[daveT]

[ 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.