Is Multi Tabling Profitable?

A look at how multi tabling has changed the poker landscape, and what that means for the future.

Over on the TwoPlusTwo forums I was directed towards a thread on multi tabling, and why people might do it. I was surprised to see a viewpoint other than simply desiring an increase on the usual hourly rate.

Somebody made a claim that they had started up some PLO Zoom tables on Pokerstars while they were down to the final table of a multi table tournament. Not only does this sound extremely careless, but the poster also declared their actions were borne out of boredom!

Quickly the thread degenerated into an argument without anything else constructive to add, but it set me thinking. What is the current state of multi tabling in online poker today, and how does it affect the overall quality of the games available?

Ever since I played my first hand of online poker back in 2005, there has been a steady release of various software packages designed to aid the player in a manner of ways. We have constantly evolved from the first version of the database program, Pokertracker, to a modern day multi tabling assistance package such as Tableninja 2 or Starshelper.

Less common but still widely used are what are known as 'seating scripts'. These programs are designed to seek out the weakest cash tables and to get the user onto the waiting list in the fastest time possible. This is quite a help if the player is already busy with a large number of tables currently active. It has also been suggested that it is a grossly unfair advantage, given how tough the cash tables already are in today's games.

All of these add-ons have given the regular players enough of an advantage to the point where they can now play many more hands per hour without disturbing their overall win rate per table to a huge extent.

What we have seen over the last ten years is a shift to the point where players might achieve approximately eighty hands per hour on a cash game table, but they can have up to twenty four tables open resulting in more than two thousand hands per hour played. Before the arrival of Pokertracker the number of professionals who could multi task to this degree was marginally at best.

Given how much effort is currently expended to aiding these mass tabling grinders, the answer to the original question, 'Is multi tabling profitable', is a resounding yes.

But is multi tabling good for online poker?

Anybody who keeps up to date with poker news will be aware of the current move towards treating recreational players as the lifeblood of the game we love. Online gaming operators who provide poker tables have come to the conclusion that things have moved on to a point where recreational players are losing money too fast to skilled players who have every software aid package available. This is viewed as unhealthy for the game as a whole, and their view is that changes must happen if we are to maintain the viability of the games well into the future.

Unibet in 2014 became one of the first companies to ban outright the use of a HUD, with a mixed response. Partypoker this year took matters more than a step further by removing the option to download personal hand histories as well as players no longer being able to choose which seat to sit down at. You are assigned a seat and don't see the screen names of your opponent until the first hand is dealt.

Over at Sky Poker the use of HUDs has never been permitted, and the general feeling of that provider has always been that fun and enjoyment were more important than attracting players who want to play all day chasing rakeback rewards.

Times are changing, and fast. All over the internet we hear cries of how the high volume professional player is no longer welcome following the recent changes to Pokerstars' loyalty scheme.

The hard facts are that the poker economy has become extremely imbalanced. The number of multi tabling regular players now win money from recreational players so fast that the number of players re-depositing is dwindling. How long can this continue before it puts the viability of the games beyond repair?

I've played cash games up to $100NL for a living for five years, and I think with my experience I can admit that professional players can fairly be accused of being a little too self-interested. Things have been naturally getting tougher for a while, and after we survived Black Friday in 2011 as well as the almost complete eradication of the USA player pool, it has been on our minds that one more set of major changes could bring the whole dream to an end. People must now be worried that 2016 is finally the year where they have to go out and get a 'real' job.

If a blanket ban of HUDs arrives across the industry it will be impossible to multi table in the same fashion. Logically this will affect the players who manage to play for a living at smaller stakes than you might have believed possible, purely because they can multi table so effectively.

The other point of note for players who play cash games on Pokerstars is that tables at $1000NL and higher will no longer issue loyalty points known as VPPs. There is a worry now amongst the smaller stakes professionals that the high stakes players might move down stakes in order to take advantage of the loyalty scheme, which could create a ripple effect with the games getting too tough to play profitably for many players, forcing them to move down as well. It doesn't matter how well you can multi table if all of a sudden the games are a lot tougher than before.

Interesting times. My own personal view is that next year will be an important year for the future of online poker, and I hope that any changes are not so dramatic as to completely kill off the dream for new players only just beginning their poker journey.