Things that ruins online poker for no reason

Hello k0kki3

Welcome on the PokerStrategy forum

That’s pretty sick that you play so many tables at once, but I think it’s most likely better for you’re learning progress and win rate if you play less tables. Now you most likely play on auto-pilot mode and it’s difficult to find your own leaks this way.

Hopefully you can play 40 tables also at least break-even, but I’m more a player that likes quality more than quantity.

Further I wish you a pleasant stay on the forum and if you have any questions don’t hesitate to ask them.

Best regards,
SDK1987

Well my opinion is that if you want to be BE 40 tabling grinder, go for it. Then if someone wants really crush the games and play less tables and focus more on less tables, go for it.

Anyway, gl!

.

Have you thought how you could increase your winrate against those kind of players instead of just thinking that they hurt your winrate? There`s always ways to exploit other players.

I don't understand.

These tougher than fish players are called regulars, and unfortunately you must play against them because they want part of fish money too.

How do you know btw who are winning regs and who breakeven?

.

Hi, k0kki3,
The primary reason I play more tables is to fight boredom.
One or two tables of NLHE means that for a large part of the time you're doing nothing.
I play that few if I'm doing another activity at the same time.

With 4 tables I can play and takes notes and generally keep up. Above 4 I can still play properly, but the note-taking starts to suffer.

Above 8 I start to miss some hands, and I'm no longer able to watch all players, and follow all the games -- so that is where I set my limit.

40? I know that Randy Lew (nanonoko) used to do 24 regularly, but it seems that the more you play at once the more mistakes you'll make. I'm not saying it can't be done, but I think something has to be sacrificed at that many tables.

All players are different.

Best of luck to you,
VS

I played once 24 tables of play money. I lasted for 2 minutes. It was crazy!

40 Tables sounds like a lot, i can do 3 max lol. Thats it, i can would play maybe more than 3 if i play in tournaments but not cash tables, i lost a lot of money play more than 2 cash tables in NLHE at the same. GL though hope you win lots of money.
BTW which sites do you play at?

Yeah sure.

I got you!

.

Hi, k0kki3,
Yes, I *can* use all my time to observe opponents, but I usually do something on the side.

With two tables, I can usually work on my online courses, post on the forums and do emails and still keep up. Perhaps I might do better if I stopped the other stuff, but then I'd add two more tables.

<sigh>

We live in a multi-tasking world. I've read recently of a couple of studies that suggest that fragmenting our attention is not helping us at all.

Poker is a prime example of that.

Cheers,
VS

Reality of online poker vs live poker = rake and rake back. If you play live you get no rake back but pay rake.
It is true that if you play fewer tables you get to focus more on your decisions, take reads on opponents and have bigger win rate potentially. One thing that you forget is that to reach point of unconscious competence in your decisions (to recall things from memory fast enough), you need to challenge yourself where it is not insanely difficult but difficult enough to constantly force yourself to recall things in your game plan from memory. This is why some people would play 2-4-6-10-20+ tables. For some their game plan is so solid that playing lesser tables doesn't do anything better for their game plan, in fact it makes it worse because they reach a point of having same win rate with 6 vs 10 tables but with 10 tables they make more money (hourly) due to higher amount of hands per hour and rake back!
Finally, if you don't like guys who mass multi table, then you haven't understood the basic difference of online vs live poker (more hands per hour by higher number of tables, more rake, more rake back, more experience to learn from while grinding etc).

Great post from IvicaIliev77.

You might every now and then miss some profitable spots while multitabling but it doesn`t mean that you are breakeven rakeback grinder.

.

Hi, k0kki3,
Please have a look at our forum principles. Specifically, please don't call people "incredibly stupid" just because they may disagree with you.

If a person is playing more tables than is optimal for them, then by definition any game in which they are playing has at least one player who is not playing his best.

It seems to me that to make the games even softer, you would be encouraging everyone to play 40 or more tables. If we have 100 users playing 40 tables each we have a pool of 4000 positions occupied by people not playing their best.

If I sit on one position on 4 such tables, and notice that I'm getting too many folds, I just open wider.
I've had days where my steal percentage has gone well over 60% with well over 50% success rate. All of that is pre-flop money earned, and thus rake free. Why would I care HOW many tables nits are playing as long as they keep folding? If they ever DO play back, I can just fold.

Disagree all you like, but please do so politely, and with dignity.

Easy game,
VS

Exactly like Vorpal just said. If someone multitabling grinder is playing too many tables for him, in that case, doesn`t that player leave value at the table then?