[markksman]

[ QUOTE ]
It's very clear that online poker players are more skilled for many reasons. I'll try a single, different approach...

[/ QUOTE ]

I don't know. Some people believe there is more to live poker than just data analysis and number crunching.

That is where the difference comes in. I still think they are two different games, with different skill sets. Can someone be good at both? I suspect so.

The way I read it though, to be a good live player you need SOME of the skills that make a good online player. To be a good online player, you don't really need the skills that make a good live player.

Personality, physical reads, your own tells, intimidation, role-playing, acting and the rest.. you can be the worst person in the world at those things and it makes zero impact on your online game. You do those things all poorly in a live game and it doesn't matter how many odds you have rattling around in your head, you are likely to struggle.

From what I have seen if you talk to some of the top live players and the top online players they don't play the game the same at all. Some of the top live players could give two flips about the odds of the cards as they are playing the people. This is not possible online, so people are playing the numbers and betting patterns.

I am not going to claim one is better than the other, but they are different games. It would be like saying because someone dominates in NLHE they also will dominate in PLO. It is not a given. They are different games and require different skills. Someone could be very good at both, but being good at one does not guarantee you will be good at another.

I think solely from a social commentary standpoint, someone who has mastered the online game might have trouble with some aspects of the online game because of the lack of socialization required to become a dominate online player. It is not likely a person pre-disposed to this path is the salesman/reader that will make them better at live.

On the other hand, because their regular skill-sets are essentially worthless online, the live player will potentially flounder online as they have to only rely on betting patterns and mathematics to excel. Some of the live players are amazingly deficient in these areas.

So I would say that live players are likely to be better at playing in a live environment against internet bred players, and internet players are likely to be better at playing online against live players. Obviously there are always exceptions to the rule. The gregarious, socialized and perceptive online player will likely do well in the live environment. The technical, disciplined and mathematics based live player will likely do well online. The irony is, those opposing skill sets are probably going to make them less proficient at their chosen environment.

All that aside... to me the best poker player is the one who makes the most money. That is the point afterall. And it doesn't matter if it is against fish/whales/nuns or ducks. Show me the money...

So who is that?