Multi-Tabling...

Wow, I played ten tables last night on pokerstars all at once for my first time... I've played 4 or 5 tables at once before but never ten.... I have to honestly say that was crazy.... I first try to play 6 handed but my hands were coming to quickly.. So then I played 9 handed and it was a bit better but still crazy.... I don't understand how people play more than ten at once... That's crazy, anyone here play more than 10 tables at once.... and still show some profit... If there is I like to hear about it and congratulate you guys for good stuff because I find it very difficult..... And if you would care to share some tips, that would be nice.....

To multi table effectively then you most certainly have to use AHK scripts. These automate various operations for you enabling you to play efficiently. There are various ones available depending on what site your playing on, for example on Stars a lot of people use Table Ninja. I prefer Overcards scripts tbh.

You also need to play around with how you have your tables positioned. Some tile, some stack and others cascade. I prefer having mine stacked if I'm playing more than 12 tables. Hope this helps.

Can you please be more specific about what exactly these programs do?
Is it considered cheating of any form? Is it acceptable by poker rooms?

Yeah thanks Jagsti but unfortunately I wasn't able to download or even consider most of the software availbale for multitabling because I have a mac. Most of the software available is usually for windows users.. Well hopefully they will come up with some good software for mac users soon...

Wow. 10 tables is crazy. I've only played 4 at once before. Can not imagine 10.

Table Ninja and AHK scripts are not considered cheating and are acceptable in all poker rooms (Table Ninja only works on PS, and they've got a beta for FT).

All these do is automate certain activities that are time consuming on a keyboard and mouse, for example:

1. Bring active table forward
2. Color code tables requiring action
3. Set default bet size based on street, whether a raise has been made, etc.
4. Open new tables when they become available
etc.

Anyone playing more than 4 tables simultaneously will benefit strongly from using these, and it is in no way an unfair advantage to you. fwiw, I use Table Ninja and play between 6 and 9 tables.

Hmm that's interesting I might have to look into Table Ninja. Recently I've been playing 5 .02/.05 NL tables at once with favorable results. It would certainly be interesting to try 10 sometime.

i have upwards of nine at one time. 7 private and 2 cash tables. It helps having a large screen or dual monitors so all tables are open and in front of you. Also good if nothing else is going on around you to have your complete attention LOL.

I've done 6 before I think at 6-max. The number of tables you can reasonably play at once will depend upon:

1. Your decision speed
2. The number of players (HU is much faster than full ring)
3. The type of table (turbo vs not)
4. The timeout length of the site
5. Your opponents (slower ones help in this case!)

The thing is you want to maximize the number of tables while minimizing your bad decisions caused by acting too quickly. It's a trade-off, but everyone's win rate suffers to one degree or another when multitabling is introduced. The trick is whether you can minimize the damaging effects to your win-rate enough to make multi-tabling profitable. Most can, but you have to learn where your personal limit is.

This guy's is apparently at 15.

http://www.highstakesnews.com/2009/0...-multi-tabler/

I dont multi-table anymore. I noticed playing one tables i had some good days and bad days with a few very good days thrown in making me profitable. but when i started multi-tabling i started having a few good days and a few bad days with a few very bad days thrown in. once i stopped multi-tabling i started being profitable again. I dont think this is coincidence. 1 tableing is a slow way to build a bankroll but you know what the tortiose says.

the thing for me is I play 9 man sng's. by the time we get to 4 or 5 handed i pretty much have a feel for each player and how they play and stuff meaning i am rarely surprised by what someone is holding. I simply am unable to accomplish this when multi-tabling.

If you're trying to play the same game multi-tabling that you do at a single table, then that's your problem. It's a completely different game. You must tighten up and play fewer hands per table, because you don't have much time to spend with clever postflop plays and outhinking opponents. You just play the premium hands for value.

Also, most people will find it much easier to multi-table cash games than tournaments. Reason being, in cash games the blinds are static, all you really have to keep up with is the street you're on, pot size, and the opponents in the hand. With tourney's, you have to factor in the ever increasing blinds which force you to further change up your play such that you play a given hand completely differently on one table than another, assuming your tourney starts are staggered. If you start them all up at exactly the same time it's less of an issue, but it's almost impossible to start more than a few close enough together that the levels stay close to the same.

I'm quite comfortable playing 4-5 tables of 50NL at a time, and honestly get bored now if I'm playing less than that. But with MTT/SnGs I still play only one at a time (and I virtually never play STTs either). I find tournament play a more complex game and therefore prefer to maintain my concentration, particularly as I get deeper.

Another piece of software that successful multi-players invariably use are stat HUDs -- these are critical because there's no way an ordinary human can keep up with 81 other players while 10-tabling, especially as players rotate in and out. You'll be hard pressed to find any serious, successful online player (at least outside the pro/nosebleed stakes) that doesn't use a tracker & HUD, but especially those that multi-table.

yea wish i had some of that software just dont have the cash right now. That is another issue i have building my bankroll. Im poor as hell so when my bankroll starts to grow i have to withdraw for some reason or another. I am determined not to withdraw so much to really hurt my bankroll this time.

ive played twelve tourneys on fulltilt at the same time but they weren't for cash just playchips still pretty funny though multi tabling alot of tables

I can't imagine doing more than 6. and thats pushing it. your still losing out on reads so i think too many is totally useless

yeah but u catch more premium hands in a smaller time span, basically just playin like a bot and eliminating reads altogether

12-18 table 6man nl..no hud.nadda.it's like clockwork.

it is very diffuicult to multi table. I have only done well in .01/.02NL 9 handed tables when playing over 8 tables... thats how many i usually set up when i have a good BR. I try to use very strict hand starting requirements and a good solid betting strategy with no obvious tells.

I would grow an extra finger or two, just in-case
another thing that might work is that coll machine from Spider-Man 2, those bionic arms-rofl.

Does anyone know of any scripts for Ultimatebet. I see people playing up to 20 tables but i cant find any scripts for Ultimatebet.
Thanks for you help.

This is one of those times when I have to remind myself that no question is a stupid question, so here goes...

I usually play in my home office on my desktop. The screen is decent for my work, but when it comes to poker way too small for me to even play 2 tables simultaneously and remain sane.

I also have a laptop and so sometimes I've played on 2 sites at the same time and that's worked out OK.

I was wondering whether I can log on to a site from two different computers and "mini-multi-table" that way. The ISP would obviously be the same. Anyone know?

Another obvious answer would be to cave in and buy a much bigger monitor for the desktop so that leads to my next question: what size monitor is optimal for multi-tabling? Are 2 or 3 or whatever number monitors connected to the same computer a better solution?

I'm 99% sure you get kicked when you log in at a different computer. It'd be too easy to log in at two computers, play a cash table, and just kick your own butt. Or, more profitably (though not as much fun!), cheat everyone else at the table.

No, with the popular sites like PS and FT, it's not possible to login to the same site from multiple PC's. You'll either get kicked from the first login, or the second login will be refused, I don't remember which. It actually happened to me by accident once when I had left the client open on one PC and I tried to login from the other (I play from either my desktop or laptop depending on the situation).

There are different approaches to multi-tabling, and some are more dependent on monitor space than others.

Some folks prefer stacking, which is making each table the exact same size and stacking them exactly on top of each other (so you only ever see one table). When action is required on a table, it pops to the top of the stack. With stacking, monitor size or resolution is a non-issue because each table can remain full sized so there is theoretically no limit to the number of tables.

Others prefer to cascade their tables, which means each table is stacked but slightly offset such that you can see a piece of each table. This also allows a lot of tables on a single monitor because they're mostly stacked, although at some point you could have so many that some tables would be completely hidden (just as they are when taking the stacked approach).

The third option, tiling, is the one I prefer. With tiling, all windows are fully exposed at all times, usually arranged in a grid or matrix pattern. Resolution is key to tiling because you can only fit as many tables as your resolution and eyesight allow. You can shrink tables down until they're VERY tiny but it's more difficult to read cards and bets, click buttons, fit your HUD, etc. The larger the monitor (actually the resolution, not necessarily the physical size) the better, but even the largest monitor will only allow so many tiled tables, so most serious tilers use multiple monitors and tile tables across them.

I'm running three LCD monitors, two 24" and one 25.5", each at 1920x1200 for a total resolution of 5760x1200. Not just for poker, mind you -- my career is in the computer field and I've usually got different things going on different monitors -- but I certainly take advantage of it when playing poker. I can tile tables across all three and keep the tables at pretty much the same size as I would a single table, because I only 4-6 table. If one day I add more tables, I've still got a lot of room to shrink the tables down some but still keep them a nice size.

So another dedicated monitor would be the best approach. In a pinch, however, it is possible to use special software like MaxiVista and a network connection to actually use a laptop as a 2nd monitor.

David, thank you so much. Great information.

I think it is just nuts to play like that. How can you possibly concentrate and do the game justice.

It's entirely possible. Lots of top players 16-table or more and earn a nice living doing so. You can be sure they're concentrating and "doing the game justice," otherwise they wouldn't be profitable.

It just takes practice. You add one table at a time until it becomes natural. And yes, the more tables you play the tighter and more robotic you play. You tend to play fewer hands per table, but multiplied across a lot of tables your winrate will typically increase (if you're playing properly) because you'll have more playable/winning hands within a given period of time. If you single-table, you could go hours and hours without seeing AA, KK, sets, and other premium hands. When playing just 4-5 tables, you'll generally see these a lot more often -- sometimes ridiculously often. The other night while 6 tabling I had AK 11 times, AA 5 times, KK twice, and QQ twice within ONE HOUR. At one time I had AK on three tables simultaneously, a few minutes later I had AA and KK simultaneously. Now that's not typical, but it demonstrates how you'll likely see more premium hands per hour, which compensates for the fact you're playing fewer hands. And the more comfortable you get, you can either (a) add more tables and keep playing nit style, or (b) loosen up your hand selection and get involved in more pots. The only time I get a bit anxious is when the timing is just right that I get a playable hand at most or all tables, and it's my turn to act on all at the same time -- you can't spend more than a second or two looking at your position and the bets in front of you, figuring out how much to bet/raise, while all the other tables are counting down. But that doesn't happen very often.

It's easier to play more tables if you view poker as a job, something to turn a buck and not something fun and enjoyable in the process. OTOH if you actually enjoy the game itself and not just the money, and have fun outhinking/outplaying people, then it's harder to play a lot of tables because you can't afford the luxury of time to play like that. You really have to become more bot-like to play more than a few tables at a time. That's why even though I could play more, I tend to stay with 4-6 tables, which is about the limit I can handle and still "enjoy" the game. Even just 4-tabling, sometimes I'll get so into a juicy hand that I'll timeout on other tables.

I usually multi-table two at a time in cash games, but I can do three easily. The more you multi-table the more formulaic your play must become.

I never multi-table tournaments, because when the player count goes down the play gets fast enough, and I plan to be there at the end.

I'll have to check out Table Ninja for Full Tilt.

The more tables you have the more you lose focus on your game and play standard Poker. That is playing your cards and not observing your table status. I think a 4 table cap is enough if you really want to focus on more then just playing your cards.