Las Vegas vs Los Angeles Poker

[sternroolz]

[ QUOTE ]
Cost of living is much higher in LA. I think the rake is, too. Depending on the limit.

The 6-12 at Commerce/Bike was raking 5 bucks a hand when I was there 2 years ago! In Vegas the rake is a percentage of the pot, up to a max. In California size of the pot doesn't matter.

In LA, if you play 15-30 and higher though, I believe you pay time. Time = cheaper.

[/ QUOTE ]

Cost of living is no longer that much higher. 1 bedroom in Vegas is $800-1000 a month in any halfway decent place within 20 minute drive of the strip. In Los Angeles it is $800-1500 depending on the recent trendiness of the neighborhood. Drop in Los Angeles is a killer until you get up to $40-80 at most places now I think. But food is free at $15-30 and up.

[NLfool]

LA plays much more aggressive IMO (from memory). I haven't played live in sometime though

[magoo]

A "pro" asking us?

[ QUOTE ]
I apologize in advance if this is not the appropriate place for this post but it seems like the place to get the most responses. I currently play poker professionally in LA and I would like to gain valuable opinions as to whether it would be more profitable to play in Los Angeles or Las Vegas. I would love to hear details about game quality, quality of competition, game availability, etc.. I would love to hear from posters in both cities. Thanks

[/ QUOTE ]

[Bishop22]

The rake isn't that much higher at 20-40 in LA than a time payment in Vegas. The 5-10 NL game at Commerce was great while I was there, but I have never played 5-10 in Vegas. Mid-limits were hit or miss while I was in LA even on the weekend. On Friday I found quite possibly the greatest game ever while on Saturday all four games were rock gardens. Vegas mid-limits are a little more consistent in their juicyness in my limited experience. AC is by far the worst if that helps...see my Loc. [img]/images/graemlins/frown.gif[/img] [img]/images/graemlins/confused.gif[/img] [img]/images/graemlins/frown.gif[/img]