In Response to Re: IS THIS HUMAN OR A BOT? ROBOROVER VERUS THE BOT LOL! : just did 16 dym simultaneously, 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 ! Posted by IRISHROVER
There is the odd problem with your argument
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
In Response to Re: IS THIS HUMAN OR A BOT? ROBOROVER VERUS THE BOT LOL! : Sure do. Mr Gerald Ratner, whilst Chief Executiver of Ratner Group, said..... ".....We also do cut-glass sherry decanters complete with six glasses on a silver-plated tray that your butler can serve you drinks on, all for £4.95. People say , "h ow can you sell this for such a low price?", I say, "because it's total ****"". He went on to say, further, that Ratner's ear-rings were "cheaper than a Marks & Sparks prawn sandwich but probably wouldn't last as long". They lasted longer than him though - he was gone within weeks, Ratners quoted value plummeted by more than half a billion, & it was soon renamed Signet Group. Posted by Tikay10
He now owns a very successful online jewelry retailer. He learnt his lesson well.
Comments
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