1. As odd as it may be, I prefer 1 to 2 tables open, perhaps because of my small laptop screen. However, no matter how many screens I have open I can't seem to tolerate really low stakes. I find myself asking, whats the difference between playing 4 tables at one level, or 1 table at a level 4 times greater.

    I understand the variance curve will be most smooth with more tables, but if I'm practicing bankroll management does that really matter?

    Add Ryan Olsen to Rail
  2. I'm not sure if this is much help to you, but personally I'd rather play 4 at a lower level than 1 at a higher level. I get to see more hands, and I usually run much better. One table I could be card dead, while on 2 others I'm racking in the money. What is it about low stakes that you don't like? If you perform well at them, you can raise your limits.

    Raise
    Add boggs to Rail
  3. I seem to play well at all the limits I've tried, up to $2/4 LHE. Problem I have with lower limits is it just feels too tedious not to rake in pots larger than $20 when you have a good hand. Also, the more tables you have open the less effective your game is, so I'm wondering how much sense it makes to multitable before your get to the point in your game where you're playing for a living.

    Raise
    Thread StarterAdd Ryan Olsen to Rail
  4. If you're looking to win the more frequently during your sessions, playing multiple tables is the way to go. Think of it as "diversifying" your portfolio. Also, to play 4 tables at a time, my general rule of thumb is to have 20-25 times the max buy-in. For example, 2-4 you need $10,000 in your account.

    -King Rube-

    pokerrubes.com

    Raise
    Add King_Rube to Rail
  5. Limit holdem not No-limit holdem

    Add warrantofice to Rail

Similar Threads