Some questions for Part/Full Time Multi-tablers

thebmorekid · #1 10-10-2007, 11:01 PM

I'm considering dedicating more time to multi-tabling limit games, and I was curious on a couple of questions that have popped up in my head as I'm working out my plan to climb the ladder. If anyone would like to provide feedback on any or all of the questions below, it would be greatly appreciated...

For those who have been multi-tabling for a while longer than me:

1. At how many tables have you found optimum BB/100 - hourly rates? If you care to state the limit that you are referencing, awesome...

2. Does anyone set daily hand count goals? If so, how many hands do you like to see? Of course, letting me know how many tables you are playing with this question would help too...

3. Does anyone set goals of under 1BB/100, and if so at what limit and/or count of tables, did your expected goals drop below 1BB/100?

4. If you have goals of less than 1BB/100, how low have you set the goals be set? (i.e. are there logical situations to have.75BB,.50BB goals, etc.)

Any feedback provided on these topics would be greatly appreciated...

thebmorekid

HOWMANY · #2 10-10-2007, 11:09 PM

If it's 6max lhe I'm playing then I basically cannot function playing more than 3 tables. 4 tables I can't keep track of anything, too many retarded misclicks, unable to think about ranges, etc. 3 tables I feel like I play great. Less than 3 tables I usually get bored but it's not really that tough to find some random game in the 10/20-30/60 level whether it be hu lhe, omaha 8, triple draw or some kind of stud.

Can't answer the other questions because I think setting hand and winrate goals is dumb. I just sit and try to play as well as I can and hope the results reflect the play. And I hate playing online so I'm not the best example of the guy who puts in a ton of hands.

thebmorekid · #3 10-10-2007, 11:16 PM

3-4 was an answer that I was expecting. My goal was eight, but it feels much too robotic with that many open. I can calculate the math quick enough, but ranges, notetaking, reviewing previous hands, etc. suffers dramatically...

I'm getting the feeling that as I settle in, three or four is going to be about the max I could personally handle as well...

thanks for the feedback

Hobbs. · #4 10-10-2007, 11:52 PM

I wouldn't play above 5/10 if you want to play more than 4 tables. I used to play 8 a couple of years, but that was when the party 15/30 game was great. Now that the mid limit games are tougher you need to cut down the tables and focus a little more.

thebmorekid · #5 10-11-2007, 12:11 AM

My eventual goal is the 15/30 and 20/40 games...I still see a lot of people playing 3 and 4 tables at that level.

Are you suggesting that once I break the 5/10 barrier, it's an unrealistic goal to successfully multi more than two at an optimum rate?

This disturbs me a bit, as I rely on 3-8 tables for controlling variance within a session (a theory that I've yet to be able to prove)

That makes me feel like I'd be better off playing four tables of 4/8 vs. one of 15/30...

Any rhyme to that reason?

pocketpared · #6 10-11-2007, 12:29 AM

I can't help you with the multitabling but I can tell you that the smaller your edge translates into an increase in variance so if you play more tables but play a weaker game when you do your anticipated gain may be illusory. You need to know the amount people feel their game drops off the more tables they play. That will help you find the optimal tradeoff.

emerson · #7 10-11-2007, 02:37 AM

Nobody knows the answers to some of those questions. Things have changed online. It is hard to tell whether your win rate is real or just random variance. Even when you feel you are the best player at the table it is questionable whether you will beat these players for more than the rake. Nobody talks about win rates because everybody is trying to figure out if they have one.

In my opinion 5/10 is the toughest level to beat. Higher levels have the same players but smaller rake. Lower levels have a higher rake but the skill level starts to seriously drop off. I have better win rates at 10/20 to 30/60 than 5/10, where I'm actually losing. I also barely break even at 3/6 (post party).

If all are six max I only play two tables. I can play one six max and two full ring. If I'm playing three tables and one table gets down to just three players I generally sit out.

I don't have win goals. My goal is $100 a day in rake back. Its the only thing you can count on.

thebmorekid · #8 10-12-2007, 01:47 AM

Thanks for the feedback Emerson...

Any additional thoughts on what is making the 5/10 games so tough right now, or are you purely stating that opinion on the rake at that level compared to others...

And do you really think that there are not established win rates out there right now? Surely some guys are beating the 5/10 games for 1BB/100...

JacksonTens · #9 10-12-2007, 04:30 AM

[ QUOTE ]
In my opinion 5/10 is the toughest level to beat. Higher levels have the same players but smaller rake.

[/ QUOTE ]

This is way off mate.

5/T is a joke. If I went back there and didn't win 2bb/100 I would quit poker...

I only 2tab&#1602;&#1604;&#1575;&#1604;&a mp;#1575;&#1604;&#1575;&#1604;&#15 75;&#1610;&#1588;&#1604;&#1575;&am p;#1609;&#1610;&#1602;&#1594;&#160 9;&#1616;{&#1574;&#1604; &#1569;&#1609;&#1578; &#1606;&#1576;JT

÷ &#1572;&#1588;&#1609;&#1601;

Abbaddabba · #10 10-12-2007, 10:07 AM

the bigger your edge, the more tables you should be playing.

adding tables increases your earn rate multiplicatively, while win rates tend to deteriorate additively.

effective winrate of 3BB/100 (assuming one table) after rakeback/bonus/proppay may drop by 0.25BB/100 for every table you add. the optimal number of tables for that person is 6-7 tables.

someone with an effective winrate of 1.5BB/100 (assuming one table) after rakeback/bonus/proppay whose winrate declines at the same rate would be best served playing 3 or 4 tables.

but obviously peoples effective winrates decline at different rates, because some people have higher/lower breaking points. it also is likely that your winrate deteriorates more as you add more tables. ie: adding the first kills it by 0.25, then by 0.3, then by 0.35 etc. no way of knowing for sure.

when you start making misclicks, you have for sure passed the threshold of what the best number of tables is.
if your decision making ability is only somewhat compromised (because you feel pressed for time), it's tough to tell.

you just have to sort of feel it out for yourself. i think there are few situations where the ideal number of tables is less than 4, and few situations where it is greater than 8.