| Posted by: HeelHo at December 9, 2005, 11:29 pm | | Topic: Multi-tabling vs. Good poker at higher levels. Forum: Bonus Whores | I hate to break this to you, but playing 25, 50, NL poker, and 1/2, 2/4, 3/6...................thats not going to improve your "game"
Its a whole different world. EIther its a job or its fun or its stroking your ego in lieu of having a penis over 4 inches.............
_________________
If it's a miracle, Colour Sergeant, it's a short chamber Boxer Henry point 45 caliber miracle.
And a bayonet, sir, with some guts behind. | | Static Link |
| Posted by: Alphaunit1 at December 8, 2005, 6:16 pm | | Topic: Multi-tabling vs. Good poker at higher levels. Forum: Bonus Whores | LOL.... can't argue with you entirely.
However, I'm always trying to improve my game so I can continue to move up in limits and improve my game. When I play a large number of tables, I don't think I'm improving my game, just grinding a crapload of hands playing as straightforward as possible. I've actually found that after a large number of those sessions, leaks start to develop in my game that I need to go back and repair. Hence my general distaste for massive sessions of that ilk.
So I'm happier making a less money each month - still making plenty to live on, of course. | | Static Link |
| Posted by: Alphaunit1 at December 8, 2005, 9:18 am | | Topic: Multi-tabling vs. Good poker at higher levels. Forum: Bonus Whores | HeelHo (mattspoker) wrote: clearing 3-4k of bonus a month and almost as much in winnings?
That's a good win rate, but I'd rather focus on playing good poker and moving up limits than trying to play 8 tables at once. I have played up to 6 tables a few times (mainly at Crypto sites, which sometimes run slowly anyway), but I never felt comfortable enough keeping up with the action.
This may be a LHE/NLHE thing too.... seems that (to me) a lot of the serious multitabling guys are playing NLHE. Nut peddling? | | Static Link |
| Posted by: Mikke_ at December 8, 2005, 7:13 am | | Topic: Multi-tabling vs. Good poker at higher levels. Forum: Bonus Whores | HeelHo (mattspoker) wrote: Mikke_ wrote: Alphaunit1 wrote: In general, I think playing over 4 tables starts getting into the realm of insanity. Granted I often have stretches where I'm folding away on 4 tables at once, but that's punctuated by a few minutes of "holy crap, I've got great hands on 3 tables at once!". Playing 8+ tables, I can't see how you could possible maintain anything beyond a paltry winrate, and then what's the point?
Word!
clearing 3-4k of bonus a month and almost as much in winnings?
No criticism intended, just agreeing with Alphaunit1 on how it goes for me when I open up too many tables. Everyone should do what makes them comfortable I guess.
_________________
Let your plans be dark and impenetrable as night, and when you move, fall like a thunderbolt. | | Static Link |
| Posted by: tiera3 at December 8, 2005, 1:16 am | | Topic: Multi-tabling vs. Good poker at higher levels. Forum: Bonus Whores | I'm new, so I'm not yet confident to risk multitabling real money tables.
However, with freerolls (or play money) I comfortably play up to three tables at once. Up to six tables at once with full concentration - also good for a stress release. (For added stress relief, make them different games.)
Above four tables, I prefer to spread it across two computers - note different sites on different PCs.
I've tried up to ten tables (five on each PC) but I kept timing out on some. I was able to handle eight for a brief period (5 to 10 minutes) but then the concentration became too taxing so I chose a couple to sit out on.
------
I'm mainly doing freerolls, so an example of my multitabling could be:
PC1: Bet365 - $1000 freeroll (short decision time)
PC1: PokerStars - NL Holdem freeroll (timebank)
PC1: CardPlayer - B$500 freeroll
PC1: CardPlayer - TEC freeroll
PC2: Full Tilt - $40 freeroll
PC2: Bullhorn - $200 freeroll
If I ... | | Read Entire Entry |
| Posted by: HeelHo at December 7, 2005, 11:16 pm | | Topic: Multi-tabling vs. Good poker at higher levels. Forum: Bonus Whores | Mikke_ wrote: Alphaunit1 wrote: In general, I think playing over 4 tables starts getting into the realm of insanity. Granted I often have stretches where I'm folding away on 4 tables at once, but that's punctuated by a few minutes of "holy crap, I've got great hands on 3 tables at once!". Playing 8+ tables, I can't see how you could possible maintain anything beyond a paltry winrate, and then what's the point?
Word!
clearing 3-4k of bonus a month and almost as much in winnings?
_________________
If it's a miracle, Colour Sergeant, it's a short chamber Boxer Henry point 45 caliber miracle.
And a bayonet, sir, with some guts behind. | | Static Link |
| Posted by: sjguppy at December 7, 2005, 11:06 pm | | Topic: Multi-tabling vs. Good poker at higher levels. Forum: Bonus Whores | Grinder wrote: Your right. Still - very VERY small amount of hands played. A lot of work for 4BB/100. and it's only 1000 hands! Heck - I've been over 14BB/100 with 100 hands LOL.
I'm not impressed at all
I was at 8+/100 at crypto for around my first 5k hands. Thought I was the king. Since then I have been around 1. Of course when grinder is at my table it does go back up significantly. | | Static Link |
| Posted by: Mikke_ at December 7, 2005, 9:56 pm | | Topic: Multi-tabling vs. Good poker at higher levels. Forum: Bonus Whores | Alphaunit1 wrote: In general, I think playing over 4 tables starts getting into the realm of insanity. Granted I often have stretches where I'm folding away on 4 tables at once, but that's punctuated by a few minutes of "holy crap, I've got great hands on 3 tables at once!". Playing 8+ tables, I can't see how you could possible maintain anything beyond a paltry winrate, and then what's the point?
Word!
_________________
Let your plans be dark and impenetrable as night, and when you move, fall like a thunderbolt. | | Static Link |
| Posted by: Alphaunit1 at December 7, 2005, 9:08 pm | | Topic: Multi-tabling vs. Good poker at higher levels. Forum: Bonus Whores | Grinder wrote: I bet it's 4BB/100 on ALL tables and not per table. If it
s per table he is a lier.
Not to nitpick, but whether he is 4BB/100 on one table or 20 tables, doesn't the win rate stay the same?
Two-tables, playing $1/$2.
Table #1: Play 200 hands, 2BB/100 win rate. Profit: $4
Table #2: Play 500 hands, 2BB/100 win rate. Profit: $10
Overall: 700 hands, profit of $14.... which is still 2BB/100, right?
---
In general, I think playing over 4 tables starts getting into the realm of insanity. Granted I often have stretches where I'm folding away on 4 tables at once, but that's punctuated by a few minutes of "holy crap, I've got great hands on 3 tables at once!". Playing 8+ tables, I can't see how you could possible maintain anything beyond a paltry winrate, and then what's the point?
I think my personal best was once when I had a winrate of 29BB/100 after 100 hands in PT... but that was just 3 huge hands that I hi... | | Read Entire Entry |
| Posted by: todd at December 7, 2005, 4:22 am | | Topic: Multi-tabling vs. Good poker at higher levels. Forum: Bonus Whores | HeelHo (mattspoker) wrote: Dont mention Starcraft. I havent played it in 6 years and I still feel the addiction creeping over my hands. Damnit that was a great game. RTS is probably good training for multitabling. AOE maybe, I dont know what the cool kids play. But some real shitheads were high ladder players on starcraft. of course they were 15.
I spent most of my youth playing video games, and I also feel like it was good preparation for multitabling. When I play more than 6, I do feel like I'm playing a video game. | | Static Link |
| Posted by: HeelHo at December 7, 2005, 3:50 am | | Topic: Multi-tabling vs. Good poker at higher levels. Forum: Bonus Whores | vim wrote: There's a video of a chap 20-tabling, with a win rate of 4bbs/100 hands.
Used to be a "Starcraft" competitor.
Crazy shit, check it out:
http://www.pokermentor.net/hpm_20tablechallenge.htm
Personally, I play better with more tables. Any less than about 4 or 5 and the action is too slow, I chase too much, and win rates drop.
Best,
Vim
Dont mention Starcraft. I havent played it in 6 years and I still feel the addiction creeping over my hands. Damnit that was a great game. RTS is probably good training for multitabling. AOE maybe, I dont know what the cool kids play. But some real shitheads were high ladder players on starcraft. of course they were 15.
_________________
If it's a miracle, Colour Sergeant, it's a short chamber Boxer Henry point 45 caliber miracle.
And a bayonet, sir, with some guts behind. | | Static Link |
| Posted by: RobDoral at December 6, 2005, 7:58 am | | Topic: Multi-tabling vs. Good poker at higher levels. Forum: Bonus Whores | | I generally 2 table 5/10 and if I end up with a lot of the same players across my tables I add a third now and then. I guess I need to get with the times and use Poker tracker but I take detailed notes and I can usually track the action in my head across two (or three tables) if I'm not tired or overly distracted (though I find it takes me longer to notice when a table has gone bad). | | Static Link |
| Posted by: nadical at December 6, 2005, 4:12 am | | Topic: Multi-tabling vs. Good poker at higher levels. Forum: Bonus Whores | Grinder wrote: Your right. Still - very VERY small amount of hands played. A lot of work for 4BB/100. and it's only 1000 hands! Heck - I've been over 14BB/100 with 100 hands LOL.
I'm not impressed at all
Grinder tape a video of yourself playing 20 tables and acutally win money, then maybe youw ill be imprssed a bit more. Im pretty impressed of your 14BB+/100 winrate in 100 hands thats amazing. | | Static Link |
| Posted by: todd at December 5, 2005, 7:56 pm | | Topic: Multi-tabling vs. Good poker at higher levels. Forum: Bonus Whores | BB/100 means "big bets per 100 hands". Adding or subtracting tables has no effect on this number (ignoring that one might play better or worse with more tables to concentrate on).
You might be thinking of BB/hour vs BB/table hour. | | Static Link |
| Posted by: Grinder at December 5, 2005, 7:17 pm | | Topic: Multi-tabling vs. Good poker at higher levels. Forum: Bonus Whores | Quote: There's a video of a chap 20-tabling, with a win rate of 4bbs/100 hands.
I bet it's 4BB/100 on ALL tables and not per table. If it
s per table he is a lier.
LOL - he is a 0.20BB/100 player in 20 tables. Heck, thats not very good actually when a good player can make 6BB/100 on ONE $1 table. | | Static Link |
| Posted by: Alphaunit1 at November 24, 2005, 12:10 am | | Topic: Multi-tabling vs. Good poker at higher levels. Forum: Bonus Whores | I play a pretty large range of games. My "bread and butter" is the $5/$10 games, but I drop down often to clear bonuses at other sites.
Anything up to $2/$4 LHE I can 4-table fairly comfortably, as I'm playing fairly straightforward ABC poker at those levels. (Some sites/times require that I play fewer tables due to the tighter play, but I might drop down to 3 tables then.)
$3/$6 LHE and up I play between 2 and 3 tables max. If I'm playing in a tougher game, esp. at $5/$10, I'll single-table. I generally stick to two-tabling max at that level, although on occassion I've added a 3rd when both of the original two are quite passive/non-tricky.
My concentration level does have a lot to do with it too. If I feel my concentration wavering (tired/distracted/etc.), I stick to single-tabling if anything at all.
For other games, I only single-table, regardless of limit. This includes Omaha, Stud, and any 6-max game. My skills at most of these games, although passable, ... | | Read Entire Entry |
| Posted by: vim at November 22, 2005, 8:49 am | | Topic: Multi-tabling vs. Good poker at higher levels. Forum: Bonus Whores | There's a video of a chap 20-tabling, with a win rate of 4bbs/100 hands.
Used to be a "Starcraft" competitor.
Crazy shit, check it out:
http://www.pokermentor.net/hpm_20tablechallenge.htm
Personally, I play better with more tables. Any less than about 4 or 5 and the action is too slow, I chase too much, and win rates drop.
Best,
Vim | | Static Link |
| Posted by: Cpt. Canuck at November 22, 2005, 8:43 am | | Topic: Multi-tabling vs. Good poker at higher levels. Forum: Bonus Whores | Mikke_ wrote: I am most comfortable 2-tabling, where I can have 2 PT external game windows going underneath the two tables I am playing so that I can see the stats of the players, and can react accordingly when the different types start to put their $s in and so on.
THat's me exactly. I have my laptop by my PC, so I can play on two tables simultaneously on two separate screens, with PT running underneath both tables. Since I play tight (PT rates me an Eagle), I'm rarely involved in two hands simultaneously. But, when I am, I tend to rush and make costly mistakes. Personally, I'm going to concentrate on moving up in limits, and possibly start playing some tourneys, rather than play more than two tables at once. | | Static Link |
| Posted by: BigPoppa at November 21, 2005, 8:21 pm | | Topic: Multi-tabling vs. Good poker at higher levels. Forum: Bonus Whores | I can play 3 tables of $2/4 or $3/6 and do pretty well.
Can do 3 tables of $1/2 6max well.
Have to drop to 2 tables for $5/10.
4 tables of anything higher than $1/2 full ring causes problems.
Have no idea how people 8 table anything at all.
_________________
"I want those motherfuckin' snakes off this motherfuckin' plane!" | | Static Link |
| Posted by: Mikke_ at November 21, 2005, 1:44 pm | | Topic: Multi-tabling vs. Good poker at higher levels. Forum: Bonus Whores | Cpt. Canuck wrote: I know you wanted to hear from higher rollers than me, but I wanted to throw my $.02 in 'cause I was thinking about starting a similar thread.
I guess my style of play is similar to yours, in that I never feel comfortable multi-tabling beyond 3. I can do 4 at a pinch if I am playing a site with mini-views, and will be OK with that at other sites once I get a bigger monitor to allow me to see all 4 tables at the same time - without making my eyes bleed.
I am most comfortable 2-tabling, where I can have 2 PT external game windows going underneath the two tables I am playing so that I can see the stats of the players, and can react accordingly when the different types start to put their $s in and so on.
I may move up the number of tables if a bonus deadline looms, but otherwise I will stick to 2-3 tables for the time being.
BTW - Thanks everyone for all of the your replies - it has been very helpful
_________________
Let your plans... | | Read Entire Entry |
| Posted by: Cpt. Canuck at November 21, 2005, 7:44 am | | Topic: Multi-tabling vs. Good poker at higher levels. Forum: Bonus Whores | I know you wanted to hear from higher rollers than me, but I wanted to throw my $.02 in 'cause I was thinking about starting a similar thread.
I started playing in May and became a winning player at .25/.5 LHE within a month. I discovered bonus whoring in September and immediately went to multitabling to clear bonuses. Playing four tables at a time, I was mowing through several signup bonuses (I followed the guide exactly) and, even though I was building a bankroll, my play was terrible and I became a losing poker player.
When I began to play the less jucier bonuses, I started to lose money playing. I went back to playing two tables so that I could really play solid poker. Once again, I am a winning player (1.6 BB over last 20K hands) and the bonuses are a significant but not dominant part of my income. I am on pace to make over $900 for November (bonuses will account for roughly $350 of that).
I am always working on my game, trying to get better. Perhaps I will get... | | Read Entire Entry |
| Posted by: HeelHo at November 21, 2005, 12:36 am | | Topic: Multi-tabling vs. Good poker at higher levels. Forum: Bonus Whores | From what Ive seen I can handle 12 tables depending on which sites at PL/NL
50 and 25. PL100 the play is a bit different as some people actually have clues about different playing styles. I think 6 is managable but Id have to not talk shit on IMs. higher than that method alone doesnt suffice but you have to know your opponents and watch somethings between hands. 4 is probably a maximum after NL400 or 15/30ish. Bonus is THE reason the lowers tables are better for me and why i do so many. If I clear triple digit bonus every day I dont really care if i only clear a 100 or so from play. If youre using Pokertracker or some such equivalent you can find your earn rates with however many tables open. It will tell you what fits your game best. The answer for you isnt going to be the same as for someone else.
_________________
If it's a miracle, Colour Sergeant, it's a short chamber Boxer Henry point 45 caliber miracle.
And a bayonet, sir, with some guts behind. | | Static Link |
| Posted by: porkrind at November 20, 2005, 9:30 pm | | Topic: Multi-tabling vs. Good poker at higher levels. Forum: Bonus Whores | I play no more than two ring games and a freeroll/low buy in tourney at a time. I can surge to four tables for a while but I start making mistakes.
As a break even 1/2 limit player i cleared $800 in bonus last month.
Seriously, after 23K hands since Sept 1st at 1/2 I am up 130 bucks from play. Statistically insignificant.
Hoping to change that next month after a gut wrenching review of every hand I chased to the river...................... | | Static Link |
| Posted by: Mikke_ at November 20, 2005, 4:40 pm | | Topic: Multi-tabling vs. Good poker at higher levels. Forum: Bonus Whores | This sort of question has probably been asked many times before, but times change, and I'll make this question pretty specific:-
Those of you who make decent money playing poker, either full-time or part-time - so lets say $1000 plus per month WITHOUT BONUSES, how many tables would you normally play at once, and at what level?
I am obviously asking the question of playing by the book at lower levels versus playing higher-level poker at higher stakes.
P.S. And I would also be interested to hear how much a part of the overall profit the bonus is at different levels.
Thanks for any and all replies.
_________________
Let your plans be dark and impenetrable as night, and when you move, fall like a thunderbolt. | | Static Link |
|