variance and multi tabling

It has been said that mutlitabling decreases variance. Would an example of this be - You are playing 4 tables. Tables 1-3 you are showing a profit. Table 4 you can't win a damn pot if your life depended on it. Now I'm sure all of the multitablers know what I'm talking about, there's usually those one or two tables where you can't win much. What do you guys do in that situation? Keep playing that table and rake in the profit from all your other tables? Do you leave and go find a different table? Does my example even have anything to with multitabling/variance? Post your opinions.

That really depends on why their is such a situation. If feeling outplayed its better to leave the table. If you just have a cold streak of cards there is obviously no meaning in changing table.

Originally Posted by NoctoZ

That really depends on why their is such a situation. If feeling outplayed its better to leave the table. If you just have a cold streak of cards there is obviously no meaning in changing table.

^ Very true. It's not just if you're being outplayed though, the table you're at may also be plain bad. Bad table + Cold cards = no money.

If I think there's an abnormal amount of good or tight players, I'll move. But at the limits I play, that's usually not a problem.

Usually the cards are just cold there.

Decreasing variance by playing multiple tables is basically because you're seeing more hands in a quicker period of time. It isn't really changing the variance per hand, just the variance per time period. It basically gives you four hours of play each hour...and your variance over four hours should be lower than per hour.

Midas, what is a bad table per se? Surely if you're playing badly or other people are playing well then that's a bad table by definition, but you seem to be talking about a less tangible badness.

Yeah last night was the first night where I had all 5 tables going pretty good I think I lost .3 at one table but the rest where all +profit tables, made 3 buyins in an hour and a half. Usually when I 5 table I got 2 profitable tables and 3 break even or losing slighlty tables.

I think its just cold cards more than naything not being able to hit a flop.

I have really studied my stats on this issues very closely. And there is no doubt about it. The more tables I play the more my profit per hand goes down. I find when I am playing more than 3 tables at once it starts to become a mechanical game. And I miss out on pots I should be winning. Mistakes you make in NL can take a long time to recover. So for my game I have cut down on the amount of tables I play. 3 Seems to be a good number for me. 2nl and 1 fixed. And believe my I know the deal I have dual screens and the whole setup. But I just think your game starts to suffer when you play to many tables.

I think it helps impatient players to play tighter. If you are in a marginal hand on one table and a dominant hand on another, you are less likely to get caught up in the marginal hand. That seems to happen for me. Plus, if you don't see a high PP for an hour 1-tabling you may get impatient and overplay marginal hands. If you play more than one table you will see more hands and hence see good cards more frequently per minute.

I play 8 25NL tables on PS and have no problem at all taking down pot after pot with garbage hands.

You can train yourself to do anything, at any speed. When I began, I was only playing one table at a time. Then it progressed to 2 to 3 to 8. I have found that the only thing I am loosing here are MAXIMUM READS on my opponents. The thing is, I play so many tables and so many hands that I develop a visual memory of avatars and the type of players they are. The guy with the redskin football player with 'soccor' in his name (don't ask) is a very tight player and only buys in for 40% of the maximum buy-in.. I know his style of play. crdshrk with his goofy face is also a tight player, but is aggressive postflop. I saw this one girl on one table make horrible move after horrible move, on this day, on this table, she is my fish, and I remember which table she plays at.Playing this many tables does implement a mechanical feel to it, but it is not without it's objective decisions.

I know that the higher the level I play, that I will need to rely more on reads, and thus reduce the number of tables played... but I have not yet reached a level where I'll need to do this. Maybe at 400NL ? I see myself 8 tabling 100NL one day and profiting from 7+. I see it as perfecting a limit mechanically, profitably.

Originally Posted by BankItPayette

I know that the higher the level I play, that I will need to rely more on reads, and thus reduce the number of tables played... but I have not yet reached a level where I'll need to do this.

You're still playing 25NL. Players who can play well are few and far between there. Some are tight, some are loose, many are horrible, most are weak...but almost none of them adjust and vary their game.

I don't think your opinion speaks from experience when speaking of "reaching limits," unless you had your 'roll knocked out and I don't know about it.

Anyway, back to the point: I don't think many people would dispute that you earn more per hand playing fewer tables. Good decisions are easier.

I agree that the per hand average drops when multitabling, but who cares!! The goal of poker is to make money...More hands=more money plain and simple. 4 Tables is perfect for me.

Originally Posted by Lodogg

I agree that the per hand average drops when multitabling, but who cares!! The goal of poker is to make money...More hands=more money plain and simple.

Bingo. But sometimes you're so much more profitable playing less tables that you can't make up for it multi-tabling. This is more true in NL, I believe.

I like more than four of 25NL, though.

Originally Posted by biondino

Midas, what is a bad table per se? Surely if you're playing badly or other people are playing well then that's a bad table by definition, but you seem to be talking about a less tangible badness.

A bad table could be something as simple as having bad position on a couple of fish on the table, or something really bad like having 9 TAgg's sitting with you when you're also a multitabling TAgg.

If you can find 4 out of 4 tables in which you have good position relative to the fish and the better players on the table, you will maximise your profit.

Originally Posted by BankItPayette

I play 8 25NL tables on PS and have no problem at all taking down pot after pot with garbage hands.

You can train yourself to do anything, at any speed. When I began, I was only playing one table at a time. Then it progressed to 2 to 3 to 8. I have found that the only thing I am loosing here are MAXIMUM READS on my opponents. The thing is, I play so many tables and so many hands that I develop a visual memory of avatars and the type of players they are. The guy with the redskin football player with 'soccor' in his name (don't ask) is a very tight player and only buys in for 40% of the maximum buy-in.. I know his style of play. crdshrk with his goofy face is also a tight player, but is aggressive postflop. I saw this one girl on one table make horrible move after horrible move, on this day, on this table, she is my fish, and I remember which table she plays at.Playing this many tables does implement a mechanical feel to it, but it is not without it's objective decisions.

I know that the higher the level I play, that I will need to rely more on reads, and thus reduce the number of tables played... but I have not yet reached a level where I'll need to do this. Maybe at 400NL ? I see myself 8 tabling 100NL one day and profiting from 7+. I see it as perfecting a limit mechanically, profitably.

I play at the 100 and 200NL tables. And believe me there is a big difference between the 25NL and the 200nl. Like you I started at the 25NL and worked on my NL game there.
This is not a question if you can play a lot of tables at one time but what happens to your game when you do. Like I said in my previous quote I have dual monitors and all the trimmings. This was done to make it easier to play multiple tables. But as I moved up to the higher limits my decisions became harder and a mistake here is very very costly. Myself I had to play less tables to play well. There is no doubt if you play 8 tables at the 200 to 400NL tables. People are going to take a lot of pots away from you. There is a lot more bluffing at these levels. And bluffs that mean a lot more. But you will find out for your self. Look at all the best pro’s who play on line, John Dagastino, Layne Flack, John Juanda ect... You will never see these guys playing at even 4 tables. Let alone 8.

Originally Posted by sejje

I don't think your opinion speaks from experience when speaking of "reaching limits," unless you had your 'roll knocked out and I don't know about it.

I have played maybe 100 hands on levels higher than 25NL, and only a couple dozen since my last deposit.

Originally Posted by saywhatz

Like you I started at the 25NL and worked on my NL game there.

I started on the 5NL tables and worked my way up, this included a lot of grinding.

I agree with all those here who state that to be sucessful at higher limits, we must decrease our multitabling. This is because there is more bluffing, which makes the game more read dependant. I often wonder if one could increase or desrease the value of their hands as they move up. TPTK's, made hands, an ace or pair in late position with folders behind, blind steals becoming a necessity, etc.

How can professional online gamblers only play one table at a time? I thought these men and women are professionals. When I think of a professional poker player, I think of someone with a very high level of memory - this is all reads are. I understand that there are programs available such as pokertracker, but what about the human edge? When I play 8 tables, I remember every bet and size from every player at every table where I still have holdings. It's possible to play many tables at once and remember every move from every player at the table when you are included in the hand. When I think of a professional online poker player, I invision a multi-tasking, memory wired, patient individual.