Live Poker Pros

[futuredoc85]

[ QUOTE ]
The online comment is ridiculous. I'm sure there are some live players who cannot beat online, but this isn't everyone and it can be for a variety of reasons. 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.

As far as the OP, the difficulties live obviously are tied to the decreased number of hands/hour, which leads to things like going two hours without hitting a board, or going a week straight when you're never up during a session, etc. The rake is also a key factor that needs to be paid attention to, and when it comes to underground venues, one must put a good deal of time into analyzing when said location may dry up, get raided, etc.

[/ QUOTE ]

i dont think he meant that anyone who plays live period cant beat online (i may be wrong tho im not him). i do think it would be a bit absurd for someone to try and grind out a living at 1/2 or 2/5 live full-time if they can supplement it w/ even just 10-15 hours making a lot more $/hr online.

[daveT]

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.

[futuredoc85]

[ 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 ]

umm im not entirely sure whether you're talking to me specifically or not but i dont play small stakes online. i play mid-stakes w/ some 10/20 mixed in when the games are good, and most of my live play this summer was 5/10 uncapped at the wynn. Id say 10/20 live is def. harder than 50NL online, but 5/10 live is pretty close to the 50NL/100NL difficulty range. I do agree that a lot of online players just get bored b/c they cant socialize and end up making bad plays, but most of the good online players i know have done very well in live games much bigger than the ones they play online. And fwiw no one who knows the rules is a fish at 1/2 live [img]/images/graemlins/tongue.gif[/img]

edit: but yeah if you cant beat 50NL online 5/10 live is obv not the answer to your problems.

edit 2: also of the people you meet at casinos telling you they are internet pros, id wager 90% of them (prob the same ones who suck) are just fish online as well

[daveT]

I wrote "pro" in quotes because I have never been able to stand these people (you know the ones).

It has been cliche on this forum that some (losing) poster comes on and asks what stakes OL are equal to in a B&M. It is offensive, and simply a justification to why they cannot beat their game, "because it is too hard," and apparently we have it so easy. I am attracted to OL because I can pop up a variety of games that are not regularly (or never) spread and play at any time of the day. The fish are everywhere, even OL. And a ton of fish doesn't make the game easier if you don't know how to play the game, no matter the stakes.

It was not a slam against you.

[futuredoc85]

[ QUOTE ]
I wrote "pro" in quotes because I have never been able to stand these people (you know the ones).

It has been cliche on this forum that some (losing) poster comes on and asks what stakes OL are equal to in a B&M. It is offensive, and simply a justification to why they cannot beat their game, "because it is too hard," and apparently we have it so easy. I am attracted to OL because I can pop up a variety of games that are not regularly (or never) spread and play at any time of the day. The fish are everywhere, even OL. And a ton of fish doesn't make the game easier if you don't know how to play the game, no matter the stakes.

It was not a slam against you.

[/ QUOTE ]

yeah i hear ya. fwiw when i say that live games are softer than online at = stakes it has nothing to do with the good players. Its a combination of a) 1/2 being the smallest game offered rather than .01/.02, which means even completely new players are going to play 1/2 or 2/5 and b) tourists who would never play online but got bored on a business trip etc. you know the guys who come to the table and have to trade baccarat chips before starting etc. that you cant usually find online.

[FireStorm]

The major aspect of players playing poorly live is the time/boredom factor. People simply don't like sitting there for 45 minutes at a time folding and watching others participate in the action. Often, live players travel a half hour up to 2 hours or more to get into a game, pay parking, food, hotel, toll, etc. It becomes damning when you get dealt 20 unplayable hands in a row; subsequently QT and KJ start to look a lot better after you've been at the table for six hours. You online guys might face stiffer competition in the form of multitabling pros, but it's a hell of a lot easier mentally/discipline oriented to run at 17 VPIP on the computer when you never have to sit and wait very long.

[futuredoc85]

dude ive played a decent amount live im not hating on you guys. im pretty much just saying that the fish are worse and they have more money, not that all of you are losing online players, that was the other dude.

[Vidocq]

It's all about game selection. That is part of being a pro.

[that_pope]

I'm a semi pro who supplements my income by playing live. I used to regularly play online as well, but quit Feb this year and just keep a few dollars in it to play when bored or drunk. But I do have an easy accessible casino 15 minutes from my house, so it is almost as convenient as online.

The benefits I enjoy live are getting to know people and their playing styles, which greatly increases my winrate, not just looking at a few numbers and making an assumption based on that. Also, having huge toweres of chips is just fun, and I find my mind wanders too much playing online lately, gotta have tv, music, something else going on, so tahts -EV.

BTW I play limit, not the all in game.

[Python49]

[ 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 ]
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 ]
this is far from the truth. still i'll admit i have a MUCH harder time beatin the .25/.50 @ fulltilt than i do beatin the 5/10 live anywhere in the world.

[/ QUOTE ]
This is pretty much what he meant, he just exaggerated it a bit to stress his point. But yeah, having a harder time to beat $50 nl online over 5/10nl live was pretty much his point.