4 tables vs 1-2 tables problem

Hey guys,

I try to beat 5nl 6-max right now. I decided to move up from 2nl after 30k profitable hands (18BB/100). I played around 4-5k hands at 5nl and I am downhill. The catch is that when I play 1-2 tables I have the time to think, i know what I'm doing and I'm able to make profit from villains weaknesses, spot a fish easy, take notes and even exploit regulars patterns. The problem is that when playing 3+ tables I don't have the time to observe all of these and I go into autopilot mode losing money slowly but steady, not being able to exploit nothing. This problem I have also in zoom, which I stopped playing anyway. At 2nl it didn't happend and was profitable to play 4 tables.

My question for more experienced players is: If (and only if) I will be profitable in 1-2 tables 5nl for a (very) large number of hands, next step should be to increase the number of tables or move up the stakes?

Thanks and sorry if I may not sound like a pro, obviously I am not one

hi,

on nl2, nl5 people don't play for money. Of course some of them play, but if you don't cash out a money for a living (how stupid that sound on micro ;D) then decreasing number of tables, focusing on improving your game + maybe make some adjustments to your bankroll management (I mean if you play less tables then you don't need many buyins) and move up to higher limit it could be just better for you than playing like autopilot. I don't know if you play on pokerstars or not but nowadays multitabling is not profitable like it used some years ago because now we almost don't have any rakeback there.

I find that the style of play between the two to be very similar, with one difference people bluff more/better at 5NL. At 2NL I find people aren't bother about defending 2c blinds, or folding to a 10c. Where as 5c blinds and 25c pots people want to defend/try and steal.

I may be way off with this though just my experience over past month!

Misaki said:

hi,

on nl2, nl5 people don't play for money. Of course some of them play, but if you don't cash out a money for a living (how stupid that sound on micro ;D) then decreasing number of tables, focusing on improving your game + maybe make some adjustments to your bankroll management (I mean if you play less tables then you don't need many buyins) and move up to higher limit it could be just better for you than playing like autopilot. I don't know if you play on pokerstars or not but nowadays multitabling is not profitable like it used some years ago because now we almost don't have any rakeback there.

Click to expand...

Yes, I believe multitabling is no longer so profitable. I'm alot safer with 2 tables, maybe 3 after I have the time to take the notes I need. I don't play pokerstars, I play 888 and said Zoom cause it's more popular. I understand that pokerstars has the most good players per table so for now I stay away.

I was a multi-table (6-8 tables) regular on stars at 200nl.

I would definitely recommend moving up instead of adding more tables if the goal is to be a winning player at higher stakes.

You should spend more time away from the game too developing preflop ranges and thinking about how you will play those ranges post flop. I'd make them tight to begin with too. Not just because the players at those stakes aren't folding enough but because it makes hand analysis more complicated. Get the basics right and then add tables.

if you want to have some sorto of side income later then you have to be able to play some tables at once i would advice 2 tabling for now and then when you are beating the stakes then increase tables insead of moing up

I'm still trying to properly run 3 tables. If it's two slow moving tournies and maybe a cash table thrown in, then fine. I've noticed a severe drop though when I put on that 4th table. Three seems to be that threshold. Now if it's 3 high stakes tables, I've found myself making mistakes when I have a killer hand on two tables at once with action to me on both. It rarely happens, but when it does, I've been autofolded on winning hands because I was too busy trying to value bet on another table. Just not worth it to me.

Only you yourself must decide how many tables you are comfortable playing. I think it is better to win at one table than to lose at four tables.

If you are losing time to “think”, you should not be playing that many tables. Quality over quantity, always!

So I’ve been testing this and have noticed something specifically with cash games. I was playing 3-4 games and recently dropped to two. But I won’t start with two, I’ll wait to get the feel of the players on one before starting another.

So initially I thought I’d get bored with just two, but it’s the opposite. I find myself more occupied with each individuals playing style more than my own. If anything it’s reawoken my love for the game. It’s not a sheer numbers game based on previous statistics, and instead it’s taking on a specific role when playing each particular player. I know this is the obvious mechanism with live games, but often ignored online due to random abundance in of players.

Either way I’ve found it more lucrative and enjoy me, as it definitely develops and encourages the whole hero/villian persona. Give it a shot.

With the right players, I’ve managed to roll more $ off of nothing hands then I would have been able with ABC poker.

DISCLAIMER - some of these people I’ve mentioned might actually just be bots that I’ve figured out how to beat, in which cases, I’ve gotten lucky and ignore everything I said about pinning down peoples styles....I suck....luck is great

If you are a profitable player on 2 tables, then just keep playing at 1-2 tables, because then you can win on the first two tables and lose on the other two tables, I had that, but maybe you can do it and you can win on 4 tables!

i'd say play more tables first, then increase the stake.