific level will depend on your relative skills compared to the rest of the field at that level. If you can crush one level @ 20 BB/100 single-tabling with superman reads you could probably 6-table the same level with 8 BB/100 and 12-table @ 6 BB/100. If you are struggling single-tabling at NL 1K at 1.5 BB/100 you probably shouldnt be 6-tabling. |
#9
|
|||
|
|||
Re: Do you feel your game improves a lot playing many tables of FR?
I'm definitely improving playing a ton of tables, but it's not a read based improvement more like knowing the level from a to z and crushing the standard way of playing ( which is subtly different on each site each limit ect... )
It's not very clear sorry i'm tired and my english refuse to work |
#10
|
|||
|
|||
Re: Do you feel your game improves a lot playing many tables of FR?
Playing a lot of tables improves your game because you can see/play a lot of hands. Experience is the best teacher. But since the goal is to make money, you have to find an optimal number of tables to play. For me, I believe it's 3-4.
|
|
|