I hope this is the appropriate place for this thread.

I have only recently become interested in online play, having left Southern California for New York several months back. My recollection of the way players in brick and mortar casinos described internet play was as the loosest games on earth where you were sure to be chased to the river more often than not. Having begun railing FTP cash games, however, I'm finding the tightest play I've ever seen in my life. Has available software made online play a game played largely PF? I've been looking for a couple of weeks, and I don't see what the live players used to complain about. I'd appreciate any help understanding what I'm seeing on all levels of nlh at least at FTP. Thanks.

it's been like that since the UIGEA

I think your B&M players were a little confused. While online has become a lot tougher in the last few years, I think it's been known to be much tougher than B&M play for a lot longer than that.

What about tightening up made it the appropriate response to UIGEA? Thanks.

Internet play has always been better at a given stake than live play.

Meaning more good players...which is bad?

Online .25 .50 no limit = 100 - 200 no limit live, if not higher as far as skill goes, imo. And I used to play only live.

I think the fish have had a tougher time depositing money than they used to, so less fish depositing meant more competent players who played a bit tighter.

Correct i guess. Less contributors than there used to be, so tougher games now, but still beatable if you play well.

I sure hope this is a joke. I play a lot of 5-10 and 10-20 NL live, and mostly play 1-2 and 2-4 NL online, and I think those games are comparable, but saying .25-.50 online is like 100-200 live, well you've gotta be leveling here. I think if you can beat .25-.50NL online, as long as the money doesnt bother you, then you can probably do ok in a 1-2 live NL game.

Wait, internet .25/.50 games are as tough as live $100/$200? There's no reason for me not to drag my ass 3 hours to Atlantic City, that being the case! Like I need to be playing Barry Greenstein for .25/.50?

I think he meant 1.00-2.00nl, which is true

I'm not sure I'm understanding why only fish would be having a tougher time depositing.

As to games being beatable if you're good: I'm all for beatable, though much prefer soft. Challenges are okay, easy cash is better...infinitely so.

It's tougher for all Americans, but good players who make money from the game are much more willing to get past the hurdles than the casual fish are, of course.

I kinda misrepresnted it. I play at Lucky chances and Artichoke Joes. Chances lowest buy in is $200. The players @ Stars $25 buy in are usually better, imo. B&M players totally blow. Go to Tahoe and the players are worse.

Jesus, don't give me a friggin' heart attack!

Does anyone here attribute better internet play to software? I mean, without notes to refer to and all the sophisticated graphs and s**t for understanding in an instant how people play, do the guys who mostly play internet simply rule all live play when they go to Vegas, AC, or wherever? Thanks.

The real reason games are tight is multitabling.

Preflop play tight or loose, it doesn't matter as much as you might think, high winrates can be achieved with either. I know people who play 25% of their hands in full ring and do great, and the same for some people who play 10%.

All it takes is some sizing and postflop adjustments and any degree of looseness between 10% and 30% can be equally valid in a full ring game.

The reason most players go for the low end of that spectrum is because it makes multitabling easier to be playing fewer hands, and if the winrate is the same either way, might as well play fewer hands so you can add more tables.

Sure, that too. UIGEA, HUDs, multi-tablers, short stackers, coaches, books, training videos...lots of reasons for it.

Sounds like you could do with some catching up...lot of threads on all these issues already, and play getting tight is sort of old news.

It's a factor.

I think the biggest factor, though, is that online you can play for ridiculously small stakes and a bunch of the people who are playing just for kicks can play .01/.02 or the like rather than 1/2.

Even without software, players online are better, more aggressive, and much tighter vs live players. I've won huge pots in live games where played out, I generally would NOT have won online because the live players were limping in with such inferior holdings.

If live play was comparable to online play, you wouldn't see any coaches prostituting their services or training sites because all you'd have to do is play is play ABC poker and profit

+1 on multitabling making games tighter for someone who has a clue playing poker. But, what's the % of the fish that multitable? That would be interesting to know.

This thread is me catching up.

Live 30 hands/hr ... online 70 ... add to that the possibility of playing more than one table and there you have it .. if online wasn't tougher then you'd have sick hourly winrates online

rakeback can easily go 20-40$/hr at small stakes ... then comes the actual winrate on top

Small stakes online like 0.5-1nl or 1-2nl may be small, but it's not small money we are talking about, why'd you expect it to be softer than live play ?

See original post.

With a 2+2 handle like that I would have assumed that you would love it spandex tight