I can manage up to 12tabling at 25nl with a decent win rate. But I've seen some people playing over 20+ tables. Does anyone mind sharing a graph?strategies?win rate? programs?session length? etc... I can 24 table .01/.02 - .05/.10 and be a winning player with a fair win rate. Should I really try .10/.25 24 tabling... ? Does this help improve your game? Do you find yourself making poor decisions cause little time to act?

I just want other 24tabling regs opinion on this.

Thanks.

I typically run between 17-20 tables, but if I were to train myself to use my hot keys instead of the mouse, 24 would be pretty easy. I play 25NL. I can't post a graph, but my winrate is around 3ptBB. I typically run around 13/10. I steal around 35%. I don't isolate as much, as I don't have reads on the limpers tendancies.

If you are playing 12 tables, then playing more tables is essentially the same thing. Your reads are mainly from stats. You get a few reads on individual players, but most of the time you will be playing the category of player instead of the specific player.

As for improving your game, its a catch 22. You get a lot more situations, so you can really work on things that don't come up very often, but you don't have individual reads, so its harder to work on other situations. If you already have a solid winning strategy, then you can play add more tables. For programs, I use table ninja, HEM, and a Auto Hot Key to move tables around. Session length is really a matter of personal preferrence. I typically run around 2 hours, but that has more to do with work family and kids than poker. On the other hand, I had a day off without the wife or kids, and played for 3 hours without noticing it.

If you want to see a video of me playing 18 tabkes stacked, look up a thread of mine called 2NL concept video.

I 24 table although it's not exclusively 25NL - I usually have open about 8 50NL tables and 16 25NL tables. Some days the 50NL games are so pitifully tight I don't even bother and just run 25NL.

Graphs from 25NL only from July 1, 09 through Oct 21, 09:





If you're a winning player you need to learn how to 24 table and do it as soon as possible - you're costing yourself too much money by not opening as many games +EV games as you are capable of handling. If you decide to up to 24 I strongly recommend the purchase of Tableninja as it makes things much more pleasant/manageable and is well worth the $50 investment.

General advice:

1) Avoid tables with more than 3 shortstacks
2) Do not put yourself on the waiting list for any game with less than 25% players per flop at 25NL (25NL is usually so juicy that I'm usually able to initially join up to 24 tables with >30% plyrs/flop)
3) Add a Table HUD to your stats in addition to the normal HUD; have it display VPiP and leave any table in which you have played at least 40 hands on where the VPiP drops below 15.
4) Abuse <12 VPiP player's blinds. Some of the things I've gotten away with are ridiculous. I especially love the 10/8 straightforward 16+ tabling ABC TAG who hasn't noticed that I've stolen his blinds the last 10 times in a row.
5) Dont pay off nits; don't bluff donks.

Hope this helps. Best of luck.

Nice tip about the table VPIP. I have just been going through the lobby every hour or so to see what tables are suddenly tight.

play all regular speed and no fast ones and you can easily never time out on 24 tables.

I think i could 30+ table non fast tables without ever timing out but find it difficult to play more than 8 all fast tables.

I don't agree with this. For most people, their winrate in bb/100 drops as tables increase. Maybe the additional hands make up for this, maybe not. Depends on the individual.

Also 24 tabling will (for most people) put greater demands on your concentration level and be higher stress. Depending on your volume goals, this may be counterproductive. (Analogy: if you're planning on a 10 mile run, you won't get there if you decide to sprint from the start)

I think a more correct way to say this is that if you are a profitable player, you should increase the number of tables until you find a happy medium between the decreased ptBB and the increased number of hands. For me I started with 2 tables, moved to 4, then learned to tile and went to 10. Learned to stack, went to 16. Tried 20 and got crushed, then worked my way back up. Now that I can mass table, I make SOOOO much more money it's just crazy. In less than 6 months I went from making about $1 an hour to around $15. Now, I still play 2 or 4 tables at times, because there are certain things it is easier to work on with fewer tables, but playing more tables really opened things up for me.

I'm trying to figure out some of these things myself...I use to be a 20+ tabler at 25nl but every time I wanted to move up to 50NL i got crushed. I'm trying my best this month to only 8 table and move up and be a winning player at 50nl, but like the others say, the games are so ridiculously tight at 50NL sometimes that I don't know if it's better to just mass multi 25nl and stay there. I guess it's just find whatever you're happy with and stick with it. I still have delusions of grandeur of one day being a 200nl grinder so I decided this is the month I try to move up, but if 50NL is like this I can't imagine what 200NL is like.

A more interesting question would be how many people 24 table 25nl and make it past small stakes.

$50 NL has a lot more regular grinders who are running around 13/10 but there are still plenty of loose players at that limit. But not enough that mass multi-tabling will ensure a few really bad players on every table. Every night I run into plenty of guys running 85/10 who can't wait to give up their money. The problem is, none of these guys multi-table. They're one and done.

lol,i agree 100%

24 tabling nl25 is just silly,learn how to play and move up

It might seem silly to 100NL grinders, but if you can make 4ptBB/100 playing 800 hands an hour, then that amounts to $16 an hour without rake back or stars bonus money included. Thats pretty good money for a lot of people. And its very good money for someone who is still in the beginning phases of a poker career (I make to much to think of it as a hobby now, even though I am still love it) and want/needs to learn more. I think of it like a video game. Gotta be good enough at stage 4 before you move to stage 5 (25NL to 50NL).

I think his point is that it is silly because mass-multitabling is most likely preventing you from acquiring the skills needed to move up as quickly as possible, which should be your goal at 25nl (assuming you have any desire to move up at all).

you improve much slower though.id rather try to learn how to play better and make 50$/h at nl100 soon.

Do you, though?

I can accept you'll need more hands to reach the same ability level, but I'm not so sure you'll need more time. Also, for the analytically inclined, more hands means more hard data to work with when working out which lines are good or bad away from the table.

Could be my personal bias interfering here - I'd be happy with $30/hour at 25NL after rakeback, where a bad session is one in which you breakeven.

what % of low tablers make it past small stakes? Problably fewer than mass tablers since it will take so long to grow the roll for one.

re worded : does a 24 tabler have a greater chance of being a winning reg at nl200+ or someone who never plays more than 6?
note: not that the 24 tabler would be playing that many at the higher stakes.

you completely missed the point I was trying to make.

fwiw it doesn't take that much longer to grow the roll, just think of all the failed shots someone is going to have when they realize they don't know wtf they're doing because they've autopiloted their way through lower levels.

24tablin rocks

How many of you actually learn anything at the tables? The bulk of your learning should be off of the tables. So put in the time reviewing your sessions, actively reading 2p2 (not BBV/NVG...), watching training site videos, coaching, and talking with your poker buddies to get better, then grind it out on the tables. Doesn't matter if it's 24 or 2 or anything in between.

Moving up stakes question: Whoever wants it the most...

There are players who are break-even through play, 24-tabling 100nl on Stars and make 120K/year through VPPs. Not everyone cares about being a mid or high stakes pro, they are content grinding SNE.

edit: I don't 24 table. I like playing fewer tables and but there is certainly nothing wrong with 24-tabling.

hey guys,

i just would like to add another question here.

how do you multitable 24 tables plus (in terms of screen organisation?)

do you tile them or just have one big windows with the actual one popping up (table ninja?).

i am currently playing just 9 tables which is still fine for me, but i am thinking of buying a netbook for playing poker in the sun but i just can play more then one table in this screen.

thanks,

I have 24 tabled once and it was too insane for me. But I don't have any hotkeys etc to make it easier.

it really just boils down to if you want your learning curve to be exponential or linear. if you want to be a steddy eddy then sure 24 table.

I use stacked, and if you are going to play more than say 12 tables, I highly recommend it.

And I also disagree that mass tabling hurts the learning curve. I think that mass tabling can speed up the learning curve, if you use it right. Don't get me wrong, you learn you to combat individual players, and make finer plays with less tables. But take for instance light 3 betting out of the blinds. There are so few people that are stealing, combined with the loose nature of 25NL, that I would rarely get the chance to experiment with this if I were only playing 4 tables. Yes, I probably miss quite a few spots, but at least I get to try it on a fairly regular basis and see how it works for me.

I think that a decent mix of multitabling and mass tabling provides a good learning curve and income level.

And honestly, right now my goal is to become a 100NL grinder. I play poker because its fun, but I never wanted to be a high limit player. Putting that much money on the line at a time is just plain crazy to me.