Questions for Multi-Tablers Playing 6+

When I multi-table, I like to play 4 tables because I like to get a "feel" for the tables and get good reads on players. I seem to have decent results doing it this way.

But lately, I have been thinking that I may be missing out on some profit potential by not playing more tables. I've tried 5 & 6 tables a few times, but it seems like I just play "robot" style poker with no table feel. I didn't feel like I could make money doing that, but I could be wrong. I've seen guys like Zach and Chuck play 12 tables and they seem to be doing the robot thing, but making money at it.

So here's my questions for the heavy multi-tablers here:

- Where is YOUR "feel VS robot" threshold for tables (mine's 4)?

- Do you feel like you still make more money playing robot-style on many tables VS fewer tables with feel? Or would it be about the same profit for you playing either but less variance playing more tables?

- Is it tough to switch from playing multi-table style poker to single-table tougher games like CC events?

- How often does your timer run out on some tables when you are tied up with a big hand requiring extra thought time on one table? How often do the other players rag on you in the chatbox for this? How concerned are you when this happens?



Feel free to add anything else I didn't cover. Cheers.

I currently play 6 tables of 6max games and I still think I have decent feel most of the time Im playing (Definately not all the time, and sometimes I go on autopilot, but definately a good chunk of the time I have a good feel for atleast some of the tables Im at). Whenever Im not in a hand I go through each table and look at the player stats on the HUD on everyone and get a feel for where the bad and good players are on each table.

I have tried playing 8 and 9, but even with my bigger 19 inch monitor there is a ton of overlap and its kind of hard cuz i cant see my cards at every table.

I'm very comfortable with 4. I play a little looser and make more read dependent plays. Recently I've been playing 6 or 7 trying to maximize my FT mid-year bonus by adding a few tables. So far it hasn't really effected my bb/100 and of course my $/hr is up from seeing more hands, but I do notice I play a bit tighter and more straight-forward. I've never tried more than 7 tables.

As for timing out, I act quickly in general so it's usually not an issue unless FT locks. I don't even have chat enabled unless I want to say something so I don't really care what, if anything, is said.

Here's my setup:

Windows XP on a QuadCore Intel 3.0GHz Computer
Two 22" Widescreen monitors each @ 1650x1080 resolution
PokerTracker 3 (on PokerStars and FullTilt)

What you are saying is indeed true in the sense that yes, it's a lot more robotic playing 6 tables rather than 4. I just made this jump myself because I simply felt I wasn't seeing enough hands per hour to see the profit that I want to see. I would say that my win rate hasn't dropped and I'm pretty much making the same plays. The "feel" I have for the tables is augmented by the PT3 stats.

One thing that I am trying to tell myself is to not be afraid to take my time ... they give you 30 seconds so don't be afraid to use it. Make notes also whenever possible, they usually hold up to be true later on and again assist you in that "feel" for the table.

You also have to ask yourself what you want more:

1) A fun experience "owning" a table
2) A higher amount of profit by playing a system style across many tables

The good news is that you get to decide. On some days play those 6+ mutitable cash games. Another decide to play some SNG or MTTs and have fun.

Now that i 16 table, i'll help with these. The first thing ill say is that by 16 tabling, my winrate per table drops but only very slightly due to being generally readless and relying on stats, but my overall winrate increases, just well because i is making more money.

When multitabling i do feel however that my general play increases, i can easily fold hands like a,q oop when i have been 16 tabling, or fold tptk without a second thought, i feel marginal decisions become easier. If i am only playing 4 however, i tend to play too loose and get into 'zomg tptk arr in mode' because its been the first hand ive seen in an hour, or i find myself 3 betting a,T from the bb vs a nit just because it's the first ace ive seen in 50 minutes etc.

But on the other hand, i lose the ability to make read based calls, or miss out on something like someone who min bet bluffs, and end up folding big hands to the min bet thinking villain is showing strength.

Basically what i'm trying to say is that my a,b,c poker increase when multitabling, as i'm keeping strategies simple and most profitable, when playing 4 or less however, my 'level 10 thinking' or something along those lines, as in reading deeper into the game increases but also gets me into more trouble spots and requires much more in depth thinking and ends up getting me in a cuffudle.

That is generally why i prefer multitabling, now to answer your questions

My 'feel vs robot' threshold is between 3-6 tables, any less and im too bored to pay attention, anymore and its too frantic to watch tables for reads

As i kinds stated above, i find multitablnig improves my game, so improves my profit, its just a 'feel' thing that i 'feel' like i play better with more tables

I'm not really sure on this, i definately play a lot different single tabling, i'm a lot looser and a lot more aggressive. I have done very well when single tabling the monday night buy in, 7 final tables in 9 attempts or something like that, but find i don't play as well when single tabling a mtt. The reason for that though is because i have stats on most the people in the cc events, but not on people in mtt's. I'm guessing that is because i'm so stat orientated when multitabling that it has become a major factor when single tabling. I guess that means the switch does drastically effect me, maybe because i'm unable to play 'feel' poker on a table of people i don't any history with.

The timer used to be a major problem with me since i cascade tables. I don't know if you have ever cascaded tables, but basically when it is your turn to act on a table, it is brought into the foreground, it then stays there until you have acted then the next table you need to act on pops forward. Therefore if you have a tough decision, the table will stay there while all the others flash in the background so you need to act fast across all tables to avoid timing out. Thankfully I now have the script that calls for time on all my tables, and i havn't timed out since.

The time issue is one of the things that 'improves' my multi tabling game however, sicne when confronted with a tough decision that is touch on go as to whether to call an all in or fold for example, i find myself making the marginal fold more often than calling just because i don't have the time to analyze the hand. If i had more time, i would probably end up looking to in depth-(ly?) into the hand and making the call, which would probably end up being wrong more times than not.

I have no idea if people rag me or not about wasting time since i don't have enough time to stop and read chat. If people were ragging me though, i wouldn't care, the time is there for a reason, so im well within my rights to use it.


I hope thats the kind of things your looking for Stick

Sorry for any spelling errors, hardly looked at the screen while typing, and not going to check for any now

- Where is YOUR "feel VS robot" threshold for tables (mine's 4)?

Probably 3 or 4. I find it pretty easy to 12 table but i think i'd lose decent reads playing 4/5+.

- Do you feel like you still make more money playing robot-style on many tables VS fewer tables with feel? Or would it be about the same profit for you playing either but less variance playing more tables?

Definitely more profit for more tables. I still watch the "key" players (normally fishy players or maniacs...ie. ppl you can certainly abuse given the chance) at a table pretty carefully and often you have the same person on several tables. IMO SnGs are more read dependent to a degree, since stats tend to be pretty representative of a person's tendencies in cash whereas in tourns ppl's play changes as the tournament progresses and you can't pick up on that with Poker Tracker. But in a decent length session, even with 12 tables you still get decent reads on the important players on your tables (ie. your blinds/those stealing your blinds/fishy players and maniacs/etc etc)

- Is it tough to switch from playing multi-table style poker to single-table tougher games like CC events?

No...just gets really boring sometimes since it is hard to play 1/2 cash 1/2 tourns so i just end up surfing the net the entire time playing like 2 tables.

- How often does your timer run out on some tables when you are tied up with a big hand requiring extra thought time on one table? How often do the other players rag on you in the chatbox for this? How concerned are you when this happens?

Never for the first part. Very occasionally it might run into "bank time" but that is about it. Course that doesn't mean i wouldn't make a better decision given less pressure. I don't have time to read chat so i wouldn't know if ppl are getting pissed off at me.

Doesn't that mean that 16 tables worth of people (potentially 140+) are going to be continually waiting ages for you to act each hand? Don't you think that is being selfish?

ok well first off unless you're playing extremely low I don't think it's possible to make a ton of money being a robot, unless of course you just have good table selection and just play tight and stack of donks. At 16-tabling I would NOT say I play like a robot, and I think the rare time I do find myself falling into that trap (not thinking about what I'm doing it, just sort of doing something because it seems right), it ends up killing me. So I don't care how many tables, you should never be playing like a robot. I think a HUD is essential to playing that many tables and that can help you get reads without the "feel" you would get playing 1-4. But of course the stats don't tell the entire story and win-rate per table*hour will suffer if you heavily multi-table but the goal is just to maximize win-rate per hour.
As mentioned, 16. I'm not saying I'd play like a robot if I tried more, just that at this point in time not sure I could do any more without timing out and stuff. I haven't really had a problem of acting like a robot at all in quite a while.

More profit, less profit/table.
lol yes, just the fact that instead of almost constantly being involved in a hand, I'm practically never involved in one. I usually though play a much more LAG game at single tables and because of playing extremely aggressive with an extremely wide range of hands I get myself into marginal spots a lot more, but since I'm only at one table, I have the opportunity to think it through, act on reads, and make a decision. Also unless the table lets me run it over they get themselves into tough spots too, but for an example of some play just the other day playing at your table actually, the one where I claimed I was sewing, I called down a shove with 33, which was an underpair (this was the river). Playing against thinking players is good because I'm able to analyze how the player thinks, what kinds of hands he could have, and for example that one no real hand made any sense (basically he was pushing the entire way and then shoved when the board made a 4-straight). Similarly I've had moves made against me like that, A high hands calling down and being good, low pair, so basically the answer is that my game is so much different when 16-tabling vs. 1-tabling, and I think the LAGier game is more profitable, but even if it's not it definitely helps me improve, getting me into marginal situations with good players, which would be worth a hit to my profit, even though as I mentioned, I'm pretty sure playing LAG is better against good players because they would notice that I was playing TAG and not give me any action on my big hands.

Usually when I'm making a decision, I'll be making folds as well so I don't run out on those tables. Basically for the sake of being able to think I'll fold all but premiums when I'm faced with a big decision on another table (I'm talking I'll fold AQ/JJ in EP). I have yet to see someone rag on me in the chat box, although that doesn't mean it hasn't happened. Basically the only table that would be timing out would be the table with the big hand, and even 1-tabling I'd usually ask for time there. But if someone has a problem with it, basically I don't care at all. I'm given the 30 second time bank and I have a right to use it. If I were 1-tabling I could use it whenever I wanted and if I'm 16-tabling I'll use it however I want. Using it now impacts it on future hands, so you'd think they'd like me using it, since then in a later hand that may be against them I'll have less time to think.


Your premise is simply not true. First off preflop I'm using checkboxes a lot so I'm folding quicker than most. Second off as mentioned I'm only taking time when I have a huge decision. Sure once in a while with that decision I'll miss a table but once the time bank beeps at me I'll act so that's maybe an extra 2-3 seconds. The biggest change would be the big decision table. So I have a decision for all my chips and I use up a bit of that time folding other hands. No one is going to get mad at me thinking a bit longer in a decision for all my chips.

And selfish? By the very nature playing poker is selfish. I want their money and I'm going to do everything in my power (within the rules) to get it.

Just as a side note though, not sure about what most players do, but I play the fast tables, meaning we don't get a whole lot of extra time anyway. I think you get 15 seconds to act on each decision plus 30 seconds time bank per hour or something like that. Now sure using 15 seconds preflop before folding 52o would be a bit rude, but the fact is I don't do that. I've tried to do videos but the audio/video tracks completely screw up, I think I'll record one soon and I'll comment after the fact. Also, there are some who 24-table, and I'd have to say when I heard they did I was absolutely shocked, because they are some of the smartest players I'd found, were making a good amount of moves, and didn't ever use a whole lot of time.

Basically though, the complaints about timing out are not exactly accurate, and even if they were, we all have a right to use the amount of time in our time bank. Don't see how that would be selfish.

Poker is selfsih though rob, trying to win money off other people to use yourself is selfish. It also isn't selfish, since i don't feel 'good' about taking time to make some decisions, more annoying than anything else. I don't care if it annoys people though, it makes me more money and thats all i care about when playing