Do bad players multi-table?

On Full Tilt you can easily right click on a player and see what tables he's playing at. Is it reasonable to use the fact that someone is multi-tabling (4 tables or more) to assume that he is a decent player, or at least that he is attempting to employ a TAG strategy?

Or is it the case that bad players multi-table just as much as good ones?

prob watching someone open limp is a quicker way to know if they are bad. Plus at least on stars you can hide yourself from search.

Originally Posted by jaredtaskin

On Full Tilt you can easily right click on a player and see what tables he's playing at. Is it reasonable to use the fact that someone is multi-tabling (4 tables or more) to assume that he is a decent player, or at least that he is attempting to employ a TAG strategy?

it's a reasonable assumption

yeah generally multi-tablers seem to be remotely competent. that is, they're not bad. many of them aren't good either. they typically play tight, and very straighforward (at least at the micros) and make their money off people who can't think very well. while 4-tabling volume-nits like me steal their blinds.

They just have different ways of being beat. Most regs are bad once you figure out how to exploit something. Most multitablers, particularly at FR fold too much at the micros and don't fight for small pots

Well, I can say that my experiment with multitabling (12 tables) at 25nl on stars was a bad idea. All I want from my poker is $50 a day and then I can call it a job, so I figured m-tabling at 25s was the answer. It wasn't as simple as that, I started to run bad and in turn this caused me to play bad.

I think it's safe to assume that those playing 12 tables at least know what they're doing, but they'll have less time to analyse stats and less time for maths, so they're more exploitable, especially since no sooner do they fold they're at another table and forgetting what just happened, so their notes are not as detailed as they could be.

If you know someone is heavily m-tabling, put pressure on them. It annoys the fuck out of me when I'm trying to think through the hand again, and all the time I'm timing out of my other tables, folding fuck knows what (my VPIP with AA is not 100%) and being massively distracted by tables flashing and trying to pop up while I'm trying to crunch numbers and ranges. I end up folding because it's the easiest and safest thing to do. This trait is heavily exploitable.

I have a better winrate both in terms of bb/h and $/h when playing 4 tables and less, so my experiment with 12-tabling at 25s is well and truly finished, with an 8 buy-in loss over 25k hands.

My opinion is big m-tablers are good players, but heavily exploitable.

Great players multi-table and Bad players multi-table but IMO a great player multitabling becomes a good player and a bad player multitabling becomes a horrible player.

Originally Posted by Sasquach991

Great players multi-table and Bad players multi-table but IMO a great player multitabling becomes a good player and a bad player multitabling becomes a horrible player.

And decent players who multitable too much can often become poor players.

On a side note I just figured out why I'm on a downswing

Originally Posted by Sasquach991

Great players multi-table and Bad players multi-table but IMO a great player multitabling becomes a good player and a bad player multitabling becomes a horrible player.

If I try to play four tables I become pretty horrible, guess that makes me bad to start? I dont see how you can play more than three tables and really have a clue whats happening, but I guess people do it. Seriously been wondering how bad I am since my play falls apart when multi tabling.

What stakes? 02-05 micro? I see people trying to be aggressive pre flop with any decent hand. Spend all day to make a couple bucks, and lose it all in one hand when somebody calls the the big pre flop bet with 79s and flops a straight. The aggressive player keeps pushing his AJ, that hit nothing, until he's all in at the river.

I've been playing the $1.08 fifty50 sng at stars. I dont think TAG's will last early or late in the game. Tight and passive dont work either, need a middle ground. Not going to make any money there, maybe 10 cents an hour, but it makes me play solid and maintain discipline. I havent tried it yet but I think i could play 3 of those sng's and play decent poker, instead of trying to multi table 10 cash games.

Originally Posted by redzuk

I've been playing the $1.08 fifty50 sng at stars. I dont think TAG's will last early or late in the game. Tight and passive dont work either, need a middle ground.

IMO it's much easier to m-table the 50/50's than a cash game. Unless you've got a great hand, most of the time you'll be folding until there's about 7 players left. Then most of the oppenents get so tight trying to get their BI back that you can take your chip stack from 1150ish to the lead at over 4K pretty easily running 6 tables or more.

dont compare SnG with cash games, i really believe there is a huge diff in game strategyes.

also, if you get AI by river with AJ on a board that gives straights with a opp that called a big big bet pre, then yes, you still have a lot to learn and there no better place to do that then 2nl and start reading and learning all in BEGINNERS DIGEST.

I agree Raz:
There's a gigantic diff in strategies between the two (SnG and Cash).

But I disagree that the best place to learn to play the game is 2NL.
That should really depend upon which (SnG's or Cash) a person decides to try to learn. If it's cash, then 2nl would be best. If it's SNG or MTT then the ) $1 fifty/50's would get them thinking about bubble play and a few of the other tourney dynamics that are not found in cash games as would the micro BI single table regular SnG's.

My recommendation would be to not mix the two of them until you have a fairly decent concept of one or the other due to the diff strategies.

Originally Posted by Razvan729

dont compare SnG with cash games, i really believe there is a huge diff in game strategyes.

also, if you get AI by river with AJ on a board that gives straights with a opp that called a big big bet pre, then yes, you still have a lot to learn and there no better place to do that then 2nl and start reading and learning all in BEGINNERS DIGEST.

I'm the one who flopped the straight. I dont limp in with crappy hands often, but I'll do it once in a while against a really aggressive player, just trying to trap them. I dont like to try and catch bluffers, so how else do you beat them?

Maybe the right hud software makes it possible, playing four tables I cant even remember the names of the players. The seat could have changed three times and I didnt notice. I used pokertracker and that put me on tilt faster than any player could, just dont like the hud. Playing ten micro cash tables makes you a bad player, or you are letting the software guide you. Or maybe its just me.

Originally Posted by redzuk

What stakes? 02-05 micro? I see people trying to be aggressive pre flop with any decent hand. Spend all day to make a couple bucks, and lose it all in one hand when somebody calls the the big pre flop bet with 79s and flops a straight. The aggressive player keeps pushing his AJ, that hit nothing, until he's all in at the river.



I'm the one who flopped the straight. I dont limp in with crappy hands often, but I'll do it once in a while against a really aggressive player

Calling a big bet pre with 79o is not limping.

Originally Posted by Shotglass

Calling a big bet pre with 79o is not limping.

What do you call it, just something you should never do. I admit i did it, I remember calling the same size bet with j4 and flopping a full house once also, the guy was super aggressive and didnt take him long to put me all in with his top pair. I know better, dont do it often. But its amazing how hard some people will push with nothing or top pair. If I try playing their game seems like I always lose. I dont like to get all in with top pair, but I run into a lot that do, or even just a bluff.

I'm probably too tight, and so temping them to push. Thats the part I like about the sng, mid game when you are trying to get a little aggressive and get a stack. Its easier for me in the 50/50 turbo sng. Trying to use that controlled aggression to improve my play at cash games.

yes I do

Originally Posted by DanAronG

yes I do

I'm not sure its a terrible bet, depending on their stack. Say its larger than $5, that 15 cents is going to get you their stack any time you hit a flop. I generally bet strong and continue to bet, but often will fold to a re-raise, knowing that the real aggressive player will re-raise with nothing, I know that but still dont make the call. In a way doesnt matter if I have 79o or AQs, I need better than one pair to go all in, or enough outs.

Huh? I was referring to thread title.

Originally Posted by DanAronG

Huh? I was referring to thread title.

Oh, thought you were talking about playing stupid cards.

I agree, bad players m-table, and m-tabling makes bad players worse. Ya got to think they would quit soon. I did.

Question for the op. If you can track them down at Full Tilt have you ever watched to see how they play? What i wonder is how good you can be playing ten tables.

nanonoko multitables pretty hard. You should track him down and exploit him.

Originally Posted by daven

nanonoko multitables pretty hard. You should track him down and exploit him.

Just think how good he would be if he single-tabled

I'm a strong believer in playing one less table than you can confortably play.

saying everyone thats multitabling is good is like saying no reg is bad lol

Sometimes all the info you will have to start off with is their stack size, screen name and number of tables. In this case it's pretty good info. We want to use all the info we have available to us and then as we accumulate more info we prioritize the info available to us and determine how beneficial each piece of info is. If you only know three things about somebody then each piece is valuable. As we learn more such as tendencies, aggression etc. things like screen name and number of tables become less valuable in comparison.

Over all there are plenty of poor mutli-tablers just as there are many great single talbe players.