Compare Live game to Internet

[KHALI]

I am going to Vegas in a few weeks. I have played very little live poker(occasional home games etc...) as I only started playing this past winter. I was curious as to how you would rank a live game at say the 2/4 to 4/8 level to the internet for game difficulty. What would be comparable levels 0.50/1.00 or lower? I play mostly no limit and feel comfortable with that game and plan on playing at the Excalibur(thanks to posts here) but the limit game is something I don't play a lot of but want to when I'm there. Any comments appreciated.

[NotMitch]

Just got back from AC, played from 2/4 to 5/10 and thought the games were easier (but very different) than the 1/2 and 2/4 shorthanded games I play on Stars.

[Al_Capone_Junior]

At the limits you are talking about there are idiot fish everywhere all day long every day in every casino.

Playing online is like trying to watch TV with the sound off and your eyes closed.

al

[daryn]

</font><blockquote><font class="small">In risposta di:</font><hr />
At the limits you are talking about there are idiot fish everywhere all day long every day in every casino.

Playing online is like trying to watch TV with the sound off and your eyes closed.

al

[/ QUOTE ]



i don't think playing online is as hindering as you make it out to be. i can't remember the last time i went to watch TV, turned the sound off, closed my eyes, and got paid a lot of money.

[nothumb]

[ QUOTE ]
Playing online is like trying to watch TV with the sound off and your eyes closed.


[/ QUOTE ]

Yeah, but it's still easy enough and the extra hands per hour, lower overhead etc. make it attractive to some of us. Plus it's easy to switch tables and keep notes on yourself and others.

Any given limit at B&amp;M is usually easier than the limit 1/2 or 1/4 of that size online.

NT

[Al_Capone_Junior]

[ QUOTE ]
Any given limit at B&amp;M is usually easier than the limit 1/2 or 1/4 of that size online.

[/ QUOTE ]

well put. totally true as well.

al

[nothumb]

[ QUOTE ]
totally true as well.


[/ QUOTE ]

Yeah, I was shocked by this when I started going to B&amp;M. I can see how higher limit players would really prefer it if this axiom holds true for say, 40/80! And I do like being in a cardroom; there's really no feeling like it.

Hard to say, but I think I'd probably still play online (mostly NL tourneys) even if I lived in Vegas.

NT

[DonWaade]

[ QUOTE ]
Quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Any given limit at B&amp;M is usually easier than the limit 1/2 or 1/4 of that size online.


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------



well put. totally true as well.


[/ QUOTE ]

I second that

[Al_Capone_Junior]

[ QUOTE ]
Hard to say, but I think I'd probably still play online (mostly NL tourneys) even if I lived in Vegas.


[/ QUOTE ]

I doubt this. It's just too good here.

Live it is also MUCH easier to get a line on your opponent's play. You can often do it in just an hour or sometimes less, and the lineups don't change as quickly as they do online, thus your decisions get better quicker.

al

[playerfl]

yes, with the current popularity of poker it is not uncommon to wait an hour or more to get a table in some places, and once you get seated you intend to stay a while.

[nothumb]

I'm not saying I wouldn't spend most of my time in the casino. The prospect makes me salivate. I'm just saying that there are certain perks to each and I would probably keep my Party roll intact.

Particularly NL SNG's. Playing 20+2 or 30+3 SNG's is a great source of experience and income for me. A good run in these events beefs you up like nothing else, and I've been improving my NL tourney game by leaps and bounds. I still do a lot better in the SNG's than MTT's, though, and I don't know of a comparable live game (unless I organize it myself, which I have done on occasion).

That said, I think living in Vegas full-time, or within a half hour of any casino, I would play a lot of ring games and move up to 10/20 or 20/40 to make it worth my time. I enjoy playing at a live table and doing all the things you mention. I'm just saying that, where my game is now, I'd probably keep a modem in the house.

Having never been in your position, however, I might just not know what it's like. But you still sit in front of the box every now and then, right? /images/graemlins/wink.gif

NT

[Oblivious]

every good player should put in a lot of time getting good at both live and online games. there are pros and cons to both.

[MrBlini]

My general rule of thumb is double to triple the limits for live play:

.5/1 to 1/2 online -&gt; 1-3 to 3/6 live
2/4 online -&gt; 4/8 to 5/10 with a kill live
3/6 or 5/10 online -&gt; 6/12 to 10/20 live

This rule of thumb did not originate with me. I do not claim credit, nor can I provide references. It just is.

Edit: nor did I read nothumb's post in this very thread. Doh! Well, it was worth a bump. On my head.

[Luv2DriveTT]

[ QUOTE ]

.5/1 to 1/2 online -&gt; 1-3 to 3/6 live
2/4 online -&gt; 4/8 to 5/10 with a kill live
3/6 or 5/10 online -&gt; 6/12 to 10/20 live

[/ QUOTE ]

Interesting. I have never played in a kill game before (although I know how its played, just never did it yet). Why do you reccomend 5-10 w/kill vs 5-10 w/o kill?

[The Armchair]

I don't think it's a recommendation, per se. I think that 5/10 kill is a lot looser/aggressive than 5/10, because there are usually maniacs trying to build a pot so that the next is a kill pot. But that's all conjecture on my part.

[nothumb]

5/10 with a kill really just loosens up the game, as people have mentioned. It should affect your bankroll considerations as much as your actual strategy. I liked playing a kill game because people make more mistakes, trying to create or drag big pots. If you are timid or hate changing gears you will probably not enjoy a kill.

NT

[MrBlini]

I listed the 5/10 with a kill because I have experience at 5/10 with a kill. It averages about 7/14 or 8/16, but plays like 5/10.