Live Poker Pros
 

I was just wondering, if there were any live poker pros anymore, that don't play online at all (other then tv pros). If so, I'd like to here from you and if you think it is easy, and if so, alot easier then online? I know I am asking alot of general questions, but if someone could give me their experience as an exclusively live poker player, that would be awesome.

Re: Live Poker Pros
 

Live poker pros under say 25/50NL that play 100% live do so because they are not good enough to beat online.

Re: Live Poker Pros
 

nm

Re: Live Poker Pros
 

I can think of three but keep in mind just because they are Pro's doesn't mean they are good.

Re: Live Poker Pros
 

[ QUOTE ]
Live poker pros under say 25/50NL that play 100% live do so because they are not good enough to beat online.

[/ QUOTE ]

this is rediculous.

Re: Live Poker Pros
 

i think its pretty true that the people playing live for a living in smaller games haven't adapted to online games a large percentage of the time. i only say that because it's exactly what i did, i just happened to move around the time of uigea and was able to play live and never looked back. but am now looking back

Re: Live Poker Pros
 

yea i'm sure people playing 10/20 and 20/40 at commerce for a living are slumming it up because they can't adapt to online games. Also why would you want to have large sums of money in offshore gaming sites if you can avoid it.

Re: Live Poker Pros
 

obviously...or perhaps it's because the games may be better in B&M...hmmm

Re: Live Poker Pros
 

I prefer playing live, and I'm successful at it note: not a pro). I don't earn anything close to what I can do two levels down playing a few tables online though.

Re: Live Poker Pros
 

[ QUOTE ]
Live poker pros under say 25/50NL that play 100% live do so because they are not good enough to beat online.

[/ QUOTE ]

this is far from the truth. still i'll admit i have a MUCH harder time beatin the .25/.50 @ fulltilt than i do beatin the 5/10 live anywhere in the world.

anyways i like playin live cos i can make more money b/c the games are softer. also i don't like keepin large amounts of money where it's not accesible to me (i.e. pokerwebsites).

Re: Live Poker Pros
 

I was just wondering if anyone who gets to have real sex doesn't watch porn everyday?

Re: Live Poker Pros
 

Guesses, but

Ed Miller, Gabe Thaler, Kenny Tran(until ftp deal), Bart Hanson as the known ones but nearly everyone who beats 5/10nl or 10/20 and above and is a regular of a big room(bellagio,commerce, bicycle, and the other big la, lv and ac ones) considers themselves to be a "professional live player".

Re: Live Poker Pros
 

someone crushing 5/10 live makes about as much $/hr as a good 100NL player online, fwiw

Re: Live Poker Pros
 

I am a live pro. I don't play online because it doesn't feel like real poker to me and is way less fun. Picking up physical tells and getting to know how someone thinks by observing them in real life is really cool. I may start playing online to improve my fundamentals though. It is a great way to get cheap practice against solid players.

Re: Live Poker Pros
 

I consider myself a part time pro (I work a regular job, but play poker for side income). I'd just simply rather play live. I beat online games consistently for two years, and just simply got tired of it. I also hated massive multitabling, and frankly wasn't good at it.
Live is more interesting to me, I enjoy getting to meet new people and have had some very interesting conversations with a wide variety of folks. I'm also making quite good money for the investment required, and as long as that's true I don't see any reason to change.

Re: Live Poker Pros
 

ya i was just explaining why the poster above said that people playing lower stakes for a living are doing so b/c they cant beat online. I enjoy playing live as well when im in LV but i could never put in enough hours to live off of live play alone, mainly cause i find playing at a table full of quiet people insanely boring and partially b/c i just cant stay in the same place doing the same thing for more than 4-5 hours before i start to go crazy.

Re: Live Poker Pros
 

I'm curious how you come up with that reasoning? Do you have data to support it or is this just your opinion? I ask because I make a living at the $5-10nl in my local casino and have just recently started playing online again (last couple months) on occasion.

I'm playing full, $1-2NL online and the games are pretty tight-in general (barely a sample size worth mentioning...100 hours). I use very good table selection, but inevitably there are 7 people at the tables that play about 17% of the hands and maybe a couple 22%ers and one live one. if I'm lucky. Once the live one busts out the table is again filled with rocks and if the pots are big it's because you're got one rock getting it all in w/ A's w/ the other having K's. That's just a trend I've been seeing and I usually play late at night

Re: Live Poker Pros
 

[ QUOTE ]
I'm curious how you come up with that reasoning? Do you have data to support it or is this just your opinion? I ask because I make a living at the $5-10nl in my local casino and have just recently started playing online again (last couple months) on occasion.

I'm playing full, $1-2NL online and the games are pretty tight-in general (barely a sample size worth mentioning...100 hours). I use very good table selection, but inevitably there are 7 people at the tables that play about 17% of the hands and maybe a couple 22%ers and one live one. if I'm lucky. Once the live one busts out the table is again filled with rocks and if the pots are big it's because you're got one rock getting it all in w/ A's w/ the other having K's. That's just a trend I've been seeing and I usually play late at night

[/ QUOTE ]

Exactly why I mainly stick to PLO when I play online. Too many pros whereas live I play with more casual players.

Re: Live Poker Pros
 

The online comment is ridiculous. I'm sure there are some live players who cannot beat online, but this isn't everyone and it can be for a variety of reasons. Not everyone is an antisocial muppet who thinks life is about clicking a button on as many tables at once to brag/lie about your winrate on 2p2.com. Certain people simply prefer live dynamics, dislike computers in general, or have a game that is better suited to their local venues.

As far as the OP, the difficulties live obviously are tied to the decreased number of hands/hour, which leads to things like going two hours without hitting a board, or going a week straight when you're never up during a session, etc. The rake is also a key factor that needs to be paid attention to, and when it comes to underground venues, one must put a good deal of time into analyzing when said location may dry up, get raided, etc.

Re: Live Poker Pros
 

[ QUOTE ]
I'm curious how you come up with that reasoning? Do you have data to support it or is this just your opinion? I ask because I make a living at the $5-10nl in my local casino and have just recently started playing online again (last couple months) on occasion.

I'm playing full, $1-2NL online and the games are pretty tight-in general (barely a sample size worth mentioning...100 hours). I use very good table selection, but inevitably there are 7 people at the tables that play about 17% of the hands and maybe a couple 22%ers and one live one. if I'm lucky. Once the live one busts out the table is again filled with rocks and if the pots are big it's because you're got one rock getting it all in w/ A's w/ the other having K's. That's just a trend I've been seeing and I usually play late at night

[/ QUOTE ]

playing hours might be the prob, early in the morning and primetime EST hrs are usually really good at stars for 2/4-5/10, cant say about 1/2. I also play 6-max almost all the time so that might have something to do with it. My figures werent based on anything i put much effort into but here is what i did:

5/10 live= winning at 10ptbbs (20 big blinds)/100 hands= $200/100 hands. assuming ~30 hands/hr thats $60/hr

.5/1 online= winning at 5ptbbs (10 big blinds)/100 hands= $10/100 hands, so 6 tabling is gonna make about $54/hr, 7 tabling $63/hr.

my hourly at .5/1 online was $68/hr 7-8 tabling so its def possible. This summer at the series i didnt really track my hourly at 5/10, but keep in mind also that live players will have to tip waitresses and dealers as well.

Re: Live Poker Pros
 

[ QUOTE ]
The online comment is ridiculous. I'm sure there are some live players who cannot beat online, but this isn't everyone and it can be for a variety of reasons. Not everyone is an antisocial muppet who thinks life is about clicking a button on as many tables at once to brag/lie about your winrate on 2p2.com. Certain people simply prefer live dynamics, dislike computers in general, or have a game that is better suited to their local venues.

As far as the OP, the difficulties live obviously are tied to the decreased number of hands/hour, which leads to things like going two hours without hitting a board, or going a week straight when you're never up during a session, etc. The rake is also a key factor that needs to be paid attention to, and when it comes to underground venues, one must put a good deal of time into analyzing when said location may dry up, get raided, etc.

[/ QUOTE ]

i dont think he meant that anyone who plays live period cant beat online (i may be wrong tho im not him). i do think it would be a bit absurd for someone to try and grind out a living at 1/2 or 2/5 live full-time if they can supplement it w/ even just 10-15 hours making a lot more $/hr online.

Re: Live Poker Pros
 

Wow. Maybe I am some odd exception to the rule, but I had no problems adjusting to OL play. Many OL "pros" go the the B&M and act like they play better, but they, as a rule, suck.

If you are really convinced that playing 10/20 NL live is equal to .25/50 OL, I only have to say this: A pro at this level is playing TWELVE tables and beating the fish. Give me a break. If you can't win at this stake, you would be a fish at 1/2 live.

Re: Live Poker Pros
 

[ QUOTE ]
Wow. Maybe I am some odd exception to the rule, but I had no problems adjusting to OL play. Many OL "pros" go the the B&M and act like they play better, but they, as a rule, suck.

If you are really convinced that playing 10/20 NL live is equal to .25/50 OL, I only have to say this: A pro at this level is playing TWELVE tables and beating the fish. Give me a break. If you can't win at this stake, you would be a fish at 1/2 live.

[/ QUOTE ]

umm im not entirely sure whether you're talking to me specifically or not but i dont play small stakes online. i play mid-stakes w/ some 10/20 mixed in when the games are good, and most of my live play this summer was 5/10 uncapped at the wynn. Id say 10/20 live is def. harder than 50NL online, but 5/10 live is pretty close to the 50NL/100NL difficulty range. I do agree that a lot of online players just get bored b/c they cant socialize and end up making bad plays, but most of the good online players i know have done very well in live games much bigger than the ones they play online. And fwiw no one who knows the rules is a fish at 1/2 live [img]/images/graemlins/tongue.gif[/img]

edit: but yeah if you cant beat 50NL online 5/10 live is obv not the answer to your problems.

edit 2: also of the people you meet at casinos telling you they are internet pros, id wager 90% of them (prob the same ones who suck) are just fish online as well

Re: Live Poker Pros
 

I wrote "pro" in quotes because I have never been able to stand these people (you know the ones).

It has been cliche on this forum that some (losing) poster comes on and asks what stakes OL are equal to in a B&M. It is offensive, and simply a justification to why they cannot beat their game, "because it is too hard," and apparently we have it so easy. I am attracted to OL because I can pop up a variety of games that are not regularly (or never) spread and play at any time of the day. The fish are everywhere, even OL. And a ton of fish doesn't make the game easier if you don't know how to play the game, no matter the stakes.

It was not a slam against you.

Re: Live Poker Pros
 

[ QUOTE ]
I wrote "pro" in quotes because I have never been able to stand these people (you know the ones).

It has been cliche on this forum that some (losing) poster comes on and asks what stakes OL are equal to in a B&M. It is offensive, and simply a justification to why they cannot beat their game, "because it is too hard," and apparently we have it so easy. I am attracted to OL because I can pop up a variety of games that are not regularly (or never) spread and play at any time of the day. The fish are everywhere, even OL. And a ton of fish doesn't make the game easier if you don't know how to play the game, no matter the stakes.

It was not a slam against you.

[/ QUOTE ]

yeah i hear ya. fwiw when i say that live games are softer than online at = stakes it has nothing to do with the good players. Its a combination of a) 1/2 being the smallest game offered rather than .01/.02, which means even completely new players are going to play 1/2 or 2/5 and b) tourists who would never play online but got bored on a business trip etc. you know the guys who come to the table and have to trade baccarat chips before starting etc. that you cant usually find online.

Re: Live Poker Pros
 

The major aspect of players playing poorly live is the time/boredom factor. People simply don't like sitting there for 45 minutes at a time folding and watching others participate in the action. Often, live players travel a half hour up to 2 hours or more to get into a game, pay parking, food, hotel, toll, etc. It becomes damning when you get dealt 20 unplayable hands in a row; subsequently QT and KJ start to look a lot better after you've been at the table for six hours. You online guys might face stiffer competition in the form of multitabling pros, but it's a hell of a lot easier mentally/discipline oriented to run at 17 VPIP on the computer when you never have to sit and wait very long.

Re: Live Poker Pros
 

dude ive played a decent amount live im not hating on you guys. im pretty much just saying that the fish are worse and they have more money, not that all of you are losing online players, that was the other dude.

Re: Live Poker Pros
 

It's all about game selection. That is part of being a pro.

Re: Live Poker Pros
 

I'm a semi pro who supplements my income by playing live. I used to regularly play online as well, but quit Feb this year and just keep a few dollars in it to play when bored or drunk. But I do have an easy accessible casino 15 minutes from my house, so it is almost as convenient as online.

The benefits I enjoy live are getting to know people and their playing styles, which greatly increases my winrate, not just looking at a few numbers and making an assumption based on that. Also, having huge toweres of chips is just fun, and I find my mind wanders too much playing online lately, gotta have tv, music, something else going on, so tahts -EV.

BTW I play limit, not the all in game.

Re: Live Poker Pros
 

[ QUOTE ]
Not everyone is an antisocial muppet who thinks life is about clicking a button on as many tables at once to brag/lie about your winrate on 2p2.com. Certain people simply prefer live dynamics, dislike computers in general, or have a game that is better suited to their local venues.

[/ QUOTE ]
This means you're a recreational player, OP is asking about pro players.

[ QUOTE ]
Wow. Maybe I am some odd exception to the rule, but I had no problems adjusting to OL play. Many OL "pros" go the the B&M and act like they play better, but they, as a rule, suck.

If you are really convinced that playing 10/20 NL live is equal to .25/50 OL, I only have to say this: A pro at this level is playing TWELVE tables and beating the fish. Give me a break. If you can't win at this stake, you would be a fish at 1/2 live.

[/ QUOTE ]
The fact that a winning 1/2 nl online player at FTP/PS, etc, can crush 1/2 nl live and not vice versa is the simplest way to refute this point. Also, your sample size is probably incredilby small both online and live. Lots of live players really have no idea how huge variance is.

[ QUOTE ]
this is far from the truth. still i'll admit i have a MUCH harder time beatin the .25/.50 @ fulltilt than i do beatin the 5/10 live anywhere in the world.

[/ QUOTE ]
This is pretty much what he meant, he just exaggerated it a bit to stress his point. But yeah, having a harder time to beat $50 nl online over 5/10nl live was pretty much his point.

Re: Live Poker Pros
 

[ QUOTE ]
yeah i hear ya. fwiw when i say that live games are softer than online at = stakes it has nothing to do with the good players. Its a combination of a) 1/2 being the smallest game offered rather than .01/.02, which means even completely new players are going to play 1/2 or 2/5 and b) tourists who would never play online but got bored on a business trip etc. you know the guys who come to the table and have to trade baccarat chips before starting etc. that you cant usually find online.


[/ QUOTE ]
Well if we assume this to be true then it implies also that live regulars do not get nearly the experience online players do in playing against better players overall, thus they do not develop their skills as fast/much.

Re: Live Poker Pros
 

obv online players are going to see more hands and the average opponent is better, but online players are often really slow to improve themselves. look at how many people w/ access to 2p2 have been playing for over a year and still cant win past 1/2

Re: Live Poker Pros
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Not everyone is an antisocial muppet who thinks life is about clicking a button on as many tables at once to brag/lie about your winrate on 2p2.com. Certain people simply prefer live dynamics, dislike computers in general, or have a game that is better suited to their local venues.

[/ QUOTE ]
This means you're a recreational player, OP is asking about pro players.

[/ QUOTE ]

Believe it or not, some people never went on-line until they were 20 years old. And yes, some people do still play live for a living, and prefer it as well.

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Wow. Maybe I am some odd exception to the rule, but I had no problems adjusting to OL play. Many OL "pros" go the the B&M and act like they play better, but they, as a rule, suck.

If you are really convinced that playing 10/20 NL live is equal to .25/50 OL, I only have to say this: A pro at this level is playing TWELVE tables and beating the fish. Give me a break. If you can't win at this stake, you would be a fish at 1/2 live.

[/ QUOTE ]
The fact that a winning 1/2 nl online player at FTP/PS, etc, can crush 1/2 nl live and not vice versa is the simplest way to refute this point. Also, your sample size is probably incredilby small both online and live. Lots of live players really have no idea how huge variance is.

[/ QUOTE ]

A live pro has to be able to do is figure out his opponents as quick as possible. I could pin-point tons of information in about two orbits. This has nothing to do with variance, this has to do with play. A mistake is a mistake, and an obvious leak is an obvious leak, matter your sample size.

On variance and sample size: I have more than 100k hands live and nearly 200k hands OL. Believe me, I have witnessed the oddest crap on variance.

Re: Live Poker Pros
 

[ QUOTE ]
On variance and sample size: I have more than 100k hands live and nearly 200k hands OL. Believe me, I have witnessed the oddest crap on variance.

[/ QUOTE ]
Pretty much what my point was [img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img]

Re: Live Poker Pros
 

[ QUOTE ]
obv online players are going to see more hands and the average opponent is better, but online players are often really slow to improve themselves. look at how many people w/ access to 2p2 have been playing for over a year and still cant win past 1/2


[/ QUOTE ]
In my experience, live pros just aren't as good because they haven't had to adjust to highly aggressive games with lots of 3 betting and pepole making moves. It's nothing against them... but if they aren't playing many 3 bet pots because games arent aggressive then they just won't get as much experience in playing them.

Re: Live Poker Pros
 

i have played w/ a couple famous TV pros that were absolutely miserable at poker so i def agree some live pros are really bad. Ive also played w/ a couple really really sick players that never play on line. Yeah most of them dont play 3-bet pots well and that might factor in a lot w/ 100bbs, but most games ive played in LV have been 200bbs or Uncapped, and most online pros suck at 3-betting and playing 3-bet pots w/ 200bb+ stacks also so it kind of cancels out IME. Yeah on average online pros are better than live pros but that doesnt mean that there arent live pros who could deposit on stars tomorrow and beat decent stakes online.

Re: Live Poker Pros
 

Online pros don't play live because there isn't any money to be made. Playing 30 hands an hour vs at least 300 is no contest.

Re: Live Poker Pros
 

[ QUOTE ]
Online pros don't play live because there isn't any money to be made. Playing 30 hands an hour vs at least 800 is no contest.


[/ QUOTE ]
[img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img]

Re: Live Poker Pros
 

Not everyone can play 12 tables though and play well! I know I'm struggling w/ 3-4 NL games especially when full tilt keeps stealing focus when I'm trying to type in a bet!

Re: Live Poker Pros
 

I never play more than 4 tables, in fact it's usually only 2 or 3. And I one-table stud and stud7.

I guess I could prob 12 table some micro NLHE game, but eh. Maybe some weekend I'll do an adhoc session just to say I did.