Multitabling cash games to increase hand volume and $/hour

[jeffred1111]

I'm growing somewhat tired of the SNG's (too many swings, especially the turbos) and the other option to increase my bankroll is to hit the limit tables, wich is fine, since I've grown to like playing LHE and look forward to becoming a regular at the low stakes (1/2 and beyond) as soon as BR permits.

Now, since I've only broken 100$ for a few days, I will be playing the .10/.20 stakes (full ring at PS). How many table can a newish limit player like me can handle ? When does multitabling becomes -EV, considering I can fit a max of 4 tables on my screen at a time without cascading (low, but I have an old CPU) and I don't have any tracking or HUD software? Concerning table selection, do we look for the same tables as when playing only one at a time (loose, passive) ?

Not looking for definitive answers. I played two tables at once today and my play was good, if anything, it was tighter than usual (23% flop, less flops from BB SB in raised pots, etc.), but I'm a bit weary about adding more. Should I also play different limits (say 2 games of .10/.20 and 2 games of .5/.10) to acclimate before 4 tabling my regular limit ?

Thanks

 

[Effexor]

I'm sure it's different for everyone, and something you'll have to decide for yourself.

What I can tell you is that when I multi-table I actually do much better per table. It cuts down on the boredom factor and I don't limp in with garbage hands.

 

[HustlinIreland]

I know a lot of people seem to play a lot of tables at once but I like to give 100% of my focus and attention to one table at a time, so I only play at 1.

 

[gator_dad23]

i like to play multitables when there lower stakes because i tend to be less bored! when it comes to higher stakes though i like to be at one table so i can strategically do hand odds and different stuff like that

 

[stormswa]

limit poker at low stakes is basic ABC poker so you should play as many as you feel comfortable playing. I do 4+ when I do low limit "limit" poker. There really arnt that many hard decisions when it comes to limit poker, and its pretty simple to do the math so you dont have to worry about giving a single table your 100% attention.

 

[vanquish]

I quad-tabled 1/2 SH LHE without seeing a huge drop in my BB/100, so I would say it's certainly possible that you can do very well for yourself playing full ring games.

 

[jeffred1111]

Thanks guys. I think I'll try 3 tabling first and tighten up some more preflop and on the flop as many of the hard decisions come when you limp 89s into 3 limpers and the flop comes 8cAsJs. I tend to c-bet out of position way to much and I think multi-tabling will cut down on my "moves" factor.

 

[stormswa]

Thanks guys. I think I'll try 3 tabling first and tighten up some more preflop and on the flop as many of the hard decisions come when you limp 89s into 3 limpers and the flop comes 8cAsJs. I tend to c-bet out of position way to much and I think multi-tabling will cut down on my "moves" factor.

why would that be a hard decision?

one is you are not c-betting because you limped preflop, you can not continuation bet when you never bet in 1st place preflop. 2nd is you honestly think you are folding a pair and a flush draw here? hell no. At this point you are trying to build a pot on the flop so you can call down on turn and river.

 

[TheJace]

Thanks guys. I think I'll try 3 tabling first and tighten up some more preflop and on the flop as many of the hard decisions come when you limp 89s into 3 limpers and the flop comes 8cAsJs. I tend to c-bet out of position way to much and I think multi-tabling will cut down on my "moves" factor.

This looks like a routine check/fold to me.

 

[stormswa]

This looks like a routine check/fold to me.

lol


are you kidding? you are going to fold pair plus flush draw in LIMIT POKER?

 

[vanquish]

lol


are you kidding? you are going to fold pair plus flush draw in LIMIT POKER?

We don't know if he has a flush draw. He says "89s" and the flop has two spades, but we do not know if the 89 is suited in spades or another suit. Thus, the people disagreeing with you don't think he has spades, and you think he does.

 

[stormswa]

We don't know if he has a flush draw. He says "89s" and the flop has two spades, but we do not know if the 89 is suited in spades or another suit. Thus, the people disagreeing with you don't think he has spades, and you think he does.

I thought he meant spades but yea guess he could mean suited also.


well in that case it is a mathmatical decision if we should call with bottom pair. A lot of times it is still correct to try to peel one of on flop even with bottom pair.

 

[jeffred1111]

I meant spades obviously and no it is not a c-bet here (phrased it wrongly). The reasoning behind me saying this a tough decision is that since many people have seen the flop, we risk getting outdrawned (or if we're second best, getting even farther) if we don't thin out the field but on the other hand a bet accomplishes nothing since the flop ain't that dry and people never fold to a bet by the button in this spot. We cannot yet start to build a pot because we
a) risk getting check-raised (at these limits, J4 pairing will probably c/r)
b) can get a free card

Let's just say that my example wasn't the best: if I had AJs and raised these three limpers but everyone calls (three limpers plus blinds) and the flop comes A67 (or even worse 458) with none of my suit and a flushdraw and it is checked to me on the button. By tightening my range and not peeling as much (I won't have time to start peeling 4-tabling), my play should get more optimal (cutting on stupid bluffs mainly).

Let's just put it this way, it'll give me an excuse to find a fold or at least go to showdown cheaply in family pots with marginal to mediocre holdings (that can very well be best), something I have a hard time doing right now single tabling. BTW, I have tried 2 tables again today and came up very much on top with my BB/100 hands hovering around 8-11 (played around 500 hands in two days). Probably only running crazy hot, but it still feels nice.

 

[altruist]

I meant spades obviously and no it is not a c-bet here (phrased it wrongly). The reasoning behind me saying this a tough decision is that since many people have seen the flop, we risk getting outdrawned (or if we're second best, getting even farther) if we don't thin out the field but on the other hand a bet accomplishes nothing since the flop ain't that dry and people never fold to a bet by the button in this spot. We cannot yet start to build a pot because we
a) risk getting check-raised (at these limits, J4 pairing will probably c/r)
b) can get a free card

8s 9s on 8_ As Js, definitely bet unless the pot is small (in which case, check/fold for everything except the flush). A few things can happen here:
1. Your hand improves to a flush.
2. You hit another 8 for a set.
3. You hit a 9 for two pair.
4. Your hand improves to a straight flush (unlikely).
5. Your opponents believe you have AJ, and fold.

If your opponent has an ace, or even AJ and you hit your flush, he's likely to pay you off.

By betting you may eliminate at least one opponent, increasing the chances that your hand will hold up. An opponent could be holding A9 or QT.

As for multi-tabling.. you should be able to handle at least 1/2 of the tables with ease. So if you're multi-tabling 4 tables, you must be able to manage 2 tables the same as if you only had one open. (e.g. say you were dealt AKs and KK on two tables at the same time, you don't want one to time out)

Additionally, you want to be able to notice flush cards or straight possibilities with AK/KK when multi-tabling. If you can't, you're multi-tabling too many tables.

 

[TheJace]

Actually in response to storm. I did think he meant of spades but I thought this was NLHE not limit and dont flame me for not reading the posts cuz I did I just made an oopsy.