Playing at several tables

Is it stupid playing at several tables at once? You see pros doing it all the time, but they are pros. I was wondering at a low stakes tourney, or cash game you really can make money playing just premiums. When you hit the flop you just continue if not you fold, because it is so easy is it ok to play 2 or 3 tables at once. I read in a book you shouldnt do this, but at the low stakes watching the table benefits, but is not mandatory for success.

Most good winning players play at least 2 tables at a time, regardless of what game they're playing.

If you're still learning the game, I think watching the table is more beneficial. If you're purely playing for the money and you already know how to pick up certain signs from people, then yes multi tabling seems fine.

I recently started multi tabling (and using auto top off feature to refill my stack when it drops below 100bb) and its increased my $/hr fairly significantly. Before, I was one tabling and (playing 2nl) I was making close to $1/hr (in other words 50bb/hr).

Well, now that I've started multi-tabling, my bb/100 is still sitting at around 40-50 HOWEVER, I'm getting in anywhere from 2-4x the amount of hands I was before, so that equals increased profits! See what I'm saying?

I think multi tabling works great for some and if you can make it work go for it. I like to stick to 2 maybe 3 depending on the buy ins and the game...I don't like to just go premium so I gotta watch more for patterns, check out hand historys to see what they are going with so I can pick my move spots better.

I think that with a few weeks practice, anybody who can play decent at one table may play well at 8-10 tables as well. To be able to play at top at more than 10 tables, I'd say it requires a month or two with serious grinding. However, multitabling is no problem and nothing to worry about. Just remember to practice this at lower stakes so you don't blow away your bank roll while you're still playing below your standard level.

Once you're a reasonably experienced player, it's not overly difficult to focus on multiple tables at once. If you're confident in your abilities, you'll generally be able to concentrate on each table. It also makes it easier to play a more conservative style for the simple reason that you won't get bored or frustrated nearly as easily. The one exception to playing multiple tables is if you are deep in a tournament. If you get to the later stages of a tourney, the blinds are high and with every elimination you make some more money. If this is the case, I'd advise focusing on this table only and sitting out in the cash tables that you might be involved in.

WTF? ARE YOU GOD ?

It's 2nl...

Even still, do you honestly believe 40-50 bb/100 is sustainable over the long term? I mean, I know that's where you're likely to find the worst No Limit Hold'em players, but that number seems a bit optimistic.

if bb is big blind and not big bet, yes.

2nl is a special beast not only because it's full of the most horrible players on the planet, but also because you can buy-in 250bb deep. so 50bb/100 is only 1 buy-in every 500 hands, it's not unrealistic if you only play a few tables like OP does.

Over the long run this is not sustainable!

He is obviously talking about a smallish sample which i would believe, but theres too much swings to beable to continually make 40/50 BB per 100 hands IMO !

RJB-7,

I realize that 40-50bb/100 is an unsustainable rate over long term, OBVOULSY. I mean come on lol, that would just be disgusting. But, BelgoSuisse I only buy in for 100bb. I must not have said what my sample size was, I've got about 6.5-7k hands so far.

Now that my BR is getting a lil bigger I have also moved up to 5nl every once in a while to take shots. I know that I won't be able to crush 5nl like have been with 2nl but if i can still make 20bb/100 i would be more than happy