Playing 2 or more games at once online

Hi guys.

I`m not sure what u call the above, but what I mean is I know a lot of players who play 2,3,4 or more games at the same time online.

One immediate benefit I can see is that if u play 3 games at the same time u will `feel` u r getting your fare share of cards. Also, if u are supposed to hit the flop about 1 in 3/ 1 in 4 times, you will feel you are always playing - I know I seem to play better online when I`m also doing something else.

I would be interested to have your comments on the following:-

1. How would your strategy change
2. Is it really profitable - I know a few guys who play this way spend a lot of their time top of the league on various websites.
3. What is this best suited for - MTT, SNG`s, cash, etc.

Thanks guys

Ronaldadio

I usually play three tables of $2/$4 or $3/$6 limit shorthanded hold 'em.

1. My strategy doesn't change; I try to play optimally at any given time. It gets stressful when I have difficult decisions on all three tables at once, but that doesn't happen often.

2. It's profitable. I can't really say how profitable in comparison to only playing one table, because I can't say for sure how much more I'd be able to win on a single table. But I doubt I'd be beating it for three times more than I am on the three tables.

3. There are people who multitable any type of games. I think the only real pitfall is having different kinds of games up at the same time, e.g. playing both a limit cash table and a tournament at the same time. Switching mindsets between the different tables is difficult.

It really is dependant on how you feel you can handle it. Traditionally ive played $10nl 6 max tables, and once i have a solid handle on the first table, ill open a second ect all the way up to 4, sometimes 6.

HOWEVER, the more tables you open the more mistakes you are prone to make, its much more difficult to see when an opponent is bluffing, and you will become totally card dependant, which is fine at the micro limits.

Nowadays ive changed my approach slightly, ill play slightly higher limits and play 2 tables, usually an MTT and a cash table, or a cash table and a sit and go. It allows me to get enough action without making the mistakes ive made playing 4 or more tables. But in the end of the day its totally up to yourself.

So for the first question, if im multi-tabling 4 or more, ill become much more card dependant, bluff less, and generally play any big hands very fast.

Second question, tough one, if you can avoid mistakes then yes it is more profitable, but remember if you making 2BB Hr on one table you certainly wont be making 8BB Hr on 4 tables.

Third one, for starting out you should really multi-table the same sort of game. The MTT/NL ring combination works well for me, but its not for everyone.

Nice thread.

When I'm 3 or 4-tabling my games, it's much easier for me to do it all in limit cash games - although many times I will throw a SnG or MTT in the mix. Limit cash games, for me, are easier to multi-table, since your decisions are usually easier here, but it can be done playing PL or NL, as well.

I don't really think you should play more than two tables. I don't care how good you are, you really need to pay attention on how your opponents are playing, as well switching back and forth can cause you to fold, raise or call at the wrong table because it happens so fast. And the biggest peeve for me is having to wait on you while your playing at the other table.
Of course it can be profitable but at the same time it can be damaging as well to your bank roll.

Hit Start/Control Panel/Display/Settings, then adjust your screen size accordingly. Now you can say that an obvious leak in your game has been fixed.

I play 4 cash tables. I dont really recommend playing any more.

Having more than one laptop or screen helps. In party poker you can resize to 4 in a screen but only in holdem, so I have to play 2 per screen (Omaha).

If you play holdem cash I would probably say 3 tables. The reason being that Omaha really doesnt have any equivalents to low or middle pairs or KJ/KT/QJ etc, so 4 is OK to follow.

If you play MTTs I think 2 or 3 is the maximum really, because of tables changes etc and the need for closer attention.

The main reason I think it is necessary to multi-table is funnily enough not so much to do with money, it is more to do with the alleviation of boredom. Anyone who plays a large volume of cash hands knows one thing, it is very very tiresom to do it correctly. If you dont multi-table there is too much of a danger of you going "thrill-seeking".

Anyway, hope this helps

Welly

I think muti-tabling is best suited to cash (ring) games. In a Sit and Go you will become short-handed at some point and will need to start paying full attention, so I definitely wouldn't play more than one tournament at once.

It also depends on your playing style. If you're a rock, playing only the best hands in a conservative way, multi-tabling is a good idea because you'll have long waits between playable hands. If you like a looser, more aggressive style, you'll need to start paying more attention to the players and less to just the cards. I used to play 2 tables of NL Hold'em at once (2 was the max I could handle), but these days I mainly concentrate on 1 table, and spend time between hands surfing the internet or doing something else.

I definitely agree... It really depends on how many tables' worth of players you can keep track of. If you can keep tabs on four tables' worth of players' styles, then far be it from me to stop you, but I'll stick with fewer tables.

I have done that a few times, 2 tables at once. each time i do, at some point i play a hand i didnt mean to and fold a great hand or call an all in with rags....i wouldnt recommend it unless you are real quick and have a decent computer

Kenn, see this reply from above - basically, shrink your windows so you can see more than 1 at one time:

Hit Start/Control Panel/Display/Settings, then adjust your screen size accordingly. Now you can say that an obvious leak in your game has been fixed.