More Multitabling Pondering

    • deVall3y
      deVall3y
      Bronze
      Joined: 06.01.2009 Posts: 554
      I play the $3 turbos on stars. I used to play 4, and had good winning rate then but it felt like too light. So I made a thread here and I decided to move to 6.
      Playing six feels just right, intensity-wise, but I have two main problems:

      1. I used to tile 4 tables. Tiling six results with really small windows. Spreading them on each other isnt comfortable to me as well
      2. I'm losing money!! or atleast, barely winning. I cant get near my winning rate with the four tables even though I dont feel a big change in my game

      What do you think?
  • 5 replies
    • Tim64
      Tim64
      Black
      Joined: 02.11.2008 Posts: 7,401
      1. 2nd monitor seems only option in that case - but ofc it will eat up your winnings.

      2. Go back to 4 tbles for a while. If your winrate climbs back to old level, you'll know you're making mistakes which are costing you - even if you don't realise it at the time.

      If there are mistakes, you should be able to isolate and eliminate them by posting hands/studying.

      Nothing else you can do. It's silly to play more tables than you are able to profitably, just because you feel you ought to be able to.

      p.s. sort out #2 first. No point worrying about the praticalities of multitabling 6 tables until you are certain you can do so with a decent winrate.

      glatt,
      Tim
    • viewer88
      viewer88
      Bronze
      Joined: 19.04.2008 Posts: 5,545
      I just let the big tables cascade on pokerstars, you will get 0 reads (and even a hard time spotting regulars), but it's fast and your screen is alot bigger (pretty shitty screen over here, have a hard time reading betsizes etc... when 4-tiling).

      I used to 4tile my screen and still cascade it (you always see 4 tables, but it are infact 4 groups of multiple sng's stacked on top of eachother). When you play 16 tables this should still allow you to get more reads, since it's alot easier to spot patterns (that guy on that table raises often, ...) and you will see alot more showdowns. It becomes useless when 16+ tabling imo, since the screen pop up way to fast anyway and you just end up making a lot of miles with your mouse (and smaller screens).
    • deVall3y
      deVall3y
      Bronze
      Joined: 06.01.2009 Posts: 554
      lol :P
      I've decided I'm moving back to normal, not turbo, sng's for a while. So far it's working good.
      Maybe it's because turbos were too swingy for me or because the psychological effect of having more time (i never timed out I just made hesitant decisions imo)
      I have a great monitor, wide 22" HD. The 4 tiles stacks is a pretty good solution for me I think. I even have enough room to have half of atable peek outside of the 4 tile stack if that makes sense
    • Tim64
      Tim64
      Black
      Joined: 02.11.2008 Posts: 7,401
      Hey Viewer88,

      Don't answer this if it's too nosy, but what sort of ROI are you able to make 16-tabling in this way?

      & what limits are you playing?

      Cheers,
      Tim
    • viewer88
      viewer88
      Bronze
      Joined: 19.04.2008 Posts: 5,545
      I suck balls, running at less then 5% ROI at stars. sharkscope : viewer88

      Samplesize is too small, I hope it's just variance ^^
      biggest part of those are turbo's (so lower ROI)
      5-10% ROI should def be doable 20-tabling turbo's imo.