You think most people are stupid enough to actually decrease their bottom line while at the same time expending more energy?

You will have a smaller BB/100 the more tables you play. That's certain. But that's not the important factor. I'd rather make 30BB/hour 18-tabling than 4BB/hour 1-tabling.

yea thats wild, almost as crazy as most people playing poker when they arent long-term winners, crazy crazy idea

Big drop off between 2 - 8. I have found that I can play 16-20 just as well as 8.

My win-rate if I 6-8 tabled would not be significantly higher because i'm kind of a sucky player.
For some people it works out better to crank out the hands and points as a greater percentage of your income.
If you aren't that good at poker like me but are good at clickee-clickee-clickee all day long then it's not a bad idea to do it the way some of the mega-tablers like me do.

For others who get flustered AND who happen to be really outstanding when they are playing 4-6 or 8 tables or whatever then playing many more tables would be dumb.
It depends. I'm not aba and am not expert at making awesome reads when playing only 2-4 tables.
I suck at poker but am good at multi-tabling.


Not only is there the argument that .11BB/100 on 10 tables is better than 10BB/100 on 1 table..but you have to consider the extra VPP's in there as well.
If I went from 24 to 8 tables just to concentrate more then my VPP/hr earn-rate would go down even MORE than that because I almost certainly would not be able to make Elite so I would be earning less for each VPP.

There's almost no way I'm going to be able to get triple my win-rate if I cut my tables from 21-24 down to 7-8. And if I did triple it I would still end up making less because of the nature of the Elite and milestone program.
So just to make it even I would need to increase my BB/100 by 4x really and that almost definitely is not happening.

He's talking to professional poker players who are certainly winners.

The new cash game bonus is now in effect...tournaments have been canceled for rest of month !!!

What I think is that some people fall into that category while others don't. I don't actually know how anybody is really doing--hence the question.

What if you cut down your number of tables and gradually stepped up in stakes to compensate? Wouldn't it then be possible to duplicate (or come close) to your Elite benefits while at the same allowing you to cut back on the the number of hours (days) that you play?

There would be other benefits as well. A lot of pressure would be lifted. Burnout would decrease. Quality of life would improve. More time to post...etc.

Yes, that is exactly what Microbob needs.

i'm not a winning player with more than 6 tables open

Seriously, this is weird.

First, ummm yeah. If I played higher than I could make more money and/or make even more than the Elite program gives.
If I'm a winning player at NL100 then I can make more there than I can at NL25.
And if I'm a winning player at NL1k then I can make more there than I can at NL100. and if I'm a winning player at the 4k/8k game at the Bellagio then I can make more there than I can playing NL1k online.

This is like telling a 3/6 limit player, "Hey, why don't you learn to beat the 200/400 game so that you can make more money."
Ummm, not everyone is good enough or smart enough to beat the higher games. I am one of these people.


Anyway, I'm not the only one who does this but it sure seems like people are acting like I am. When I casually mention that I'm similar to some other players like 1p0kerboy or sandviper or whatever people start asking me about increasing my win-rate by playing fewer tables or increasing my quality of life by playing higher stakes.

I do it because it works best for me. If decreasing your # of tables or moving up in stakes works best for you then by all means you should do that. LDO.


To briefly answer other questions Crane posed:

I will rate my stress and burnout on a scale of 1-10 as I do it right now and compare that with how I'm pretty sure it would change if I decreased tables and moved up in stakes as Crane suggests. FWIW, I have some experience with trying to move up in stakes so this isn't just total guessing on my part:

Stress Now: 2
Burnout Now: 4

Stress stepping up and playing fewer tables: 8
Burnout stepping up and playing fewer tables: 8


I'm not exaggerating. the stress now is so minimal.
The burnout is still there a bit but that's only because poker is freaking boring. But at least by playing so many tables at stakes I'm comfortable with I can go ahead and auto-pilot and not worry about it and watch the game on TV at the same time if I like. Sure beats the boredom/burnout issues of many other jobs imo.

The stress of playing higher would be significant. I don't want it.
The burnout would be higher because of the increased stresss AND because when playing on fewer tables I would actually have to concentrate and try to figure out wht the hell is going on in the hand and that just wears me out and I'm not terribly good at it to begin with.


If I could play NL100 with a lower win-rate but almost no variance I would do that in a heart-beat.
For me the stress comes from the biggest swings and variance...not from the number of tables or hours.
I don't put in that many hours really. And the stress is incredibly minimal to me and I like to keep it that way.

My quality of life would be worse if I did it the way Crane suggests.


Again, this isn't to say that others should do that too. But so many people just saw my bit about playing 20-24 tables and started asking all these Q's that seem somewhat presumptuous to me.
Shouldn't it be kind of obvious that grinding along at the lower stakes is more appealing to some people?

qft
cash games filled w/ donks atm

the streak is over 550 BB in 5 days... lost ~130 today.

151k VPPs

To those feeling some effects of burnout that are in the 100k-150k VPP range,

The milestone bonuses are probably going to help offset your burnout a little bit. I was feeling a ton of burnout a week ago, but with 200k in sight, I've been able to crank out a lot of VPPs last few days. I have to imagine that as the milestone bonuses get bigger, the desire to crank out those hands will increase as well

How many VPPs per hour do I get 1-tabling NL400 6-max, NL600 6-max, NL1k 6-max? How about FR?

Know this isn't the right spot for this question, but can't find the old thread and obv this'll get answered here.

No.

I'm a recovering bankroll nit myself and a friend or coach of many recovering bankroll nits. I really really regret thinking the way you're thinking right now, and I know a bunch of people who feel the same way. My net worth is way way lower for it and the stress of moving up is only bad til you get used to the stakes. Obv how long that takes varies by person, but you're talking about a one-time cost for a huge increase in income, so it's a pretty obvious choice.

I don't buy for a second that you're not smart enough to beat higher stakes.

1) Higher stakes aren't that much tougher.
2) From your posts, you're clearly not dumb, and it's not like being good at poker requires some crazy deep understanding. Maybe you just need to a find a decent coach or something or start talking hands with some better players on AIM.

To reiterate, I'd be willing to bet if you started moving up regularly now, in a year you'll be very happy you did it.

My name is one pokerboy, and I'm a bankroll nit.

At first I didn't want to believe it. So I denied it. Over and over.

But I've come to accept it and am struggling to deal with it. Hopefully I've started the path to recovery as Noah did.

Scottyy-

Of the people who are on pace to SNE, how many are mainly cash game players, how many are full-table SNG players, and how many are mainly heads-up SNGers like Dario?

Also, would there ever be an option for someone to purse SNE on something other than a calendar year? For someone like me who is considering going pro, with possibly more than half of my poker income coming from acheiving SNE status, the only real option is to wait until January '09, since it's really too late to make it this year. If I could go on a March to February schedule, I might jump on it now. (I realize this would probably be a logistical problem with the way the system calculates points, etc. but I thought I would ask.)

TIA,
Austiger

there should be a separate thread for random chatter. about 1 in 50 posts now are directly related to title.

SNE can be made in under 9 months for a low limit player. Why do you think it's too late for 2k8?

We don't have any plans to adjust the system as it is set up today. 800,000 VPP Milestone should still be possible. This would be around 40% RB not counting bonuses and promos. SNE might not be something you want to attempt in your first 12 months of playing FT.

Scotty

QFT. This is a major grind. You never feel like you can take a day off, which is not a feeling you want to give yourself as you get used to playing fulltime. You'll burn out much faster than you would have otherwise

I'm gonna try to be really careful how I word this but I know it will most likely come across not the way I intend it.

I don't get the feeling like I can't take a day off. I've been aiming for 120k VPPs a month so at that rate I'd be SNE by mid September w/o any sort of double VPP promotion. So let's say by end of September to be safe. That gives me October, November, and December as free time.

Now granted it is a sort of grind but I mean wtf...when I was in corporate I frequently put in 50+ hour weeks.

It IS a grind, I agree with you 100% there however I feel it's worth it. I know exactly what you mean when you say you feel like you can't take a day off because I sometimes feel that way but I try to keep the big picture in mind....3 months to play with if one chooses to do so.

ryan,

If you're willing to put in that much time right now, you should gun for 1.5 million like me. It's another $57,500 in cash breaking even for the 500k VPPs after 1 million

WOW...believe it or not I actually did not know that. I think I may shoot for that now that you mention it. Many thanks