Single-tabling vs. Multi-tabling - JeffreyGB & Ilikeaces

[Genitruc]

I am running reasonably well playing 20+2 on Stars SnG (23% roi over 186 SnG) and have considered switching to a fishier site (i.e. Bodog or Party) and multi-tabling 10 +1 (2 tables?...4 tables?) to up my profitability. I have often read posts by more senior members of FTR that this is a dangerous tactic if you're not rock solid because you can't properly read other players while multi-tabling.

So are these guys basically saying that they throw their "reads" out the window when they multi-table? Does ANYBODY actually pretend to be reading other players while 8-tabling?

I suppose the thinking goes that, while you give up some ROI% by not being able to make killer reads, you up profitability by playing solid, straighforward poker twice or three times or 8 times as much...

Thoughts?

[MAX]

Why not just start playing 2 tables of the game you are currently beating? Your reads shouldn't suffer much. I was where you are and started 2 tabling and was very happy with the results. I moved to 4 tables and had to make some adjustments (learning to focus on one table at a time when there are 4 on my screen). Although playing 4 is a higher hourly rate, the enjoyment factor dropped a little for me and I am leaning towards sticking to 2 tables and moving up in stakes instead of # of tables. I think that jumping straight from 1 to 4 would be a mistake. Just my 2 cents.

[Monty9]

Hi,

I am not in the same classs as the two FTR'ers you mentioned and I'm not sure of your playing status.

I have recently found that single tabling is the better way to go for me. You do get more reads and you can actually use them. I have even stopped playing ring while I play S&G's and MTT's. Over a small sample run I am doing better single tabling than I did multitabling.

Also, If you are a student of the game then stay with one table. I have a hunch your game is not that solid to play too many tables. When you play your single table now how much do your use reads? Do you find yourself pondering alot of situations or just " oh ok..RAISE " -- click.

I myself got both volumes of H&H for Xmas, you can't try to apply and learn what you read in a book or on FTR by multitabling. PLus I used to hate when I'd bust out of an S&G and not even know why.

Just last night I came in 2nd in a 2 table S&G on party, I successsfully made moves I never would have prior to reading H&H that were soely based on reads.

My advice ( take it for what its worth ) is to stay where you are, build your BR then move up a limit.

[mcatdog]

I think that jumping straight from 1 to 4 would be a mistake.

I agree with MAX. If you add too many tables too quickly, you may find that you're losing money all of a sudden. It's taken me six months and lots of practice to work my way up from one table to six. Yesterday, I tried playing eight tables, and I misclicked three times in that set of eight, so I don't think I'm ready for eight just yet. And I play Turbo SNG's -- when I'm playing Normal SNG's, MTT's, or cash games, the blinds are smaller and reads are more important. I still can't handle more than three of those tables at once.

As far as reads go, playing six table I obviously don't have the chance to pay careful attention to my opponents. I make my reads based on betting patterns, and stack sizes. In other words, if it's level 3 and someone already lost a third of their chips, I assume that they suck, and use that information accordingly. If they have 75 chips less than their starting stack, I'm more likely to give them credit for being a tight player. I'm also thinking of getting Poker Tracker and PokerAce HUD, some people tell me those help you a lot if you're multitabling.

But yeah, it's very hard to make a decent hourly rate if you don't multitable. Eventually, you're probably going to have to start doing it. Whether you're ready yet, is a judgment call that's up to you.

[azureXsmurF]

Just two table what you're playing now if you're doing well =]

If you find you're having trouble getting reads just focus on the players located near you at each table.

[Genitruc]

Thanks for the feedback so far guys.

Reading the responses has prompted me to try to clarify my initial query - this basic question arose when I was reading JeffreyGB's post about gradually incorporating 2-tabling into his play.

He seemed to suggest that he was trying to maintain the quality of his reads at 2 tables, with the hope of eventually playing more than 2. Next I read Ilikeaces's blog that described his 8-table exploits at 100+9 and this made me wonder how in the hell anything he did at 8 tables could be dependant upon his reads on other players.

I suppose my curiosity centers around the possibility of there being of a kind of threshold where you are no longer playing players, only situations. I mean do you read players or not? Is there a kind of grey zone at 3 or 4 tables where you're "kind of" reading players? 8 tables just seems impossible to me.

I experimented 4-tabling 5$ SnGo on Party Poker this afternoon and was faced with an EP all-in from a short stack. I had NO IDEA if this was a fish or someone who'd had his rockets cracked by K-J. I was sitting on A-K o with an average stack. If I had known him to be a complete donk his range would've included A-x which would've more than made up for the slim possibility that my A-K was worse than coinflip territory (we were still at level 1 so he had more than 15 bb). I jammed from the cutoff and he turned over 8-8...

BTW, since I'm pretty much a brand new poster on FTR, my situation is as follows :

-started playing this October with a deposit of 200$ on Pacific Poker after throwing away four 25$ deposits on consecutive weekends in September ("just for fun" I told myself, as I secretly hoped to luck out and build a nice stack).

-Built my 200$ stack up to 1300$ playing S n Gos way out of my league in the span of 5 days (10 + 1, then 30 + 3). Cashed out 200$ to purchase SS2, All of Sklansky, Gordon's Little Green Book and HOH2.

-Ran bad down to 400$ (what a surprise lol), stopped playing and studied poker literature a million hours a day during reading week, ran the 400$ back up to 1200$ in 3 days the following week (playing WAY above my bankroll, as usual).

- Cashed out 600$ to pay for school-related stuff and decided to deposit the remaining 600$ on Stars and stick to 20 + 2 Sit n Gos, which is about when I discovered FTR

Add to that my decent winrate at 20 +2 on stars (mentioned in first post) and I'm in my current situation, where I feel like I'm a decent, profitable player at 20 + 2, have a stack of approximately 1350$ and am looking to mix things up. Maybe I should move up to 30 + 3 or 50 + 5... And maybe my sample set isn't big enough to be sure about my profitability. Who knows... But I'm glad to have fallen upon FTR. I think I have a lot to learn and it seems like there's a ton of interesting debate and discussion on this site.

[mcatdog]

Don't move up in stakes. Dropping 10 buy-ins is a fairly common occurrence for me and that would be a disaster for you with a $1350 bankroll, if you move up to the $50+5's. My bankroll is about $3000 and the $25+2 Turbos on PokerStars are still the highest stakes I play. I think rilla's 15-buyin rule is completely insane, I would want at least 50 and probably over 100. But I'm a fairly risk-averse person in general so maybe I'm just being too cautious.

Edit: I also think the don't risk more than 5-10% of your bankroll on one day rule, is retarded, and I break it almost every day that I play SNG's. If I play 30 SNG's in a session, that's enough that there's very little chance I'm actually going to lose 10% of my bankroll. I think the 5-10% rule is more for new players who aren't even sure whether they're winning players or not.

From reading your last post, I think you should just play two $20+2's at a time for the next month or so, and then evaluate your progress. Do your best to get reads, but there will also be situations when you don't have one, so you'll get to practice playing without one.

I suppose my curiosity centers around the possibility of there being of a kind of threshold where you are no longer playing players, only situations. I mean do you read players or not? Is there a kind of grey zone at 3 or 4 tables where you're "kind of" reading players? 8 tables just seems impossible to me.

One thing to keep in mind is that at the level ilikeaces plays, he sees some of the same opponents over and over again. And yes, if I see someone do something completely stupid, like reraise all-in with A5, I'll put a brief note on him. Other than that, it's just playing situations. Over time you learn what bet sizes the "average" player uses when he has a monster, and when he just has a decent hand, or complete air.

[zenbitz]

I have noticed (small sample size) that I seem to play a little worse 2-tabling than 1 tabling, although I have 2-tabled a PS $27 and a PP $33 and won both more or less simulatanously.

I think multi-tabling works best at really low and really high (at least $55+) limits. Here your reads are less important because you are fine assuming your opponents are terrible or solid respectivly. I think I can gain a bigger edge in the middle limits by single tabling - but is it enough to DOUBLE my hourly rate? Probably not.