Monday 23 June 2008

Multi-tabling 6-max at $1-$2

I’ve now managed a sustained period of multi-tabling the 6-max tables and results have been great. Even though its only $1-$2 blinds and I am averaging just less than 3 tables I have had a win-rate of almost $70 per hour. The best thing is, that having played so much $2-$4 and $5-$10 over the last year, I am finding that the standard at $1-$2 is really quite bad and it’s not that difficult to find some truly awful players. This makes me think that even though I have only played just over 7,000 hands my results have been roughly in line with expectation.

If I can ‘expect’ to make $60-$70 at this level then I am onto a good thing as pro-rata this is worth about $100,000 a year. The other good thing is that it is pretty much stress-free. Looking ahead, if I could translate this to success at $2-$4, it could be the start of something really big. I know there are players out there making well in excess of $200k a year playing as low as $2-$4.

So how have I managed to finally get the hang of multi-tabling?

Well, I think the first thing is I have gained a lot of experience over the last year, done a lot of thinking about the game and about various situations and have developed a more solid ‘B game.’ In truth, when playing more than one table, it is not really possible to play an ‘A game’ and so you need to have a way to win despite not giving each table your full attention. This means that you have to analyse common situations away from the tables and work out how best to play them, so that when those situations come up you are able to quickly apply your knowledge in line with the balance of probabilities. Obviously you can’t be right every time but you must calculate how to create a long-term edge and then wait patiently for it to materialise.

The next factor is PA HUD. I had never used a HUD until I started playing Omaha on more than one table and this allowed me to spot bad players and quickly get a line on all opponents at the tables. Also, it becomes really obvious when a table has turned bad, signalling the time to leave and find a softer line-up.

I have developed my play to try to remain aggressive in most circumstances. The exceptions are when playing against really over-aggro players and when out of position with weak but probably winning hands against solid players.

Also, my play has become more dependent on the type of opponent I am facing. I can happily re-raise a loose player with A8, and happily fold AK against a very tight player. Against a loose player I will be more aggressive with decent drawing hands, as they will often be in there with a drawing hand too. Against tight players, well, I don’t get involved for big money anywhere near as much as I used to.

These are all simple adjustments and it truly shows that the skill in poker comes down more to applying what you know than simply having the knowledge.

I hope that things can continue as they have. I am going to try to complete 50,000 hands at $1-$2 before I consider moving up to $2-$4. I really need to bed myself in and just grind at $1-$2. After all, $60+ per hour is pretty significant money, especially when it’s tax-free.

1 comment:

ROSSI said...

superb post, i think your one of the only blogs i read that makes the point that playing less tables is better. I stick to playing 2x 6-max tables of NL $1/$2 on Full Tilt, and get near full concentration as i can see both tables at once on my setup.
I have HUD running and a program called spadeeye running which is a table selection tool and lets me easily see how many tables someone is at.
$70 is easily acheivable and like you say if you put in 39hrs per week you would be $100k per year better off. The hard work is getting stuck into the grind.
hope it goes well and hope to bump into you at $2/$4 lol