Volume the pro's and con's!

So I was reviewing graphs today and a thought popped into my head which has many times. So many of us get so wrapped up in volume and place such an importance on it. But why? Would we rather post a graph showing our 46,942 hands @.000234bb/100 than 9512 hands @ 8.43bb/100?

Now if you noticed I put US in bold/underlined/italic because I wanted to make sure everybody realized I am guilty myself. Now I can only speak for myself but I am realizing more and more that volume has been my enemy for sure. Now as I type this I am on my office computer so I don't have my database available but I believe I put in nearly 500,000 hands last year or there abouts. My winrate is well.......can't even call it a winrate as I am sure it is a negative so we'll call it my lossrate and again don't have the stats available but I am sure I am down a couple hundred bucks for the years.

I have achieved bronze star, silver star and even gold star but I am confident if I walked in the bank they would not except any of my stars for a deposit! More importantly I know my wife doesn't give a shit about my stars. All she knows is my dumbass has been on that computer for countless hours and all I have to show for it is some "Stars!" Oh fuck wait another minute because unlike grade school when the teacher would put a gold star on my homework I could actually take it home and show my mommy. PS doesn't even send me a star to show off with!

So what is the point of all my rambling? Well I for one am going to just "Just Say Fuck It" as my new slogan. If I get flammed for a lack of volume I don't care. Hell it can't be any worse than getting flammed for being a lifer in the mircros. I will play my baby volume until I have mastered (at least logged a baller winrate) my stake and then and only then will I start worrying about my volume.

I would be interested in others thoughts. Am I missing something?

I blew this out real fast without thinking it through but it is what it is.

I find that my winrate goes down directly in relation to how many tables I play. This is also very true of my redline. My redline goes up when I play a table or two, but dramatically goes down once I hit 6+ tables. I actually make more money with less tables. Rakeback is more with volume, but I find that it's not worth it.

Concentrating on decisions, and not being a multi-tabling bot is way better in all shapes and forms. Playing better poker makes you a better player, and not more hands playing sub-par poker.

That's what I learned this month. Taking the time to concentrate on each action, and planning out streets against specific villain. This is extremely hard to do multi-tabling and watching TV, etc.. at the same time.

That being sad, some players/grinders are lazy and don't put in as much time at the tables as we would like by the end of the month. I think there is a distinct difference between time at the tables, and how many tables/hands are being played.

I agree with a lot of what you said.

My opinion is that if you play 4 tables or less and concentrate on every decision (even if you think its the most obvious/trivial spot in the world!) then you're bound to improve a LOT faster than someone who's 14 tabling.

There's a reason why a lot of players who play higher stakes tell people to have the "learners" mentality rather than the "grinders" mentality.

Obviously you still need to put in volume, but the first priority should be improvement.

Quote:

---

Obviously you still need to put in volume, but the first priority should be improvement.

---

+1

GL harley and good post

nice post. i've been thinking about this a lot lately. basically there are two things which determine one's success in poker (assuming success is $ earned). the first is their skill level. the second is how much they play it. it's far more logical to work on developing the skill level to be able to maintain a decent winrate THEN start winning that rate playing more h/hr than it is to get your multitabling skills up, while learning nothing of the game, probably experiencing huge variance because your edge is so small, and probably never amounting to much more than a high-volume, low-skill, rakeback pro. i'm starting to rant now too. over and out.

ps who flames people for lack of volume? why does anyone else give a shit how many hands of holdem you play in a month?

its possible to put in volume AND concentrate on ur decisions and i dont think it should be blamed for why your winrate isnt where you want it to be

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by rpm

ps who flames people for lack of volume? why does anyone else give a shit how many hands of holdem you play in a month?

---

or more importantly why would you care if they did

i don't. it just seems strange.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Imthenewfish

its possible to put in volume AND concentrate on ur decisions and i dont think it should be blamed for why your winrate isnt where you want it to be

---

I'm going to assume you were talking about people in general, but I disagree based on the following.

Volume is all relative, and is different for everybody. It's personally defined by oneself.

The more tables you play the more opportunities you miss for stabbing at pots, and making correct reads. Betting patterns will not be as clearly defined etc... This is pretty undeniable. It's also relative as to when too many tables causes an impact on one's winrate. However, it is ultimately inevitable. Whether it's 2 or 24.

I know that this is true for myself, and has no barring on any blame on where I want my winrate to be. I doubt anybody is happy with their winrate. Everybody wants to improve no matter who they are.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Imthenewfish

its possible to put in volume AND concentrate on ur decisions and i dont think it should be blamed for why your winrate isnt where you want it to be

---

Well, its pretty much a generally accepted fact that the more tables you play the lower your winrate is going to be compared to if you had played less tables. This is for obvious reasons: you're paying less attention to each individual table so its harder to obtain really good reads, take notes, follow action when you're not in a hand, etc...

I don't disagree that its possible to put in volume and concentrate on decisions, it just takes a lot more time and effort when you're 4 tabling vs 12 tabling. If you're saying that you should be able to 12 table and still make really informed decisions, then I disagree with that.

Over my ~500k hands also over the past year, my winrate definitely correlates directly with the amount of tables I play. 6-10 is ideal for me. Anything over 10 and I am just too rushed.

Granted there are some players who can mass multi-table, but unless it is a stake that you've been beating for a long time and you know 60% of your opponents stats like the back of your hand, keep the tables down for now. You'll learn a lot more that way too.

And I don't know if you knew...but the amount of money you can win at the table is WAY more than you can win from FPPs/rakeback =P

If you have a negative winrate, playing more tables isn't going to solve anything, but it will make your winrate even worse and the amount of money you lose per hour higher, too. Focus on making your game solid, then you can worry about adding more tables.

I'm dealing with this now at 50NL. I was up to 6 tables at 25NL and still showing a very nice winrate. But now at 50NL, I don't think I should really be playing past 4 tables (maybe only playing 3, honestly).

Great post, Harley!
There are several other things I'd love to say but your post and the other positive comments cover anything I could add pretty well.

The # of tables obviously effects your winrate due to decision making, however I believe most of the "lolvolume" is directed at people who put in 4-digit hands a month despite playing like 4+ tables. It's not so much that you should increase the number of tables you play, but you should increase the amount of time played if you're really wanting to improve.

I mean fuck, if you put in 5K hands in a month most people might laugh but if you put in 5K hands 1 tabling then you're not playing lolvolume at all. The point is, find the # of tables that allows you to watch the action, take notes, and think before important actions and play more hours. I may put in the same # of hours as some of you this month (2/day on average) but because I comfortably can 4table RUSH poker I am going to have an 80K hand month. If I had a 40K hand month it'd seem like "holy shit volume" for a BCer but it'd actually be lolvolume because of the number of hours played.

DUCY?

I am a complete noob. Prior to 19 Nov 2010, I did not know how to play poker. I had never played before that date. As such, take what I say with a grain of salt.

The way I see it, there are a few aspects to consider when approaching the game from a volume perspective:
- Winrate: playing more table tend to be negatively correlated with your winrate. Obviously, this is not linear and the effect starts to be noticeable usually at a higher number of tables.
- Learning rate: similar to winrate
- Bankroll growth: tend to be positively correlated with increasing number of table, up to a point. Obviously, you need to be a winning player or at least breakeven + rakeback + bonus kind of thing.
- Experience: The more table you play, the more experience you gain.

As a new player, the key for me is to put together a very solid game (ABC poker if you will). As such, I decided to play only 2 or 3 tables because I feel that, for me, it optimizes my learning rate. Also, I do not focus on goals that are volume/bankroll related. I focus on learning. For example, I am playing 5NL and prior to moving up, I want to have made some progress on the following:
1- Pre-flop: Use appropriate ranges for open pots, raise pots, .... that are positionally aware and are modified based on who the villains are.
2- Pre-flop: Use appropriate ranges for 3bet/4bet ... positionally and villain type aware
3- Have a Cbet strategy that take into consideration position/villains/board texture
4- Incorporate some blind defense and steals in my game
5- Have a basic strategy to play draws post flop. When to bet/fold/raise ... based on type of draw, board texture and villain.
6- Put villain on a range.

Here, I am not talking about mastering any of this but only to put the foundation of a solid ABC game of poker together. Before moving up to 10NL, I want to have achieve these goals. I obviously also need to have the proper bankroll and a good winrate but I think these will come as a by-product of reaching my 6 goals. And if my bankroll is not quite high enough once I am done with these goals, I will likely see if I can increase the number of tables to make it grow faster.

Bottom line: Volume is a tool to reach an end, not the end itself.

this thread is pretty useless. just find the most profitable way to play poker and do it. if you 6 table your way to msnl awesome and if you 24 table in ssnl for a small winrate and large amounts of rb equally awesome

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by bikes

this thread is pretty useless. just find the most profitable way to play poker and do it. if you 6 table your way to msnl awesome and if you 24 table in ssnl for a small winrate and large amounts of rb equally awesome

---

Great feed back sir. I was merely stating how volume has effected me. Kind of thought others were talking about what they have found works best for them etc. Unfortunate you find it useless to hear about what others are doing. I was interested in others opinions and I don't really find them useless.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by bikes

this thread is pretty useless. just find the most profitable way to play poker and do it. if you 6 table your way to msnl awesome and if you 24 table in ssnl for a small winrate and large amounts of rb equally awesome

---

First, if you think the thread is useless then don't post in it - simple.

Second, I disagree with what you're saying. I think the issues of volume and winrates and rakeback is a very unique situation for each person and depends on several variables, including your poker goals.

--If poker is a very important side income for you and your goal is to maximize your hourly rate, then playing a bunch of tables with good rakeback may be best for you which maximizes your hourly rate TODAY.

--If poker is your career and your goal is to make the most amount of money over your ENTIRE CAREER, then playing less tables and focusing on improving your game may be best because that maximizes your hourly IN THE FUTURE. Obviously you still need to make enough to live on, but in this case there is a big difference between "6 table your way to msnl awesome and if you 24 table in ssnl for a small winrate and large amounts of rb"

--If you're a recreational player who wants to make it to 100NL then grind out some good profits, then you may want to play some mass multitabling sessions and some <4 table sessions to improve.

There are infinity other situations that I don't need to list because I think I've made my point. I don't think its valid just make a blanket statement like you did.

However, talking about these things with other people and getting an idea for what their poker goals are and what they're trying to accomplish helps you refine your own ideas, does it not?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by bikes

this thread is pretty useless. just find the most profitable way to play poker and do it. if you 6 table your way to msnl awesome and if you 24 table in ssnl for a small winrate and large amounts of rb equally awesome

---

Quick question: If it's useless to you then why did you waste your valuable time typing.
I can't speak for everyone else that's posted previously, but I didn't find it useless because after reading Harley's rant I paused to reflect upon my own win rates playing 2, 4, 8 and 12 tables and made some decisions about how I should continue.

I'm barely break even when playing 12 @ 5nl, but pretty decent winrate while playing 2 or 4. I realized that to work toward my own personal goals I don't need to be concerned with "omg, I've only played X hands this month." as long as I'm playing decent volume for the number of tables that allows me to play to the best of my ability and learn something while I'm playing, instead of just being on autopilot because so-and-so said 'lolvolume'.

damn, these last few posts are pretty useless

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by d0zer

damn, these last few posts are pretty useless

---

irony itt

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by d0zer

damn, these last few posts are pretty useless

---

:shipit::goldstar:

high volume: can hurt ears, can make some music sound better

low volume: easier on ears, less exciting

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by mbiz

high volume: can hurt ears, can make some music sound better

low volume: easier on ears, less exciting

---

you win, thread can be closed now.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by mbiz

high volume: can hurt ears, can make some music sound better

low volume: easier on ears, less exciting

---

LOL...That's funny shit right there!

I just recently had my biggest month at the tables with probably lowest volume in quite sometime. I pretty much stuck to 2-4 tables the whole month. Boosted my roll by like 30%. FOR ME PERSONALLY, not only did I learn a shit ton more than mass multitabling, but I still won plenty in the process. I came to the conclusion a few months back that moving up through the stakes and trying to play assloads of tables did me more harm than good.

I really think anybody really trying to move up solidly through the levels should not be aiming at trying to masstable. You have so much to learn and cant afford to miss a thing. It's been said already tho everybody has different tolerances to how many they can handle. This is true. But I think for most learning players that number is lower than they think it is. If you wanna be a RB pro fine. But you have to get to a level where that RB is actually meaningful. You aint gonna be a 24 tabling 5NL RB pro. If you feel like you want to get more hands in, you will need to put in more time at fewer tables. Quality over quantity. Just my thoughts....

i think everyone has different capabilities even on a day to day basis focus is critical when you are multi tabling to do it successfully.
I began with 2 tables recently moved up to 4 and now on 5-6 tables i can play comfortably.
I guess my point is to multi table successfully you have to try prioritize your hands to make action on the ones that are most important always.

I see it like training your skills.

Like in running ( i used to marathon around a bit) u need difference(variance in workout) to keep it fun and profitable. some long slow runs and interfall with musscle training etc

soo, study, play some one or few tables and mass table somethimes, you can shift down in levels to do this but it are skills that can be trained for IMO


500K hands losing u 100dreds of dolla`s ???

WTF OM F G when do u stop ?? Was this mainly bankroll management errors or whut ??
I mean 500 k hands of 5 ptbb/100 at 2 nl ... man u could be rich ...
if u lose start at 2 tables max at 2 nl and only shift / move up / mass up if ya win ...
start out putting more mass in study ;)


Ok i mass`d around a bit losing some to but i did it on pupose to learn the game now I `m trying to win. Yes i focus to much on gold star to, but isn`t PS giving you money for this in points ???

Man, and I thought I had issues.

Gl working on PROFIT !

fwiw i see it as a mental thing, u choose to grind or u choose to learn...[and maybe some jump into the volume thing a tad to soon]
i'm the learning type, i wish to get better and i strive to really improve and to understand concepts, i like to get better at hand reading, exploiting villains and trying to work out how they think, the lines they take etc etc etc etc.. i want to be a sponge soaking up as much knowledge as possible:) [hmm i like what i just wrote there lol]
when i've tried in the past to put in volume i found it stunted my learning curve, i didn't have enough spare time for any meaningful study...
each to there own as they say, but for me i'd rather take a learner approach over volume anyday.. the profits have come naturally because i've improved at such a fast rate by playing only 1 to 4 tables [and applying what i learn each day] and by just having this thirst to get better....

having read all of the above posts, the nugget i'd take from it all would be - learn as much as possible then add the volume:)

I wouldn't recommend going the high volume route until you have lots of experience winning playing low volume because you want to be able to keep working on your game while playing that high volume.

Rush Poker - kill two birds with one stone.

/thread

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Roid_Rage

Rush Poker - kill two birds with one stone.

/thread

---

wasn't dranger talking about getting into rush poker lately?? :whistle:

Why yes, yes I was.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Micro2Macro

I wouldn't recommend going the high volume route until you have lots of experience winning playing low volume because you want to be able to keep working on your game while playing that high volume.

---

/thread.