First post here. Wonderful forums.

I started playing poker a couple of months ago, and I, of course, was a losing player. I started (and currently reside) at NL4. I lost constantly and consistently, and was very disappointed with how my poker career began. This continued until I was down around $100 in no-deposit bonuses and $100 of my own money. I was improving, but not enough.

I decided to take a week off and I did some really extensive study. I studied for hours every day, deciding that, if I didn't even have the theory down, I of course would lose money. I watched videos, read threads, spectated micro stakes games to better understand player habits.

I came back, and I've been playing a lot better ever since. I'm even somewhat profitable.

The problem is, I play four tables now, as that is by far my most profitable position. On four tables, I'm focused, alert and I make very good calls. On five I'm a bit sloppy, on three I'm a bit too "daring". I just feel like it's the perfect fit for me. However, I'm not sure if it's necessarily good for my learning? I'm in poker for the long haul, and improving means a lot more to me than a few dollars. When I play on four tables, I make good calls, but I'm not necessarily thinking to myself "What are this guy's motivations for ___? Am I being bluffed? Is he misrepresenting his hand?". I put all of my opponents in the hand on a hand range, but I don't necessarily think their actions through very thoroughly.

My question is, am I doing it wrong? Should I cut down on the number of tables I play? Is it better to get in more hands and play the hands better, or is it better to play less hands, but to think about your opponent's moves more?

The average uNL player isn't the most multi-level thinking kind of guy, which is one of the reasons I've stuck with four tables for so long.

Thank you for reading this, and for any advice you could offer me.

meh, you know yourself better than anyone else does, or should. So whatever feels right. You might consider cutting back to one or two tables and moving to 10NL if your bankroll permits.

welcome to the forums.

to be honest, its not even close. where you are at in your career is all about getting better at poker and it is not even close. You should focus on that instead of trying to play more tables than you feel comfortable - there is plenty if time for adding more tables later. the beauty of this is that you will probably make more money this way as well. also its possible to do both and add more tables over time.

goodluck

Thank you both for your replies.


I wish I had the bankroll for that. I still suck, just less than I used to.


I agree with you. Getting better is my #1 priority. I feel very comfortable at four tables, I just don't feel like I'm "getting inside the head" of the guys I'm playing against, so to speak. Their habbits, their motivations... I don't pay as much attention to that over four tables as I would on, say, two tables.

When someone's learning to play the violin, nobody suggests they play 24 at once.

Just a thought.

Good Luck and Welcome to the Forums.

I started playing poker a couple of months ago, and I, of course, was a losing player. I started (and currently reside) at NL4. I lost constantly and consistently, and was very disappointed with how my poker career began. This continued until I was down around $100 in no-deposit bonuses and $100 of my own money. I was improving, but not enough.
So you started only a few months ago and you are already thinking about number of tables of play and how to improve based off that! Sounds like a pretty good mindset...Don't be disapointed with how your career began because it got you thinking about your approach and learning in other words it motivated you...Now if you had won tons right off the bat over a small sample size then you would really be worse off trying to cling onto what worked for you before but may of been wrong.

I decided to take a week off and I did some really extensive study. I studied for hours every day, deciding that, if I didn't even have the theory down, I of course would lose money. I watched videos, read threads, spectated micro stakes games to better understand player habits.

Also, keep doing this and number of tables will be the least of your concerns!

I came back, and I've been playing a lot better ever since. I'm even somewhat profitable.

^ Imagine that!

Thank the gods!

Welcome to the 2+2 Forums youMaDson!

I can only echo the sentiments above. Nobody is playing the micros for the money, so your focus needs to be on improving your game so you can move up.

On the bright side, you recognize that you're not very good, and you've found an awesome resource. I think you're ahead of the curve.


EDIT: this is so tilting... Ry889 (and everyone else, it's been happening more often lately it seems) when you make posts, PLEASE don't use colors. This forum allows users to change their forum skin to suit their preferences. You can't assume that what you're looking at, and what looks good to you, are what other people use.

If you must embellish a post for accent, use the tools like bold, underline, italic, etc. But don't use colors if you can help it (and I'm sure you can).

For reference, here is a sample of what your post looks like on my screen:



Yes, I know I can then highlight the text and try to make it more readable.. but.. ugh. Have mercy on those of us who no longer have the eyes we did when we were 19.

Thanks!

IMO, you might try playing just one table for a while, and really paying attention to the other players. Ignore the HUD, and actually pay attention to what they are doing...especially in hands you are not in. You will get to the point that you can actually read their patterns and have a good idea about how they think in various situations.

THEN start looking at your HUD...how do the tendencies you've observed show up in the stats?

I know it can be very dull to play at only one table online (live you actually get to watch and interact with the other players, so there's a lot more going on), but if you really want to get good you need to understand that NL is a PEOPLE game, and the implications of that.

Good luck with it! It sounds like you have the type of mindset that will allow you to improve quickly.

Play 2 tables minimum, 4 max.

Add more if you're getting bored and playing too loose and drop tables if you're running into too many spots where you're under pressure and you can feel your game slipping, easy game?

At that level, the single and only focus should be getting better.

If 4 tables is most profitable for you, then that's great. Whether it's good for your "poker education", I couldn't say.
I personally have trouble with more than one table at a time, and I think it's because I (over-)analyse every single bet/fold by every single player. At higher stakes, you can probably get pretty good reads on players purely from their HUD stats (e.g. loose pre-flop, often folds to 3-bet etc), so you can almost go on auto-pilot against certain opponents. At the microstakes level, players often make really weird and unexpected plays. They aren't being "creative" like top pros. They're just weird. For me, this makes microstakes even more interesting. There are so many (bad) decisions being made, I simply can't keep track of all of them if I have more than one table on the go. I wish I could. My bankroll would no doubt be growing a lot quicker if I could multi-table successfully! I'm hoping that multi-tabling gets easier at higher stakes, as there should be fewer crazy players you have to account for.

Thank you all for your advice and words of encouragement. It helps a lot more than you know. Sometimes it's nice to see something positive, especially after losing AA vs QJs (of diamonds... always of diamonds) all-in four times today, and losing more JJ and KK's than I care to count. Probably the worst series of bad beats I've experienced so far. I was surprisingly mellow about the whole thing though, and experiencing that, in a way, made it worth it.

After contemplating my play and the advice I received from you all, I think I'm going to stick with four tables, then cut down on tables if I feel off/under pressure.

Thank you all again.

@arty... multi tabling only gets harder the higher up you go tbh, if your studying away from the tables & analyzing hands & have reads on pretty much every reg then yea your decisions might atleast have a more solid basis but its not really cause the regs makes mistakes but more to do with the fact you can pinpoint tendencies easier

micro games still have more spewtards which makes it easier to multi table by far & regs for the most part play pretty similar & robotic

you can make 15 bucks an hour multitabling 25nl, of course we're playing micros for the money. i myself is proof of that. i work part time and play poker part time. of course have to improve along the way and think of moving up. the more hands you play you more you see repeating situations, and the more you learn. the best way to become a better player is to put in volume and see repeating situations over and over. its like learning math, the best way to improve is to do a lot of equations and see a lot of variety that will really solidify your foundation

why cant you edit your own **** what kind of forum is this

oh i can edit this one but the one above theres no edit button, what i cant edit my own **** after a certain period of time what a joke go **** yourself

calm down tiger.

regular posters get up to 30 minutes to edit, that is just the way it is. if you dont like this then feel free to post about it in About The Forums. complaining here isnt the place and this isnt the place for deliberately beating the profanity filter either and often only results in an infraction. beginners is a relative sanctuary of 2+2 and posters are expected to maintain a reasonable level of posting here.

now, lets get this thread back on track.....

If you have to update or edit your post, quote it and then type the change below your original post.

Some posts are widely discussed, and if you change your post once the debate starts, someone who read it shortly after is was typed is seeing a different post than someone who reads it two days late days later. With a heavily discussed post, that can lead to a lot of confusion. Also, if you post something questionable (like telling someone to go F himself) and a moderator desides to deal with it, it would be too easy for you to change your post, then say that you never said it.

For such reasons, posts can only be changed shortly after they are written, unless you get the permission of a moderator.

That's it man, let it out. It's OK...it's OK. Shhshshshsss. It's. OK.

tldr but at low limits you should be learning and improving rather than just looking for $. but by improving you shoul be makin money

+1 to what most of the others have said basically.

Focus on improving, making better decisions, making better reads etc, rather than increasing volume.

If you feel that playing 4 tables currently gives you the best results, but less than 4 makes you too loose in your play, then I would probably continue to play 4.

You have identified an important fact about yourself there though, that your tendency can be to LAG it up too much, so this is something that you should work on. As you get more used to playing 4 tables I'm pretty sure this potential leak will come back as it currently does for you playing 2 or 3 tables.

I sort of feel that at 2NL I'm "improving" to the point where I'm learning a style that beats that limit but I'm still effectively playing fit-or-fold. A thinking player at a higher limit would destroy me.

Pretty much, yeah. I'm a pretty loose and very aggressive player by default. When I started, I was playing any two cards, before gradually trimming my range down. I'll play basically any two broadways, suited connectors to suited three-gappers, a broadway with straight potential (AT, J7, etc.), and any pocket pair. I end up with about 40-45% VPIP on most tables these days.

I'm not a maniac, though. The thing that I've worked on the most in my game is folding. I've gotten reasonably good at folding when I know I'm beaten, folding to three-bets, not c-betting when I know my opponent connected, and folding easily dominated hands like KJ to heavy raising. It's something I still need to work on though, as it's probably the thing that loses me the most money. Occasionally I'll still sort of "know" that I'm beaten, but call it down with the worse hand anyway.

That still sounds way too high unless you're exceptionally good post-flop. I was never playing ATC, but at the start I would play stuff like AJ and QTs in any position. Now I realise it's not just your overall tightness or looseness that counts, but how well you tighten or loosen your range according to the particular circumstances. Some hands are just terrible UTG, but become very strong on the button. Some hands are great to limp with in some spots, and great to raise with in others. Making the right decisions in marginal situations is where you'll find the profits.

I agree 100% with this, 40% VPIP is extremely loose. There can't be many tables where this is an optimal range. youMaDson, you said you play J7, if you are playing hands like this in EP to MP or calling with them, that is pure spew IMO.

100bb poker doesn't allow for a winning uber lag strategy tbh & the tags will eat you alive if they can adjust at all...



btw @ topcat... 2nl wont teach you much & that's the truth, you will learn how to beat spewy fish pretty much which is necessary as most of your poker $ comes from them as well as loose passives.... but i would start at 10nl if your looking to really learn the game imo, as its where more of a strategy is needed & when you face regs etc