online tougher than B&M???

[Palomino]

I honestly do so much better online than I do live. Although I completely agree that online players are much better on average than live players. I also play a lot more online so it could also just be variance. Live players are horrible, but if you aren't catching cards it's hard to beat the game when there are 6-7 players/flop. However, if you do catch cards you will win WAY more money live than online.

[HuskerFan85]

not sure, I ain't there yet. There are ways around it though with different payment options available and going through third parties, etc.

[HuskerFan85]

so what youre sayng is because you're playing more hands/hour that it offsets the smaller profit you get each hand? I hear ya that its hard to catch when practically the whole table wants to see the flop and its not uncommon to see a constant family pot in B&M.AA doesn't do so well against that many people, but if you think about it... the sheer amount of the pot gives more than enough of the correct odds and making it profitable. I think this is why B&M play is more profitable in general- alot of people don't grasp the patience factor in correct play because theres alot less hands being dealt so people tend to make stupid mistakes out of boredom and " the need to go home a winner" that night.

[Skallagrim]

I play poker to win because I have a competetive nature, but I dont play to make money per se - I play for fun. That said, my experience is that, at least at present, one finds far more bad players at live play AT LEAST AT TOURIST TYPE CASINOS. In places like California (where I have never been) I suspect that most players are "regulars" and are pretty good. I find that generally to be true online too these days (post UIGEA). But when I travel to Vegas, AC, or Foxwwods, I am always happy to see the large percentage of players who are there just for the thrill, have little experience, and think poker is just another form of gambling.

[NL__Fool]

[ QUOTE ]
so what youre sayng is because you're playing more hands/hour that it offsets the smaller profit you get each hand?

[/ QUOTE ]

Yes

I 14 table NL100. I am playing about 950-1000 hands per hour

A winrate of 3 PTBB/100 will make about $60/Hour
A winrate of 4 PTBB/100 will make about $80/Hour
A winrate of 5 PTBB/100 will make about $100/hour

Add rakeback or Stars Supernove FPP points for Cash at Supernova level and you can add another $20/hour on top of your winnings.

How much can you make at 1-2 NL in the casino? Not that much

[Backspin20]

Live games are much looser period.
The problem I seem to be having lately is I play too tight live.

exp hand
I was at the Hilton in AC I call a preflop raise ($10)with AQs one off the button

4 players for $10 I have position on all
flop Kd Jd 4s
its checked around and I check behind them
turn 10d
Kd Jd 4s 10d
first to act goes all in for $83 he was very lose and I would have call him but the next player called quickly so I mucked
river Ah
Kd Jd 4s 10d Ah

first player has 44 for a set
the lady that made the call has AK

my point is you would never even think about this call online but in AC I defiantly pondered it. To change modes from playing online three days stright to going to loose AC has been a challange

[JayA]

Online is rigged. Live isn't rigged yet. /end rant

[betgo]

Live games are much softer than online games at the same stakes, but you get twice as many hands per hour and can play a zillion tables.

Low stakes limit and no limit holdem games are filled with multitabling ABC weak/tight grinders. A live 60/120 limit holdem game is looser than an online 1/2 limit holdem game, but it probably isn't softer.

Live NLHE games tend to be wild. Online NLHE games are much tighter and the play is better than live, but they are not that tough. In general, you can beat live limit and no limit holdem games mainly by just playing solidly, but that doesn't work online.

In live tournaments the play is actually a little tighter than online, but the players tend to be lacking in aggression and weak/tight.

You can't 6-table online stud, and there is less difference in style and level of play between online and live, but still the level of online play at a certain stakes is probably equivalent to that of 5 x higher stakes live.

[augie_]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
3/6 live plays like a .50/1 online game

[/ QUOTE ]

More like .5/.10 in my experience, but of course your mileage may vary.

I'm a recreational player, internet poker boom guy who first played on the internet 5 years ago. With all the crazy nonsense going on now in the US I went to a B&M cardroom for the first time in my life late last year in Tunica which is close to where I live. I barely ever play a hand online anymore, there really is no need too. If the Republicans have their way and totally wipe out internet poker (and internet freedom) I can honestly say I won't miss internet poker one bit - which is something I never thought I would think.

[/ QUOTE ]

you will if you sit in a cardroom for long enough!

[Percula]

I consider myself more of a live player than online player despite having nearly 2M hands in my PTDBs over the last couple of years, but online is where the money is at.

To have a comparable hourly rate compared to say a decent winning mid-stakes NL player that can grind 4-8 tables, you would have to be playing 10/20NL live at a bare minimum, likely 20/40NL or 25/50NL would have a better shot. Frankly you are not going to find that high of a game except in a couple of places, one of which you live in now...

Also be careful of all the "live is easy" that you will hear. As a general rule, this is correct, but it is also true that you will run into much better players live than you might think you would...