Multi-tabling vs Rush

At this point in my poker "career", I am at best a casual player. Before starting Rush poker, I would at best be able to play four tables at a time before the volume of hands overwhelmed me. When I started playing Rush, I was able to see dramatically more hands vs. my multi-tabling, as well as make better decisions without feeling rushed.

I am curious if others have had similar experiences using Rush, especially those who multi-table more than me under normal conditions. Is Rush a better option vs multi-tabling?

I would simply say do whatever feels the most comfortable and if you want to play more tables, increase them gradually.

As far as one rush vs multiple regular tables.... The hand volume is not the primary concern. Rush is played and should be approached differently than reg tables so you must first make sure you like playing rush more than reg games.

Your volume will come with patience and practice...

Hmm... a few pros and cons:

Rush:
-Pros:
--Potential for Massive Volume (This is pretty much the only one I can think of)
--Can clear bonuses a lot faster while playing rush.
--If you enjoy playing like a total nit this may be the best place.

-Cons:
--HUD is not of great value to you, because you may never have a decent history with villain. When the HUD even works (Holdem Manager is what I use and the HUD never seems to work while playing Rush)
--Much Higher Variance than Full Ring or 6-Max (non-rush).
--Note taking on villains is more difficult especially when you don't watch the hand go to showdown against two other opponents.

6-Max or Full Ring:
-Pros:
--History with villains is always handy.
--Seeing the hands that villain is willing to go to showdown with (when you are not in the hand) is very good information

-Cons:
--Not nearly as much volume. I was seeing about 4 times as many hands playing full ring rush than you would in Full Ring. So 1 Rush table is the equivalent of 4 Full Ring Non-Rush tables.
--Generally slower game play.

When I weigh these two together I would much prefer playing a non-rush cash game. It benefits you more to be able to see your villain's actions on a consistent basis and having the HUD at your disposal is always +1000.

Rush was really profitable for the first month then the sharks started eating up all the fish and now rush is the playground for nits to eat off other nits and the 10% of the field full of low stakes recreational fish.

just my two cents.

The benefit you get from knowing the players at your table completely outweighs the sick volume you can put in at Rush IMO...

Rush is just full of people playing ABC poker and as you have no reads you must play ABC poker back, making money purely off fishes. Whereas with standard cash you can adjust and adapt and that's a huge part of poker and profit.

^^ not even remotely close to true (i've been putting in lots of volume at the rush tables and i am probably more aggressive there than I am at reg ones)

also.... if you play enough and take notes yes you most definitely can get reads on players. Granted it isn't as easy or as quick to do as it is at reg tables, but you can still do it and if you aren't you are massively missing out. I will pretty regularly intentionally time/out fold just to see the showdown of a hand and take notes on it sometimes.


My biggest complaint about rush is that I can't use a HUD with it, but I still record my hands with HeM and have actually made notes on specific villains based on hand review sessions as well.

I dont See how anyone in this world could multi table 4-5 or more tables at once playing rush. That would make me dizzy helll 1 rush tourny makes me dizzy.

I like playing Rush more. I cant keep up with more than 2 tables at a time.

I like playing rush for several reasons. 1) No waiting for a spot at a good table or having the table break up. I have very limited time to play and waiting on tables cuts into that. 2) I don't have a HUD so levels the field. 3) I like playing ABC poker.

Rush is only good for clearing bonuses or the lowest stakes - 2/5c and 5/10c are somewhat profitable. I can beat 10NL for about $15 per 1000 hands + rakeback, but I understand that I am not developing any poker skills, so it's useless playing time and few dollars/hour is not good enough.

I have similar winrate when I multitable 6 or 8 tables, and I have best winrate on 2 tables, because when I play only 1 , I get involved in too many hands. 2 tables seems to work best for me, but I can't escape from the micros.... Greed & Alcohol keep me at the same stakes

id say another advantage about rush is everyone is at a disadvantage in knowing there apponent however, when you multi table you are playing with people who just play 1. The thing about rush is that it is indeed a different game. No one at your next table most likely saw your last play. I think it is possible to be just as successful at both, but you will have to play differently. It is a tough dicision but id go with normal poker multi tabling

I am a person who likes to break in between hands to do a varitey of things. When I first started playing Rush poker I enjoyed not having to wait in between hands but it soon got in the way of my sng's because how much time it took to concentrate. For that reason I usally don't play Rush unless its the end of the night.

due to rush week I have also decided to play.
I am running at 44\40 and over 10k hands I'm doin pretty well.
btw I'm normally at most 16\12.
but you guys are right, rush is a completely different game and should be approached with some thought.

[quote=Tygran;1517532]^^ not even remotely close to true (i've been putting in lots of volume at the rush tables and i am probably more aggressive there than I am at reg ones)
are you sure you arent more agressive at rush tables because people feel more obligated to fold because everyone assumes that to play in a rush hand it has to be decent? i feel my play at a rush table is more agressive because of the amount of nits that play and i can veryt easily steal because everyone figures they will be right back in another hand right away and they wont have to think much about the last hand

as for my response to this thread, the rush multi table tends to make players play and rely solely on their cards. i feel as though i only depend on my cards when i play rush poker because you cant get any betting patterns on anyone or how they play. everyone just tends to play monster hands so bluffing doesnt happen much. i feel as though if you play regular tables it allows you to get better reads and use more of an arsenal of poker skills

[quote=usetheion13;1530038]
Reads aren't as easy to get, but anyone who says you can't get them is flat out wrong is my point. I have great reads on a number of people I see at rush regularly.

No it isn't as easy to get reads at rush as it is normal tables..of course not. But very few people have any kind of a read on you either... I seriously doubt most put as much effort into observing and taking notes as I do for example. It gives you a massive advantage.



Bottom line, they are different games requiring somewhat different skill sets and should be approached differently. I just don't think it's valid to compare rush to multi-tabling reg tables at all really because of this... hand volume isn't everything.