I also have been playing 9 tables, since Party made adjustable table sizes and I can have them with no overlap.
Ugh. Party. Everytime I play on there I time out like every other hand. For some reason, I just never know when it's my turn. It gets to the point where I feel bad for the other players at the table. I think it might have something to do with the fact that it beeps once when it's your turn on another table, but doesn't beep again when you finish action on your current table, like Stars. Have you had any problems with what I'm talking about? Also, I havn't played any party recently, how do you do the adjustable table sizes?

I agree with everything you said. You get in so many hands against the bad players. HUD can help you avoid good players. I rely on HUD for my reads. I hate when a new player is at the table and I don' thave many hands on him. A 25/0/0 player after 25 hands isn't really telling me anything.

I vary my cbet based on player stats. For instance, if I know someone is just set-hunting, I just pot it no matter what. He's not calling without his set, and if he calls, I know what he has and there's no need to outplay him.
agree 100%, but I don't think I rely on PAHU quite this much. Often times they are the only reads you are going to have though.

Anyway, I think multi-tabling is a wonderful thing, although I might not be learning the skills I need to beat the higher limits, if I can ever get there. I always do well for a while, then go on this nasty set under set, KK v AA, flush under flush, and your normal suckouts streak, and lose a bunch of money and shake my confidence. It's hard to keep telling yourself "you're supposed to go broke there."
I feel you man, but when you are getting in upwards of 500 hands/hour, these things happen. It seems like you remember when you are getting the worst of it much moreso then when you are getting the best of it though, that's for sure. And the way I look at it, I play better cards then most of my opponents, so I SHOULD be getting the best of it more.....

Now, Lukie, a question: What should BR requirements be for a nine-tabler?
I don't claim to be an expert on this, but it depends on a lot on your skill level, skill level of the game your playing at, general agression level of the game, whether or not that br is replenishable, how small of an edge you want to push (ie passing up hardly +EV situations in favor of much smaller variance), how good you are at 9-tabling, winrate (kinda goes along with how much of an edge you want to push), and a bunch of other things I'm sure that I couldn't think of off the top of my head.

Generally you hear two lines of thought on BR managment issues: buy-in rule or % risked rule.

If you need 20 buy-ins, obviously that doesn't matter multi-tabling...you're just getting in more hands.

If you can only risk 5% of your roll at any given time, I'm messing up bad. I was running hot the other night and ended up with 65% of my 'roll on the table. (Obviously I follow the buy-in rule)
I don't think % risked rule really applies to multi-tablers. I mean. Say I'm playing 8 tables and I can only risk 5% of my roll (we'll just ignore any winnings for now). Thats 160 buyins. Maybe if your entire livelihood depended on your br, but for my purposes, that's just crazy.

I do think multi-tablers should have a larger br for a variety of reasons, and I think at the middleish stakes if you are a solid player, 30ish would be pretty ideal. I moved up to NL200 with around 20 buyins, so take it for what it's worth.

For those interested (I know it's a meaningless sample size), I started off slow, but after 6.2k hands of NL200 I'm running at 3.18ptbb/100 in the green all while playing 8.