You need to be logged in to your Sky Poker account above to post discussions and comments.
You might need to refresh your page afterwards.
You need to be logged in to your Sky Poker account above to post discussions and comments.
You might need to refresh your page afterwards.
Comments
Also, rumour has it that Richard Orford tried to become a Super User but unfortunately it went wrong and he can no longer see his own hole-cards.
well thought i try a little poker experiment over the next few night ,
see how many tables i can play simultaneously .
i started tonight and played 10 dym simultaneously .
i found it to be a lot eaisier then expected and
managed to keep the timer from running out .
won 7 lost 3
so going to up it to 13 dym simultaneously tomorrow night .
just did 13 dym simultaneously,
result not good ,
won 7
lost 6
rake wins
never got timed out,
with screens popping up so much my eyes were sore after this session .
experiment goes on to
try 16 tomorrow night !
and i bet your good with your hands !
result not bad ,
won 10
lost 6
slight profit
was under huge presure to keep all the tables going ,
but i still never timed out ,
if push came to shove and i had practice ,
my limit would be around 25 tables .
so experiment over ,
my conclusion is ,
its humanly impossible for 1 person to play 90 tables simultaneously,
you would need help to run all 90 tables ,
whether it be a so called bot,
or other player / players helping you ,
i only did above for 1 hour ,
the said player is doing this 13 hours a day lol !
robobot rover and my eyes have popped out !
good point but he cant slow down games
or fold hands quicker than i was doing !
i advise anyone to try it lol !
and playing for 10- 13 hours continous for 1 person .
I bet he can put shelves up faster then you too !
but damn fine effort sir.
a summary of the reply i got is in page 4 of this thread,
towards the end of that page ,
take what i am about to say in jest about your above question lol ,
the guy never went around in a bot suit of armour !
just because your to quick in the bedroom department !
1: I'm assuming this was on Stars like the OP, because a different site with different software could easily be more difficult to multitable as many tables (not so much a flaw in your argument as I'm assuming it is, more just checking this isn't a flaw)
2: I've played 32 tables simultaneously before
a: I made a profit
b: I normally only play 1 table, but regularly 2 tables and often 4 tables - BUT never more than that - i.e. the 32 tables didn't get built up from practice it was just straight out.
c: They weren't DYM sit and goes; i.e. they were more complicated games
(actually they were 32 different games - basically every private tournament that Stars can set; i.e. every variant at every betting limit and they were MTT; albeit with only 2 tables on most; so you couldn't possibly make it more complicated)
3: I haven't got any of that script software that speeds it up, it was all done manually.
In other words, "its humanly impossible for 1 person to play 90 tables simultaneously" seems a bit of a rash statement when from personal experience I can say that an average amateur can play 32 for a profit and without any scripting help.
Doing it over 12 hours a day is the impressive bit - but that's the bit that I think would just come from having so much practice