Im thinking about trying a strategy where i 3 table .10 .25 and every time double my buy in on a table i leave and go to a new table. Someone tell me what you think. Any math on this theory or real downfalls.


not a theory more of a strategy sorry.

So, if you are playing well at a soft table to double up, you then leave? Sounds dumb to me.

If you double up you have two times the buy in, that's pretty much the math. Don't really see the point though.

What is your strategy designed to achieve? What benefits do you think it brings?

If you suck at playing deep then it sounds ok.
Learning to play deep sounds better.

If you're not very good, or particularly unlucky, you might be playing on that table for the rest of your life, or until your money runs out, whichever comes sooner.
At 5bb/100, it takes 2000 hands (on average) to double your money. One-tabling, that might take you about 35.0 hours. Good luck!

The number one leak of fun players is that they don't understand relative hand strength. The deeper the stacks, the more this leak gets punished.

Example: thinking top pair is the nuts at 10bb is correct, thinking top pair is the nuts at 200bb is disastrous.

Thus you always want to be as deep as possible.

I used this strategy a long time ago. Basically if my stack was doubled and another player ended up with 1.5x there buy-in I would leave the table. I climbed up the stakes fairly quickly. Odds are the other players at your table with big stacks are going to be more skilled as well. Another advantage is your variance will be less extreme.

A lot of people will say "buy-in full", but choosing not to will allow you more experience at a smaller stack and if people are more skilled than you at the table you won't get taken advantage of as easily. Then you won't lose more money than you already have.

Everyone tends to think they are better than everyone, but this is not true at all for most people.