I am a mediocre player by online play standards. I am a break-even player at the lowest micros online.

Recently I have played at 2/2 tables in casinos a total of 7 or 8 times, staying around 6 to 8 hours every time and I never had a losing day. I have made around 1000€ in total. Of course I cannot have the confidence yet to think I am better than average, but I'm starting to suspect it. Basically the only thing that I do is play very nitty, observe what the others are doing, almost never limp, move seat to the left of the maniacs and remember to keep the pot small with a small hand. That's about it. Even a mediocre player like me who play very tight is bound to make a profit against the average looser casino player.

The difference in toughness between the online play and the casino is huge and I've been wondering why decent online players don't just play in casinos for a much better profit.

I play in a big, touristic, european city by the way (not London).

You said everything that's already very known facts. Live Poker, especially 1/2 NL or 1/3 NL are the equivalent of playing against chimpanzees.

Probably because of slow pace.

That's not nice to call Rob's mum a chimpanzee. So what if she is a bit more hairy than your average lady.

40hrs of live play is not much of a sample size

Whats a good sample size for live? 200hours?

Sample size of maybe 1500 hands may not be enough to say you have conquered poker.

It's not always about sample size. Sometimes you just know that the players are giving away their money, making plays that make no sense, over-calls, bad folds and often wearing their hole cards on their foreheads.

There is a location or two where I am almost undefeated (small sample size) but making something like $80-90 an hour after travel, food and gas expenses (2/5 NL). And it's not because I had sets over sets or AA vs KK.

You just get paid in spots that you know you will not pay off if the cards/situation were reversed.

no point playing live poker now, OP just killed the game

RIP

i've heard you need about 100k hands to know if you're a winning player, live that takes about a million hours

Jesus you beats brags variance bums cant math for a cent.

You get 13.7 hands every 26 minutes, so multiply those 2 together and carry over the 28 to divide it all by 3 to give you a number which needs to have a permutation of 5 given the addition of the standard deviation of 2.02 gives us a nice round answer of:

OP CRUSHERS LIVE POKES

yeah because every hand live takes 10 hours...

I've done the math guys, just believe me

also, you guys forgot to take the triple range merge integral over value space

Confirm mmmKay's math is correct.

Thats a different equation I am sure, it includes the use of tangent to find the hypotenuse of hours squared correct?

EDIT - Found out why Mr.Mmmmkay thinks it takes 1 million hours for 100k hands.

Some mod moved the thread but I was not bragging, I am genuinely curious. I said I was mediocre and I am mediocre.

My best guess is that these guys in the casino have watched too many videos of Tom Dwan playing J2s or whatever. They only forgot the part where they are not Tom Dwan. I, on the other hand, will fold something like JTs UTG every time. Nitty, mediocre, bland? Absolutely. But it works.

I have to say though, if I only make a couple of hundred $/month playing online, the training I get from it turns out to be gold when playing live.

Where was it moved from OP?

From "live casino poker". It's no big deal, I wanted your input and I got it.

Maybe you should have posted in the beginner ? thread? Dunno, people see a low post count and immediately call bs. Can't blame em though since it is a frequent occurrence. shrugz.

I doubt you'll be making that after ~50 sessions of 6-8 hours play. There are BIG downswings in that game

OP see that light at the end of the tunnel? That's the live casino poker V train coming right at you. But if you are ready you will get thru it just fine. It won't be as much fun as you are having now, but you can deal with it OK.

I once put a quarter in a slot machine and won $100.

that's roughly 1hand:2minutes, which i think is somewhat generous. i betchu he's played maybe 1300 at most, which is an infinitesimally small sample size