Absolutely. If you have ever put in any serious volume as a winning player online, then you will have seen more hands than many live successful pros will ever see (if they havent played online). You will understand poker is about board textures, combinations, good/bad spots, ranges and not about whether Cowboy Hat, handlebar mustache guy twisted the tips of his mustache between his fingers before he went all in or not.

Being successful at live poker requires a somewhat different set of skills than online. There is certainly overlap, but to claim that the interpersonal/observational/psychological skills one uses in live poker are irrelevant completely misses the boat and doing so would in all likelihood doom most to be poor live players... literally and figuratively. In any case, if online poker can be reduced to the ability to analyze ranges and board textures versus particular playing styles, then online poker will be dead within a decade, by the time which computers will be able to do that sort of task far better than humans. So online players better brush up on their live skills if they’re going to want to be playing poker in the future.

Lol. I didn't make the rules this way, so don't fault me. Also, it's okay that younger people and online players play the game at a higher level.

What rules?

Your live tells don't work very well for figuring out the context of the situation lol.

The rules that state if you work hard in any given subject then you will be more knowledgeable, more well versed and better prepared than those who don't. I.E. Online poker player vs Live players.

I’m not sure why the context matters when you have a choice to make and you will either choose correctly and win or choose incorrectly and lose.
When it comes to live poker, I would rather be a master at reading body language accurately than be a master at calculating ranges. That doesn’t been the latter is useless. It just means one can be more important. The former can help you to make the actual correct decision. The latter can only help you make the correct mathematical decision. There is a world of difference.

That being said, reading “tells” is only a subset of the sorts of skills one must use when playing live poker as opposed to online. Dealing with actual real human beings as opposed to avatars can be a complicated thing. Not everyone is very good at it... even some technically proficient poker players. Perhaps most technically proficient poker players.

There is no such rule. At least not in the real world. It’s just a fable parents tell their kids so they can sleep at night. The parents and the kids. In any case, as I mentioned in my original post on this subject, this hard work you talk of and “preparation” that online players make is a doomed proposition eventually. It won’t be long before computers will be capable of doing all the hard work for you. At that point online poker will be reduced to a competition between software engineers.

https://gyazo.com/b8b50f4f03b2b8de05525c000a9534d5 (Discussion solved many years ago)


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LDmpAfdipKY

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1K1GqsddKBI

Last word. Not even going to attempt this any longer, but putting it out there for people who have a chance.

Live tournament are softer IMO. The gap is not as large as it use to be.

Right. Cause internet forums are definitive sources for solving debates. LOL.

Anyhow, the Ryan Fee video was interesting, but the thrust of his argument is that online players play more poker and take it more seriously, so they are better, and therefore online is tougher. I think that's pretty much the gist of your argument too. I haven't really heard anything differently.

I will allow that playing higher volume will make it easier for a player to learn various strategies. And participating in a particular environment more will make a smart person more adept at dealing with that environment. But that doesn't mean that person will suddenly be better at dealing with different environments. That takes other skills, which the player may have, but do not come from the fact that they have gotten good in their particular environment.

Virtually half of the Ryan Fee video is about how there are aspects to live play which are different, and in fact, "worse" than online... the variability, the larger bankroll requirements, etc. These do not sound like arguments for why live is easier. Rather the opposite. They sound like arguments for why online is better and live is actually harder.

And I'm not sure why you included DNeg's video in your "argument". He spent the whole time basically talking about how live and online have different skillsets that are key. That's pretty much the point I have been making. He did say that he thought a good online player would be more likely to be good playing live than a good live player would be playing online. That's a debate for another day, but even if true, doesn't say anything about whether online players are better live than live players.

A player can become good at playing online, or they can become good at playing live, or they can become good at playing both. If they do that, its not because one is easier than the other, but simply that they have mastered the skills required to succeed in each environment. For those considering whether they should play live or online, they should remember that their level of success will have little to do with which they choose and like all poker, be primarily based on their relative level of skill compared to their competitors. And, this of course, means all types of skills... not just knowing shoving ranges and equities.