Live Poker Pros

[FireStorm]

Not sure why I'm labeled a recreational player because I described the point of not enjoying playing online. Plenty of people such as myself and those similar to myself play almost exclusively live as pros or semi-pros for these reasons. You underestimate the possible winrates live, believe me. I'm simply trying to say that despite 2p2's obsession with it, online multitabling isn't for everyone.

[MrMore]

[ QUOTE ]
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.

[/ QUOTE ]

LOL. You can't play ANY hands of poker online. None. The game can't be played online. You can only play miniature golf, I mean, online poker, online. Why is that so hard for online donks to understand?

And to the poster who said he saw TV pros who were horrible, uh, they were "TV" pros. Not real pros. You don't know the names of most pros. You only know the names of celebudonks, who, yes, suck. We live pros love them in our games, too. Just like we love you mini-golf "pros."

[futuredoc85]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
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.

[/ QUOTE ]

LOL. You can't play ANY hands of poker online. None. The game can't be played online. You can only play miniature golf, I mean, online poker, online. Why is that so hard for online donks to understand?

And to the poster who said he saw TV pros who were horrible, uh, they were "TV" pros. Not real pros. You don't know the names of most pros. You only know the names of celebudonks, who, yes, suck. We live pros love them in our games, too. Just like we love you mini-golf "pros."

[/ QUOTE ]

umm if you think the actual play of the game is THAT different its probably because you arent very good and just try to read souls all the time.

[Diana Ross Fan]

[ QUOTE ]
Not sure why I'm labeled a recreational player because I described the point of not enjoying playing online. Plenty of people such as myself and those similar to myself play almost exclusively live as pros or semi-pros for these reasons. You underestimate the possible winrates live, believe me. I'm simply trying to say that despite 2p2's obsession with it, online multitabling isn't for everyone.

[/ QUOTE ]

We're very lucky Firestorm, because all of these online pros would crush the live 5/10 nl game beacuse it is so easy. Thank God they are content to 5-table .50/1

[Python49]

[ QUOTE ]
We're very lucky Firestorm, because all of these online pros would crush the live 5/10 nl game beacuse it is so easy. Thank God they are content to 5-table .50/1

[/ QUOTE ]
Well, I see where this is going and people that play live might be getting offended. I wasn't speaking for all live pros, I was just mainly saying that in my experience nearly all the live games i've played in have been soft and the regulars there nits. Also has been the experience of everyone else I know. Online players that you call golf players have been doing very well in the tournament scene and cash games. Even some live pros like Nick Schulman and Jdags have said they don't even play high stakes online anymore cuz its alot tougher. *shrug*

[Miamipuck]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
We're very lucky Firestorm, because all of these online pros would crush the live 5/10 nl game beacuse it is so easy. Thank God they are content to 5-table .50/1

[/ QUOTE ]
Well, I see where this is going and people that play live might be getting offended. I wasn't speaking for all live pros, I was just mainly saying that in my experience nearly all the live games i've played in have been soft and the regulars there nits. Also has been the experience of everyone else I know. Online players that you call golf players have been doing very well in the tournament scene and cash games. Even some live pros like Nick Schulman and Jdags have said they don't even play high stakes online anymore cuz its alot tougher. *shrug*

[/ QUOTE ]

I play live. Why? Certain aspects of it make it a lot more enjoyable to me than online play. Plus a room full of donkeys is only 15 minutes away.


It is easier than online play to be sure, I do not think anyone would dispute that. Generally most online have read a book or two for example. I just do not see why every thread about who plays exclusively live has to become a pissing match.

If you are an observant regular winner live, it is more than reasonable to think said person can become a winning online player. Most of the tendencies that help me live also helped me online (i.e betting patterns and such).

Anyway, I play 1-2 NL(yes I am a disciplined nit as it is 100 max game and not deep stacked) live and was a winning player pretty much in all forms of online play. I just enjoy live and never play online any longer since the gaming act ( not too mention I staked a person that lost almost my entire online roll but that is another story). I played tourny's and SNG's online but not live for rake and structure reasons.

To sum up I have not played much online in the last year and in general there are now better players online than live. I can not dispute that. But so what?

[FireStorm]

Python, he and I make sarcastic comments like that because of all the online players on this site who can't wait to talk about how great they are at .50-$1 NL online and how much everyone sucks live. We wouldn't care if this wasn't an everyday-of-the-week 2p2 notion. It's considered to be some sort of foregone conclusion on this site that online players are the greatest alive because 15% of you have had three live sessions where you saw someone overplay 99, and thus all live players SUCKKKKKKKK!!!!! For all those seven tablers who think it's so easy, try playing AJs UTG+2 in a full ring live 5/5 NL game. How about light three betting after a pop to $25 and three callers? GL with this play when you're on the real felt instead of Pokertracker number crunching.

[ChadK]

Could we get a mod to rename this thread the online vs. live players pissing contest.

[ChadK]

Poker is a very diverse game. You can be a great stud player but not good at holdem. The same goes for online or live, some players are good at one but not the other. There are differances and whichever suits you best play that. There is no reson to hate people that specialize in one form of poker. The truly great player strive to become above average/winning at many forms of poker. Now cant we all just get along.

[futuredoc85]

[ QUOTE ]
Python, he and I make sarcastic comments like that because of all the online players on this site who can't wait to talk about how great they are at .50-$1 NL online and how much everyone sucks live. We wouldn't care if this wasn't an everyday-of-the-week 2p2 notion. It's considered to be some sort of foregone conclusion on this site that online players are the greatest alive because 15% of you have had three live sessions where you saw someone overplay 99, and thus all live players SUCKKKKKKKK!!!!! For all those seven tablers who think it's so easy, try playing AJs UTG+2 in a full ring live 5/5 NL game. How about light three betting after a pop to $25 and three callers? GL with this play when you're on the real felt instead of Pokertracker number crunching.

[/ QUOTE ]

umm ive read some of your strategy posts and agreed w/ most of them. I would suspect you know as well as i do that a good poker player is going to win whether its live or online. There are more good players online and the huge fish generally play lower stakes online than they do live, this makes live games softer. It doesnt mean that someone who only plays live is bad at poker. It doesnt even mean that every winning player at .5/1 could beat 5/10 live. But im pretty sure the % of online pros playing .5/1 and 1/2 that could beat 5/10 live soundly is higher than the % of live pros playing 5/10 and lower that could beat .5/1 and 1/2 online. Why does the fact that live games are softer than online games have to be taken as a personal attack on winning live players? You guys arent the reason the games are so soft.