Location: Ohio

Don't hate us because we can play online if we want to. I'd be mad too if I could only play live.

not at all the same

Another ignorant one liner by the man, the legend...

The downside is you have to live in Ohio.

One thing that I haven't seen mentioned is speed in relation to difficulty. The speed of the decisions made in live poker is far slower than online.

The multi tabling aspect also comes into play and just makes online even faster.

You can't just compare the amount of variables, because weighing say 8 variables in 15 seconds can be far more difficult than weighing 12 variables in 40 seconds.

I think we'd all agree that decision making in online poker would be easier if you were forced to think 30 seconds minimum about each decision. I think that is proof in point that the speed of online poker is a real part of the skill discussion.

Maybe a good comparison is playing chess by mail versus playing timed chess.

Live poker is actual poker. Online poker is some digital version of it.

Online guys can't beat live players.

Can live players beat online guys? No one knows. Their screen names are anonymous.


Online players should stop talking smack if they suck and can't win in real life.

It's true. They can't win live. They suck without an hud cheat sheet.

Can't tell you how many "top" internet guys I've seen dump live and crawl back to their digital slot machines loaded up with 50gb hand history databases.

Except you keep choosing to miss the part where everyone in the thread has stated that online players can and do go play live and win without much issue. Everything you just listed were reasons I gave where someone who is already winning online might chose to not switch over for a small increase in hourly. The bigger the increase in hourly the more likely they are to switch. If you're not a level account and are seriously posting, I'm not sure how you even ended up on a poker forum.

Daniel and his hair plugs?? lol

hes worth a lot of money.. how come he cant get better plugs??

probably a fat troll.

This is how every conversation with joeschmoe ends. Whether he's the sickest troll account we've ever seen or whatever else, you will get nowhere by arguing with him. Trust me on this one.

http://forumserver.twoplustwo.com/pr...gnore&u=324224

Surprised it hasn't come up the kind of person the average live pro vs. online pro is. Was actually having this discussion the other day with non-poker friend about difference between live pros (the decent ones not the ******ed nits who just sit and wait for the nuts) and online pros. Live pros are typically the gambler types, they're hustlers, typically have good social skills, but will not hesitate for one minute to angleshoot and sees taking advantage of the rules as part of the game. The average online pro is probably a bit socially awkward, and good at games, not gambling. A lot come from a video game background and typically excel at math, logic, and just games in general. They also typically have bigger egos and are more focused on being the best whereas a lot of live pros just care about money.

So it's not surprising the difference of opinion. The average live pro sees poker as a game of trickery and manipulation, whereas the average online pro sees poker as a game. So the live pro sees online poker and being able to use all their observational tools, social tools, etc. all become virtually useless and think online poker is easier than live poker. Meanwhile online pros see the lack of being able to gather data and perform analysis as easier as well. Note I'm talking about the game not the skill level of the players, everyone knows stake to stake live is a joke compared to online.


There are people making 200k/yr online from playing 1/2nl. Live even the best 1/2nl players are barely making enough to live. But since it's easier most guys I know that crush small/midstakes online play 5/10-25/50nl live. But even if your hourly is similar (probably a bit higher live if you're playing 10/25+ and aren't scared money), the variance live is just brutal. Say you're a 10/25 pro with a $150/hr expectation in that game. But it's not insanely uncommon to be playing pots of up to 20k. That's almost an entire month of playing full-time, and whether you win a flip or not determines that swing? Then of course there are the perks of being able to roll out of bed and play online poker in boxers vs. driving to a casino every day.

Also yeah it's pretty hilarious how delusional live mtt pros are about variance. The ones who have run good their entire lives think they're on the top of their game, the ones who had one period of run-good think that was their expectation and they've been perpetually running bad. And since it's virtually necessary to have a backing deal if you're making a living from live mtts it means you get a bunch of people who think they're way better at poker than they are having to put on a front in order to get a backer.

Obviously, online poker is tougher to beat than live poker, but that is due to the player pool and not because it is harder or more complicated than live poker. IMO online poker is like playing checkers vs (mostly) very good opponents, and live poker is like playing chess vs (mostly) bad opponents.

Live poker is more complicated than online poker because you have a much larger number of variables to take into account when making decisions (and I don't just mean live tells, although these are part of it). The fact that in many live games most of this is not necessary says more about the standard of players in live poker at the current moment than it does about the intrinsic nature of live vs online poker.

The highest quality, most richly nuanced poker is always going to be played live, rather than online. If you took the 6 best poker players in the world and put them all on a live poker table the standard of poker played would be higher than if they played each other online. They would have 10x the amount of variables to take into account in every decision. And they would have the time to process these variables properly.

Also, live games often play very, very deep - you very rarely see effective stacks of 1000 BBs in online games, but this is fairly standard in many live games.

I'm sorry to break it to you but, regardless of how many hours you've logged, your experience is not the norm.

On average, live professional poker players are better human beings than online poker professionals. Keep in mind, when compared to almost all other types of people both live and online poker professionals are definitely worse human beings so this is a moot point.

Basically, being a good human being means that you are nice and have a positive impact on the people and the world around you.

Cliffs: Live pros are the lesser of two evils when compared to online pros and neither online or live pros are doing anything worth commending (no matter how good/successful they are at either game), for the most part.

So you think non professional poker players are better people because???? I like to think I have a positive effect on most people I encounter.

This is laughable, clearly you're on a trolling high or you're completely biased. Live pros have such worse values than online pros on average, it's not even funny.

Fwiw, I started playing poker with the opposite assumption and was over time proven otherwise so many times that I just had to adjust my perception of reality; and yes, between personal experience, hearsay and other forms of info gathering, my sample size is statistically very significant.

Obviously you don't live PLO if you've only seen a 1000bb stack by 1 person at 1 table ever. $5/5 PLO games are often 100bb min and can be 500bb max.

I am not taking a stand on the chess/checker thing; however, the rule of thumb that is generally accepted by the players I know who beat both venues is:

Whatever an online player can crush, he can play 10x (or more) as high in a casino and win, up to a point.

Top 1-2 LH players beat 10-20 LH in the casino. Top .50-.100 NLH players beat 5-10 LH in the casino.

This is a general big-picture (bottom line) statement that discounts micro issues such as "tells," ability to adapt, and so on..

I can tell you this, live players will be in big trouble when they move to a four color deck.

Online poker is going to be tougher than live of the same stakes. This doesn't mean the game itself is any more complicated, just that the player pool is tougher. They are pretty similar overall but I'd argue that live is more complicated.

People like to dismiss live tells, but they are in fact an additional piece of information that can be useful. For example I get nervous as **** when bluffing, my hands/voice start shaking ect, so i fake being nervous when I'm not bluffing. Most people can't tell the difference but a very perceptive person would be able to.

I'm not saying that live tells are as close to important as things like betting patterns but they are still a part of the game and a part that online poker does not contain.

LOLOLOLOL

These same tells are also prevalent in players holding monster hands. What you are suggesting would only work if someone at the table knew that your nervous actions meant a bluff. Tells are player specific, which means you need to watch them play for a while before picking anything up. IMO, reading physical tells is the most overrated poker skill, at least at the lower stakes. I'm assuming at stakes that Dnegs plays at, the players are so experienced at poker and life that tells are almost non-existent.

bingo. There is more money to be made purely off of tells and body language in live poker than any online player can imagine.

Think about a good actor vs. a bad actor in a movie.. you can tell the difference right? You can tell the bad actor's acting isnt really geniune right? Its the same thing in live poker. 99% of people playing are bad actors and give themselves away.