Even at the micro stakes is zoom poker really as nitty and robotic as people say in comparison to regular tables? I've started playing around 2 month ago, put around 40k hands in at nl2 and 20k at nl5. Yes I've definitely seen the difference, I beat nl2 for around 5bb/100 when in the past I've beaten it for 20bb/100 over a big sample. Same with nl5, was doing well then hit a 12 buyin downswing and now am break even at 20k hands, very often the entire table is playing something like 16/13, and I dare even say decent, solid poker for this limit.

Thing is zoom suits my lifestyle perfectly. I usually have an hour or 2 max to put in a session and if I'm spending half an hour or so table selecting then I wouldn't be able to put in much volume. Zoom is allowing me to put in 4k hands/day whilst playing only around 3 hours split into smaller sessions.

I knew the games would be tougher and my winrate lower, but if its going to be such a ridiculous difference that my winrate is cut in half then maybe its just not worth it? Anyone have any similar comparisons who've played both zoom and regular? What is the difference like at nl10 and nl25?

No zoom is great imo. It's more gto'ish math focused than player by player based. i naturally play a very lag style and it works well against knits who only play premium hands. It kinda operates on a rock paper scissor dynamic where knit>medium>loose>knit. By medium i mean as it sounds halfway between knit and loose. And considering zoom is often predominantly knitty my loose style slots in nicely.

Just be prepared for some brutal variance.

Zoom is possibly the greatest thing ever to happen to cash games

currently down 16 buyins at nl5. that was right after winning 16 in around the same amount of hands.

Don't want to scare you, but that is not considered brutal

Next step is 100K breakeven stretch

In the micros, I think Zoom winrates probably are about half what they are on regular tables. You have to make trade-offs. More volume (and more lol starscoins) or a higher winrate.
Some outliers will find they actually do better on Zoom, however, due to a playing style that works well against regnits. If you're a regnit yourself, however, you're just pushing rake around as a breakeven grinder. That's not a lot of fun imo.

You shouldn't be getting 4k hands in 3 hours. And Zoom is the nuts. At 10NL+ I don't think there's much difference between z and r games wrt winrate

I am getting that playing 4 tables.

I 4 table and do not get 4K hands/hour. More like 2.8K-3K.
You must auto-pilot like god mode mate.

4 tables is 1k per hour. If you're getting more you must be playing like 16/11?

Kind of a non-question OP, you know your winrate and you know which game style you prefer. I tend to sound like a broken record about what format you 'should' play but if you're not paying your bills with poker, play whichever you want to play.

Zoom is the only style of cash game I play online, love it.

I play something like 20/17, definitely get a little over 1,300 hands/hour

sick internet then i guess lol

have you turned off all of the zoom animations? auto muck etc?

yeah, convinced it makes no difference. i do have nutworst internet though so i guess 1300 isn't unrealistic

haha agree so annoying