General Poker Discussion Poker Forums

I play on iPoker network and 75-80 hands/hour is the average pace on normal tables. I don't play any kind of Turbo tables.

Also I think that playing 6 tables is so much more standard then 4 tables. Unless you are really struggling I doubt it is really gonna affect your bb/100 and will massively improve your hourly.

For me, there is so much difference between playing 4 and 6 tables. When you play 6+ tables there is simply no time to pay attention to the table dynamics, make reads and plan for each Villain. It would be at least very, very hard. That's why I stick to 4, maybe occasionally 5 tables. I am not interested in max hourly, I want to have a high winrate and to absolutely destroy everyone. 4-tabling is also more fun.

Well I tried getting up early and playing before work but that was not a good idea... all regulars and no fish to be detected and just felt tired throughout the rest of the day. So it looks like I'll have to play recreationally which really sucks!

Some really good advice in this thread from blah, the guy has done it himself, he knows what he is talking about. Estist i agree about playing before work is terrible lol.

I struggle to play 60 hours a month tbh, its best to try and play 2 a day to spread it out better but i dont live at home on friday and saturday so i have to try and make up for it during the week. The problem there is some days i don't always feel like playing and i dont feel like playing i wont play well. Personally i think 40 hours a month is a more reasonable goal until you reach say 100NL because the extra bit of money acts as motivation to squeeze out those extra 20 hours.

For me, there is so much difference between playing 4 and 6 tables. When you play 6+ tables there is simply no time to pay attention to the table dynamics, make reads and plan for each Villain. It would be at least very, very hard. That's why I stick to 4, maybe occasionally 5 tables. I am not interested in max hourly, I want to have a high winrate and to absolutely destroy everyone. 4-tabling is also more fun.

You don't need to pay attention to everything everyone is doing when you already have plans for majority of the regs at your stake. Playing 4 tables forever is probably leaving money on the table as well, especially when there are good tables around.

Not sure about that one Blah I mean win-rate drops, more opportunity to make mistakes which can be very costly, run bad, get tilted, etc. etc. Probably optimal if you were a solid player and know common spots inside out. Not sure if that will be the case for us microstake players

Nonetheless my goal is to get to $0.50/$1, preferably $1/$2. With your experience of having moved up through the ranking not too long ago, coaching and stuff, what would your strategy be doing this part time the serious route and doing this the recreational route? Assuming we're starting at 25NL ( or lower I'm sure others would be interested in the full route too ) how many hands do you reckon each stake will take? would your bankroll strategy change per stake / route? number of tables? which site? and what would you do differently from what you did in the past?

Sorry for all the questions just think it would be really interesting to see how you would tackle it

Not sure about that one Blah I mean win-rate drops, more opportunity to make mistakes which can be very costly, run bad, get tilted, etc. etc. Probably optimal if you were a solid player and know common spots inside out. Not sure if that will be the case for us microstake players

Nonetheless my goal is to get to $0.50/$1, preferably $1/$2. With your experience of having moved up through the ranking not too long ago, coaching and stuff, what would your strategy be doing this part time the serious route and doing this the recreational route? Assuming we're starting at 25NL ( or lower I'm sure others would be interested in the full route too ) how many hands do you reckon each stake will take? would your bankroll strategy change per stake / route? number of tables? which site? and what would you do differently from what you did in the past?

Sorry for all the questions just think it would be really interesting to see how you would tackle it

Goal is to learn first then play more tables to optimize your hourly. There's basically no point on optimizing your hourly at like 25nl. And obv increasing tables doesn't do much when you're not even a winning player. My statement said "playing 4 tables forever is leaving money on the table".

Play at the site which you can get the highest rakeback at micros, it will basically double your win rate. Game selection doesn't matter, I'm fairly sure you can find 4-6 good tables of 25NL on almost any poker network.

Number of hands needed to move up is arbitrary and you should go by feel instead of your winrate. If you know how to beat most of the players at your stake then you have an advantage so it's time to move up if your BR can handle it. Once you're at this point I'm sure you can play more than 4 tables profitably.

Be aggressive with BRM at lower stakes. Only thing I would do differently is get coaching earlier and not look at bb/100 in determining if I should move up and be able to move up way faster. Make sure you get a coach that's appropriate for your skill level.

Lastly, focus on smart learning instead of winning, don't just remember what you learned, understand it. My goal was just get to 200nl as well when moving up so don't hold yourself to it.

I would say 4 tables is good temporarily while you are building up your hands and player notes on players at that stake. Playing at a site without huge traffic makes this even more beneficial; after a while, you can sit down at almost any table and have notes/color notes and a ton of hands on at least half the table. I did this on Everleaf (before I realized they were swindling scum) and was able to play 8 tables regularly with very good reads. That's kind of an exception though, because the network was SO small. At a medium-sized network, I'll build up my notes, but then only move up to like 6 tables, even though I am capable of up to 10, because my hourly is actually better at 6. This also gives you a goal (to get notes on ~30% of players at your stake, for example), gives incentive to put in volume, and encourages you to play a very strict TAG style until you have reads.

6 tables is my sweet spot, you just need to find yours.

Blah how fast do you think moving up would be possible for somebody who followed your advice to the letter starting at 25NL (ie put in the time at the tables, put in study time, studyed probably with some kind of note taking system etc.)

Blah how fast do you think moving up would be possible for somebody who followed your advice to the letter starting at 25NL (ie put in the time at the tables, put in study time, studyed probably with some kind of note taking system etc.)

No way to tell. It's called varience. Not trying to be a dick, just simply saying.

No way to tell. It's called varience. Not trying to be a dick, just simply saying.

Yeh of course i know what variance is...
If you have ever ran any variance simulators you will see there is a middle a top and a bottom side of variance. I want to know a guestimated middle. I guess it is too hard to answer but there but maybe some one could calculate some kind of base estimate.

Its like companies estimating there quarterly income to there shareholders, there is no way of knowing and there is huge variance.

I wasn't trying to imply that you didn't know what varience was. I apologize if I offended ya. Anyway, all you really need to do is take your win rate at any given limit, figure out how much of a BR you need to move up and then calculate how many hands you need in order to go from point A to point B.

Example:

Bankroll: $250
winrate at $10NL = 5bb/100
Bankroll to move up to $25NL: $750

$750-$250 = $500 profit needed. / 5bb/100 = how many hands on average you need to play.

I would say 4 tables is good temporarily while you are building up your hands and player notes on players at that stake. Playing at a site without huge traffic makes this even more beneficial; after a while, you can sit down at almost any table and have notes/color notes and a ton of hands on at least half the table. I did this on Everleaf (before I realized they were swindling scum) and was able to play 8 tables regularly with very good reads. That's kind of an exception though, because the network was SO small. At a medium-sized network, I'll build up my notes, but then only move up to like 6 tables, even though I am capable of up to 10, because my hourly is actually better at 6. This also gives you a goal (to get notes on ~30% of players at your stake, for example), gives incentive to put in volume, and encourages you to play a very strict TAG style until you have reads.

6 tables is my sweet spot, you just need to find yours.

Very good point.

Now I have a dilemma:
- $/h vs bb/100 ?

For vast majority of players $/h is better, but reaching a high winrate is also a key to beat higher stakes. Maybe I will start first with 5 tables and see how it goes, before adding more.

Yeah man, just take your time and only add more once you feel comfortable. It might feel like it will take a long time, but you will be very comfortable before you know it. When I started multitabling I remember vowing that I would never play more than 2 tables, ever, ha ha...

@blah

1. So who was your first coach, at which stake did you get coaching and what did you guys spend the most time on?

2. Does your post mean we need to be able to beat regulars before we move up?

3. Are we not better off on a site that has a higher fish to regular ratio than a site that has high rakeback but most players are regulars?

4. If have skill advantage, should we take a lot of shots in trying to move up where we set side a couple of buyins or something rather than using set rules.

5. Did you get staked or pad your bankroll with your wage at any point?

I'm sure I forgot another major question. Might come to me in a bit hopefully

@blah

1. So who was your first coach, at which stake did you get coaching and what did you guys spend the most time on?

2. Does your post mean we need to be able to beat regulars before we move up?

3. Are we not better off on a site that has a higher fish to regular ratio than a site that has high rakeback but most players are regulars?

4. If have skill advantage, should we take a lot of shots in trying to move up where we set side a couple of buyins or something rather than using set rules.

5. Did you get staked or pad your bankroll with your wage at any point?

I'm sure I forgot another major question. Might come to me in a bit hopefully

1. Pheonix at 25NL
2. no such thing as a reg or a fish. You need to have an edge over your average player pool to move up. Also, it depends on what you want your win rate to be. There are many mass tabling breakeven/slightly winning players at every stake.
3. there are enough "fish" at every site on the lower stakes.
4. Just keep taking shots as long as you can afford it.
5. No, I just used my wages for coaching only because I thought back then bb/100 over x number of hands meant something.