Just played 4 tables each from nl5 to nl50. I only played for about 10 minutes before I had to quit in fear of going crosseyed. Has anybody else tried this out of curiousity like I just did?
Just played 4 tables each from nl5 to nl50. I only played for about 10 minutes before I had to quit in fear of going crosseyed. Has anybody else tried this out of curiousity like I just did?
Think for yourself. Question authority.
No way. I don't think I could come close to handling that. The most I have done is 6 tables.
The pro Somyung Sim, or something close to that spelling, 12 tables rush. He plays 4 each of nl200 fullring, nl200 6max, and nl100 6max. If he gets 100% rakeback he'd get like ~$220 an hour playing 0BB/100 poker. Plus whatever pros earn on top of that. No wonder I see him playing all the time.
Think for yourself. Question authority.
Yeah, it was that Somyung Sim guy... there was one day I saw him mixing in $10NL and even 1 $5NL table too... not sure why, but he was sitting down there.
i struggle with two tables. (i still do it sometimes). correct me if i'm wrong here but i can't see how anyone playing ten + tables can actually "PLAY POKER" in the usual sense of the term . (never mind at rush poker, just normal must be hard enough).it must be quite a strict formulaic version of the game from what i can see.
is it? trav? anyone?
Most players who can't play more than 2 tables don't really have the mental capacity or intelligence to "play poker". I understand what you're saying, though. Yeah, we'd play better if we didn't play so many tables. We'd also make less money.
Think for yourself. Question authority.
When I first started, 2 tables stressed me out. Eventually I got used to that. Then 4 tables stressed me out. But then I got used to that. Then I was gifted a large 24" hi def monitor, and slowly worked my way up to 12 tables. Now 12 doesn't stress me out, and sure, I'm not playing my "A" game on every table, but my "B" game is still better than most people at the stakes I play, so I am still able to turn a profit, and 12 tables of "B" game is a lot more profit than 1 or 2 tables of "A" game. 4 Tables of rush to me feels near the equivalent of 12 regular tables, so I don't get how people can up the rush tables more, but eventually I'm sure I'll start adding more rush tables to the mix.
keano, the thread with the discussion about multi-tabling is here.. I'm not going to reread everything to find out exactly where the discussion starts, but the thread is pretty lengthy... but it is in there.
http://www.rakeback.com/poker-forum/...bad-fold-8434/
Jesus Christ, I'm very comfortable with 4 and may well step it up to 5 or 6 soon when I move up, but I just tried 8 tables and my head exploded! It might just have been that they were quite small on my 23inch monitor, but still. No idea how you can play well on 8 tables Travis, much respect.
Yeah, I second that. I am quite content with 4. I wouldn't say very comfortable, but I feel comfortable with 4. I haven't even tried to step it up to 8. I can't imagine my results being very positive at all 8-tabling rush. I think it'd take me quite a long period of time of 5-6 tabling to make the adjustment.
I don't play well. I should be crushing the pathetic competition at nl50 and 100, but I just leak all over the world when I 8table Rush.
Think for yourself. Question authority.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Bookmarks