Quote:
Originally Posted by TheStackHunter
I know it's better to have a live game going with a lot of money going into pots but if they're overall just really passive, isn't this a nice, low variance way of putting together a profit? I mean, at a certain stake level simply stealing the blinds repeatedly has to be profitable, no?
Games are still profitable but when everyone is really tight and really nitty/passive, your winrate will always be low even if you're best in the world....It's the nature of poker. Lower variance for sure, but you just can't make much at all no matter how well you play even if you're Phil Ivey etc in nitty games....If you're playing $5/$10+, sure the game might be big enough, but most of us don't play that high. Also it's very boring to play in nitty passive games.