evolution of a poker player...

[Maulik]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
The frame of reference for poker is online poker.

Online poker is real poker, live poker is highly inefficient in many aspects and the players are generally much much weaker.

When people ask, he's good but could he play well live?

The answer to this is who gives a ...

The real question is could the live player make it online, and the answer 99% of the time is no because the online player learns the game 1000% faster.

[/ QUOTE ]


live vs. online reminds me of rap's East Coast vs. West Coast. a big whatever.

[/ QUOTE ]

hahaa!

[limon]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
The frame of reference for poker is online poker.

Online poker is real poker, live poker is highly inefficient in many aspects and the players are generally much much weaker.

When people ask, he's good but could he play well live?

The answer to this is who gives a ...

The real question is could the live player make it online, and the answer 99% of the time is no because the online player learns the game 1000% faster.

[/ QUOTE ]


live vs. online reminds me of rap's East Coast vs. West Coast. a big whatever.

[/ QUOTE ]

yeah i dont think this is a live v. online debate. live poker is softer because the sharpies can only sit at one table. that leaves alot more room for donks. if, online, you could only play one table at a time the games would be soft there as well. in fact you can judge the weakness of a player w/ some accuracy by seing how many tables they are on. online pros are really practicing very poor game selection but making up for it by playing in many games. any 10-20nl online is 3x as tough as any 10-20nl live. from time to time a 10-20 nl live will be as tough as online and everyone starts calling for a table change instantly. i just dont have time to sit w/ 6 pros, thats not what any of us came to the casino for. if we had to play together because everyone could be at every table at the same time we would be forced to play this hyper aggressive game everyone refers to as optimal. its optimal in a setting where you can assign narrow hand ranges and can rely on a certain amount of foldequity in certain situations. in loose passive games, which you find at the casino, where the hand ranges are wider and the fold equity less you see alot of aggro dudes berating regulars for being calling stations but really the aggro dude just totally miscalculated the hand range and FE of his opponent. on line is actually more like a big home game. if youve every played in a long running home game (i play in several) what you find is bad poker players playing very well in that specific setting. to a new guy to the game some of the plays look genius or bizarre but in fact they are just regular plays based on intimate knowledge of the opponents. on line, becuase so many players play so many hands against each other with so much specific info everyone starts to beleive they have discovered some secret key but when they venture away from their normal setting that key doesnt open anything. much in the same way a guy who is a killer in a long running home game is a sucker at the casino w/ strangers. the real key is having several keys.

[Bokonon1972]

[ QUOTE ]
live poker is softer because the sharpies can only sit at one table. that leaves alot more room for donks.

[/ QUOTE ]

How does that make any sense? Fewer tables = softer games?

Either way, I agree now, the argument is lame and pointless, but the arrogance of the online-only crowd is staggering.

[innerpeace]

[ QUOTE ]
the real key is having several keys.

[/ QUOTE ]

and also being able to assess quickly which key to use...

[ilikeaces86_]

Live poker = Hee Haw

[innerpeace]

[ QUOTE ]
If someone is playing passive and weak, wouldn't you want to play a LAG style? I think some players will take it too far and not letting up when meeting the right amount of resistance that the tight player is felting his hand, but playing a lot of hands against weak tight players is a good way to scoop up a lot of small pots.

[/ QUOTE ]

sometimes the opposite. tight weak is not the same as tight passive imho because you have more fold equity versus the former. these players often call preflop raises with a wide range and won't fold if they catch any piece. so, more often you are behind, and to make it worse, you don't have enough fold equity to make lag play work in general.

if you think about it, these players are without realizing it playing close to the style you need to in order to counter a lag opponent's style.

[limon]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
live poker is softer because the sharpies can only sit at one table. that leaves alot more room for donks.

[/ QUOTE ]

How does that make any sense? Fewer tables = softer games?

Either way, I agree now, the argument is lame and pointless, but the arrogance of the online-only crowd is staggering.

[/ QUOTE ]

imagine a world w/ 8 pros and 8 donks. live you would have 2 tables w/ appx. half pros half donks. online you would have 8 tables, each w/ 8 pros and 1 donk. the online game would be tilted w/ 8 pros at each table trying to isolate/cut up one donk. the live game would be loose passive w/ plenty of donks to go around and little chance to isolate w/ a calling station in every other seat.

[Triumph36]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]


This is true, but its not just that. They also ignore group psychology, physicality, and other basic, fairly logical points, such as the fact that live poker is played by people who had to make an effort to get to the casino, as opposed to sitting around clicking--the neophyte factor is (or was) MUCH higher online.

I swear: anyone that thinks they can sit down with actual people and win just because they play a fairly sound mathematical game in a fantasy cupcake environment really spends too much time in front of their computer.

[/ QUOTE ]

you have no idea what you're talking about.

Tx has a point, but shouldn't that re-raise range also mean that a player who picks his spots should crush these weak-passive players? There are certainly online players I know who lack the discipline to play live - were they forced to play live, they would probably quit the game altogther. If they could get over their boredom, they would crush these stakes though.

[/ QUOTE ]

Before I didn't quite understand how someone (or many someones) could say "You don't know what you're talking about" when it comes to live vs. online play, having rarely or never played in a serious live game.

But the answer is obvious: many of the people glorifying online players are too young to be allowed into a casino. Young and naive (didn't say 'dumb'), no experience, think they can do anything.

You mention Tx's post, and acknowledge he has a point, but then blow past it. Read DJ Sensei's posts in this thread. I know he wins both online and live. He gets it.

[/ QUOTE ]

i've probably run super hot, but i made $8000-$9000 in live games last year in maybe 80-100 hours of play, at stakes no higher than 5/10. i know what it takes to beat these games - it is not that hard to figure it out, esp if one doesn't sit super-deep and expect that he's got a huge edge because of it.

limon - that's an interesting point, and there's some merit to it - that online pros, having played each other over thousands of hands, just by default know their tendencies, etc. but here by talking about plays that seem 'bizarre or genius' you are loosely describing the phenomenon of 'metagame', which just shouldn't come into play very often in a live game.

Online pros would have to dial back their aggression and learn how to read players to make hero calls and ridic bluffs like they do online, but there's no doubt they can be winners in live games, and be bigger winners than all but the best of live players in mid-HSNL (5-10 - 25/50) games.

[TreyOfLight]

Long ago, when Limon was still a student, he asked the master, "Master, where can I find evidence of the evolution of a poker player?"

The master put hand to chin, and said nothing. Time passed. "Are you waiting for me to say something?" pressed Limon.

"I am checking," answered the master, "for evidence of beard growth."

[HedonismBot]

The question has been thoroughly answered by limon and DJs last posts