I'm confused...can't all of this be nullified by wearing sunglasses?

Phil Ivey made $20 million online by being a math player?

This is like XBOX FIFA 2011 players telling real life FIFA players that they'll beat them in a game of FIFA and vice versa. It may be true, but which group of 'players' actually matters?

^^^

how can anyone be this stupid

oh god this.... :/

If anyone was an outstanding live player (before BF) they would realize how much they could win online and adjust their game and do so. Also although there may be an occasional fish/whale/banker live I would think a "soul reader" would have a hard time getting much serious action live. Except from other outstanding live players. The guys who play mega stakes live all know each other and don't even try to "soul read" each other.

hey look, someone stupider than the op!!

I haven't actually lol'd while reading 2+2 in a while (mostly been reading depressing black friday stuff) but this made me lol so loud that my wife shhhh'd me from the other room (she's watching a movie)

Since most people when they talk about live poker, they're referring to "full ring cash" I'd like to say this.

HU online players > 6max online players > online full ring players > live full ring players

I was thinking the EXACT same thing, other than the "Started in 2008" part. Last week, I was playing 5-10 at Rio, and Gabe sat to my left,( I didn't know who he was at the time). Within 15 minutes he was already raise/4betting/cbet/ shoving turn bottom pair, inflating the living crap out of pots constantly with little regard for hand values or ranges, and losing ~5k in the span of 2 hours, and he and I got into the "Online vs live" discussion and I obv pwned him. He even pulled out the "I have a higher cashing % than anyone in poker" line, as well as most of the lines we have seen in this thread. He said he would play any online player HUNL or PLO for 50k, and I told him I have at least 10 different friends I can call that could be there within the hour. Then he said, ok, how about for 250k, told him I have #'s for that too, and that I have a couple numbers if he wanted to play for multiple millions, should he try to one-up again. Strangely enough, he demurred from there. Then he got into the whole "cards than can change value" theory, even showing me online info on a patent. Seems like the standard guy who is decent at poker, but doesn't understand that you don't always win, and when you lose it's not always rigged. Probably cashed big in a few events, then thought he played for a living, without understanding what being a professional poker player is all about. Seemed to not understand metagame at all either (while he was playing super aggro, a guy with like $850 on the table 5-bet him AI with AJo and cracked his JJ, and GC couldn't understand why he did it.) Was funny also how he was talking to me like I was some kid who doesn't know anything about the history of poker, or even online poker, as I'm almost 7 years older than him and likely have forgotten more about the history of poker than he'll ever know(I have like 350 books on poker, gambling and Vegas). After he busted, he left muttering how no one on the face of the earth runs worse than him, and the entire table had a good chuckle.

Like I said, seems a decent enough guy, but definitely a conspiracy theorist that is kidding himself, and likely ONLY himself).

I'd tend to disagree, I think the skill level is far more linear among online players, (and I've been/am all three) at top skill levels. I have also seen guys who crush HU not be able to transition well to SH or Ring, and vice versa. Seems to me your comment is like saying the best QB is more skilled than the best WR, who in turn is more skilled than the best RB. But one thing we can agree on, is that winning online players are far better than their live counterparts in general.

Lol. You don't have $10000.

OP was in between Daliman and myself when playing 5-10 at the Rio.

OP seemed to me like he didn't have a good handle on what poker is about. Reminded me a lot of old school players saying online is rigged etc.

I'd be interested in hearing some thoughts on exactly what "live reads" are worth. Suppose you take two online players with a solid grasp of NLHE fundamentals, and a good understanding of advanced strategy on top of that. Both are winners online and have made the necessary strategic adjustments to win in live poker as well. Both players are good at concealing their physical tells. But, only one of the two has become an expert tell reader at live poker, with the other being largely oblivious to the tells given off by his opponents at the table. How much more is the expert tell reader going to make per hour than the guy with no tell reading ability? If the non-reader is good enough to make, say, $350/hour at 25/50, how much is the tell reading expert going to make, given that his skills are otherwise on par with those of the non-reader? $400? $500? Less? More?

I think the entire point is that nobody has any idea and can only offer (almost entirely unfounded) opinions.

What a terrible debate...

Why does anyone take these debates seriously?

Poker 100% physical tells and soul reads.
I take it you donate at your local 1-2 game.

I seriously wish I could restrain myself from clicking on and reading pages of posts for the lols. I waste so much time doing this. Its not even because I'm seriously considering the argument. It's just to witness top-level-******-reasoning. And its funny.

There is no doubt online players have revolutionised the way the game is played. But any live player that can incorporate some of the deductive logic and math used by top online players, they will be tough to beat.

Obviously the math is a strong area of online players and how they approach the game but sometimes it is way over considered. Look at Hewitt tonight, he said in his interview the call was all about the math for him.

However if he took a step back to analyse the scenario he would have seen an older player who had been nitting it up, shove over an opening raise of a fairly tight player on the bubble of the November 9. KQ then becomes an easy laydown vs his range but he thought he had the right price to call and was categorically wrong to anyone that was watching.

No doubt though that the online players have a huge advantage if they can combine the best qualities of both.

No u fail sir

He means on Zynga Poker. He can soul read the avatars. Zygna keeps ignoring his petition to open play money "live" Zynga poker rooms.

obviously there is a huge fallacy in your argument. you claim that a pure online player could never be the best in the world. if he wanted to prove that he was he would have to play live according to you. ( i take it over a significant number of hands) if he does this succesfully like durr has, then you will just claim that ofcourse it is possible to cross over if you have a good feel for the game and that they have adapted. however, they are no longer a pure online player, hence it does not count. lol.

surely the best players in the world would be those that can play well both live and online, thereby maximising the ways they can make money, find action etc. I am pretty sure the players who rely on these so called "soulreads" would be absolutely atrocious online.
btw. i am sure i am sure that the live players you think are so great at reading tells get a lot more information from the line their opponent took(why is he betting here, it doen't makes sense etc) then they do fromsome kind of physical tell. seems online players should be better at this.

you can read people online to....

best female player doesn't know simple math.

you are retarted

Bingo