Can't understand why I don't do well online (long)

[mike4bmp]

I normally play live 3/6 and 4/8 at local cardrooms in the Seattle area. But about 6 or 7 months ago I gave some serious thought about playing online....so I loaded a few sites and started playing at the micro-level. At first I didn't notice anything unusual while playing except that there are a number of players that play 3 or 4 games at the same time. I played at the .25/.5 level at first and then moved up to the .5/1 after I ground up about $400.

Then I started losing...nothing unusual at first. I thought I might just be in a losing streak...but after about a month of losing (little by little I might add) I began to notice that nothing I did was allowing me to win.

At first I tried to apply SSHE textbook style plays...assuming that everyone that played online were super weak...but then I noticed that there were some micro players that were quite sophisticated. So I tried adjusting my play especially when there were more than one player at the table that I had spent a considerable amount of time playing against in the past. I have played quite a bit in live games...and although I may not be the best I feel that I play decently and do not think that I have any major leaks in my game.

Also,I began to realize that I suffer a higher percentage of beats online than I do playing live. The bad players don't seem to play any better than bad players at the B&M...but I can literally suffer heartbreak after agonizing heartbreak from the same players for days....even after jumping from table to table trying to find a profitable situation....and it never fails that when I do find a table that seems good and I do win a little I will invariably get into a hand where I am a big favorite and will lose and go under...and then remain under for the rest of the session.
I am not whining about beats here...I am actually making the observation that it seems that the beats occur way too often online...it really makes is seem like the strength of quality hands are relative...

I can't seem to figure it out.....
Does the random card generator actually shuffle the cards in a realistic manner? I know this might sound like a stooopid question...but for instance I have never seen as many people flopping quads in live games as I have seen online...It seems like at least one or two people get quads in a 6 hour session online...but I can go months without seeing quads being hit in a B&M....
Flopping the nut flush is another one...frequency seems quite high....occurrences of multiple players holding big pairs...it seems like everytime someone has KK One person will have QQ and another will have AA...I mean this happens ALOT!...With all of this said...I am not implying that the cards never work out for me because they do....its just that all of this just doesn't seem very realistic.

Other things that seem to make the games harder:
1. Hit and run players...people that come in and win a couple of huge pots and then get out...its like they take all the money and run

2. Games can be extremely tight...I always find it amusing to see a .5/1 game where the average number of players to the flop is 2 to 3...whereas in a local live 4/8 game I am accustom to seeing 5 to 6 players per flop.

3. Games can break extremely quickly...it has happened frequently where I will finally find a profitable table/situation...and then one person will leave...then two more...and then before I know it there is three people left at the table with one sitting out.

4. You tend to tilt or get angry more when playing online...I have pretty good control of my temper while playing poker...especially when I am playing live...but I can get extremely upset when being sucked out on online....nothing really different with the beat that I would experience in live play otherwise...but maybe the lack of something physical...something other than a blinking screen name to react to that drives me crazy.

Finally, tournaments are much harder to beat online...it goes without saying that yes the tournament fields are much much larger online than at a local cardroom or casino...but the number of bad NL players online makes me scratch my head and wonder why it is that GOOD players can't win very often...or even win at all online. I refuse to believe that most online tournament players play well...I will never accept this notion...I have seen too many players calling someone's all in bet preflop that has close to the same chip stack as their opponent only to flip over K7o...to catch a 7 on the turn eliminating their opponent who held an AKs....but it is these types of players that build huge chip stacks and go the final table and will quite often win...its so frustrating to invest $50 to play for a $20K prize pool and find yourself at a table where you have to gamble more than use skill...

Is collusion a big factor in the limit games online?...pokerbots?...compromising software hacking programs? Do I suck so bad that I can't beat .5/1 holdem even though I devote an enormous amount of time studying and analyzing the game?
All of this has been bugging the [censored] out of me....last week I pulled money out of all my accounts...I can't seem to handle it...not emotionally but psychologically...it starting to make me feel like I am an inferior player...criticizing your own game I believe is good...but so is having a little confidence...but since starting online play my confidence has been taxed...and I can see it in my live play now as well...I'm more hesitant...more willing to give credit for hands...I'm easier to bluff now I suppose...

So here's my rant...my observations of online poker...I just wanted to see what you guys think.
Thanks for reading through this...
-Mike /images/graemlins/laugh.gif

[Aytumious]

It's rigged. Either that, or you suck.

[xxx]

Some of the things working against you when you talk about moving from BM to online:

1) The players are better online
2) The rake at micro limits is bigger proportionately
3) The games are faster, this increasing your hourly swings
4) Tells are limited online
5) Players take much better notes online

[Perseus]

I had a streak of 20 SnG's at the WSOP this year where I didn't cash, and in something like 16 of them I went in as a better than 60% favorite and lost.

My point is, these things happen live just as much as online. Those twenty SnG's took over a week to play live, but I could have done it within 1-2 days online.

Pair over pair, yes, but there was a lot of Ak losing to AJ on the river, just as you describe. As Ed Miller says, to enjoy poker you have to enjoy the losing as well as the winning. This stuff happens live too, it just happens at a much slower pace.

There are much worse players live because it is ten times easier to get a total donk to sit down at a live table then to TRUST the online sites enought to invest there money onto an online site. Many recreational players won't do this.

But you can still beat the low limits online. It took me up to a year for to win a reasonable amount, consistently on a monthly basis. It also took me about a year to stop myself from tilting and understand the psychology part of winning poker.

Work on your game and things will take care of itself.

Good Luck

[steamboatin]

Many of the issues raised in your post can be answered easily when you take into consideration the fact that you are seeing a lot more hands online. A six hour session could be an equal number of hands as a month at a B&M, depending, of course, upon how many hours you play live poker per month.

Playing online is different than playing at a B&M and I know you won't like this answer, but it is not rigged and it is your fault that you don't win.

[mike4bmp]

Are most of these replies from online players?
I am not knocking online play...so don't get me wrong...it just seems like you have to put in an extraordinary amount of time to start to gain a profit...from what you guys are saying....
Although it may be my fault that I am losing which I still feel is hard to believe....do you think it could be I am not putting enough time at the tables?...do I need to play multiple tables like some of the other players?...
Is the limit that I am playing at too small?....

Everything you guys have said makes sense but what about tournament play....how can you not get rewarded for proper play? I don't mind losing...but I do mind losing ALL THE TIME.
I don't know....still not convinced...

[steamboatin]

I play live at least two days a week, more if my schedule allows. I play online everyday.

tournaments have the highest variance of all. I understand excactly what you are talking about because I quit playing online for about 6 months and was not ever going to redeposit. Pacific poker gave me $10 free and I started playing microlimits and built t up from there.

I did not understand why I could go play live and win but always lost playing online. The answer is I was way to loose and way to passive. Live players come to the casino to play and many will playa every hand. At low limits you can be really really loose and with a just a little better than average luck, you can win for an extended period of time.

Because there are so many more hands per hour, any holes in your game are magnified and when a fish gets lucky, it has a greater impact also.

People will flame you because every one of your issues has been covered many, many times here (and in the FAQ). Since you're from Seattle too, I'll take pity:

I think the main problem is that you've started overthinking - playing B&M, where table image can actually mean something, can cause that. You should be able to do very well at .5/1 even if you NEVER give anyone credit for reading your hands.

Yes, bad beats are plentiful. You compensate by betting and raising for value, so that even if you beat the chasers once in 10 hands, that one hand nets you a profit.

You see AA vs. KK more often online because you see ALL hands more often online. At some tables you can be dealt four times as many hands as at a B&M table.

Shuffles are more random, and collusion less common, than in B&M. And at the .5/1 limit, you should be concerned with neither. I routinely place lucky-drawing donkeys on my buddy list and check up on them. Without fail, I later find them losing big. So much for the "he must be tracking the shuffles" theory.

Tournaments are filled with people gambooling on the premise that if they don't build a huge chip stack by going all-in five times right off the bat, there's another tourney starting in 15 minutes. Again, I usually make a note and check up on people who bust me with junk hands, and with few exceptions, they don't make it close to the final table.

Right now you're suffering from what we call a "small sample size." Get 20,000 or more hands under your belt online (you're using PokerTracker, right?), and you'll find both that it all evens out, and that you've got the hang of online poker.

As for the players being better online, yes, they are, but from what I've been told, if you're used to the Seattle-area B&Ms, the online players are not THAT much better.

[mike4bmp]

Okay...I'm finding all your guys' responses to be helpful...I'm realizing that I am probably being a little paranoid about cheating...and you guys are absolutely right about the small sample size...I probably should track some of the bad players to help me psychologically cope with the swings...and all in all I probably just need a little more experience playing on the internet...I need to try and adjust to online play. Thanks all.....

[bernie]

[ QUOTE ]
As for the players being better online, yes, they are, but from what I've been told, if you're used to the Seattle-area B&Ms, the online players are not THAT much better

[/ QUOTE ]

I don't know. The UB 3-6 or 5-10 game (sometimes the 2-4 game) is noticeably tougher than the regular muckleshoot 20-40 game, imo. Definitely tougher than the 10-20 game.

b

[bernie]

I think your efforts would be better spent in the strategy forums to make sure you have no 'major leaks' in your game. Just saying you 'think' you don't isn't really good enough. Make damn sure your game is as good as you'd like to think it is.

I looked through your past posts, I didn't see one post that was on a strategy forum. Kinda makes one wonder.

[ QUOTE ]
So I tried adjusting my play especially when there were more than one player at the table that I had spent a considerable amount of time playing against in the past. I have played quite a bit in live games...and although I may not be the best I feel that I play decently and do not think that I have any major leaks in my game.


[/ QUOTE ]

Why are you adjusting to this person? Just because he's played with you abit? It's been a long, long time since i've seen a live 3-6 or 4-8 game that one needs to adjust to. Especially if you describe them like this:

[ QUOTE ]
I always find it amusing to see a .5/1 game where the average number of players to the flop is 2 to 3...whereas in a local live 4/8 game I am accustom to seeing 5 to 6 players per flop.


[/ QUOTE ]

Why adjust when you are getting action? I play against many of the same players in my main live game over and over. I rarely have to adjust to them if at all. In general, they play the same way regardless of what they think of my play.

It's not hard to be one of the best player in a live 3-6 or 4-8 game. (though 3-6 the rake sucks) If you're not, then I'd concentrate more on becoming confident in being one of the best at your table than worrying about the legitimacy of online cardrooms.

btw...just because you may be the best player on the table, doesn't necesarily mean you're still beating the game. You could be the best of the table and still not be playing well enough to beat the rake.

b

[ QUOTE ]
I don't know. The UB 3-6 or 5-10 game (sometimes the 2-4 game) is noticeably tougher than the regular muckleshoot 20-40 game, imo. Definitely tougher than the 10-20 game.

[/ QUOTE ]
UB is tougher (some say much tougher) than the average online site, though.

[bernie]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I don't know. The UB 3-6 or 5-10 game (sometimes the 2-4 game) is noticeably tougher than the regular muckleshoot 20-40 game, imo. Definitely tougher than the 10-20 game.

[/ QUOTE ]
UB is tougher (some say much tougher) than the average online site, though.

[/ QUOTE ]

You might be suprised at just how easy the 10-20 games are. Much less the 20-40.

b

[MicroBob]

[ QUOTE ]
how can you not get rewarded for proper play?

[/ QUOTE ]


you need to strongly consider the likelihood that your game has leaks and that you could be playing better.

just assuming that you KNOW you are playing well...but it's the suck-outs and the beats and the crazy cards that are beating you is denying reality.


Of course it's possible that you are just in a lousy losing streak. It happens.
Losing for 10k or more hands is VERY common (both online AND live).


You don't seem to have as much of a concept of the 'long run' as you should.
Perhaps you THINK you understand the long-run...but there are many things you have said in your posts that indicate that you clearly don't.


If you can't beat the .25/.50 games online then I'm reluctant to believe that yo are just in a losing-streak.
Your game almost definitely has leaks.
And you seem extremely reluctant to acknowledge that you really aren't playing that well.



Look at the facts:
You are playing low-stakes against primarily bad-players.
You are losing.


Blaming the cards is just avoidance imo.
Take some responsibility. Try to improve your game.


Consider posting a hand or two in the micro-limit forum and I suspect you will quickly find out that you didn't know NEARLY as much about poker as you thought you did.


Sorry to be a bit harsh...but your post and the ideas contained are fairly common.
We've seen it several times.
Basically it boils down to saying "I can't even beat the low-limit losers online. I know that I'M not the problem. Therefore, since I know the problem isn't the way I play it MUST be.... (this, that or the other thing)."

[mike4bmp]

not harsh at all....welcomed criticism....I need this kind of stuff /images/graemlins/grin.gif

I'll repeat what others have said: you're probably not a very good player.

At full ring tables full of loose opponents, with 5 or 6 players seeing the flop, it is incredibly easy to win. All you have to do is play tight preflop, fold when you don't have the pot odds to stay in, and bet and raise when you have a strong hand. That's it.

You can make all sorts of mistakes and still be a winning player, because your mistakes are cushioned by the fact that your opponents are pouring money onto the pot with very little chance of winning the hand.

Against tighter players, you have to actually outplay them after the flop to make money.

Go to the microlimits forum here and participate in the discussions about hands, use pokertracker if you're not using it already. Oh, and here's a tip: if the site you play at has 6max tables, try them instead of the full ring tables, that's where the loosest players can be found. I'm probably not a very good player either, but at .50/1.00 6max tables where half the players are seeing the flop, I can still easily win money.

<------

[mike4bmp]

So which online site are the softest?...cuz UB was where I was playing most of the time.

[mike4bmp]

[ QUOTE ]
I'll repeat what others have said: you're probably not a very good player.

[/ QUOTE ]

I have to say the feedback that I have been receiving has been helpful in that it is a major reality check...cuz you guys are probably right...I have been mostly playing low limit live games and have probably picked up bad playing habits which is causing me to lose money online.
The straight forward criticisms in combination with the discussion of performance has helped humble me....
I shall study harder and develop me game....once again thanks to everyone who had something constructive to say...
Peace

[MicroBob]

[ QUOTE ]

I have to say the feedback that I have been receiving has been helpful in that it is a major reality check...cuz you guys are probably right...

[/ QUOTE ]



I neglected to mention earlier; This attitude shows that you have DEFINITE potential as a poker-player.


Crappy poker-player = Completely denying the idea that THEY are the reason they are losing.
Good poker-player = Accepting criticism of one's ideas and game as you are doing.


I'm not kidding. You are to be commended.


These types of posts come up A LOT (mostly in the internet and general forums).
I would say that when it's this obvious that the problem is likely with the player and they receive input almost exactly like the posts that you got in this thread that a solid majority of the time the original poster gets super-defensive and starts saying things like "What are you talking about? How do YOU know I'm not a winning player? I'm telling you that I freaking know how to play. You guys are so conceited. etc etc etc."

you came into this thread with an open-mind...got the same type of feedback of "don't take this wrong way....please consider this possibility....you probably aren't that good..." etc etc and you actually LISTENED.


If you surfed around on these forums as much as steamboatin and I and others do you would fully understand how truly rare your attitude is and how truly common the ultra-defensive "my game is fine and you guys suck" resposes are.


Okay - onto some other stuff -

The micro games should be beatable at any site really.
That said, UB's are noted for being a bit tougher.
Even pokerstars limit games are probably better.
And most people around here like the partypoker games for their fishyness.


Somebody asked earlier if you were using pokertracker.
This is an important question actually.
You would be able to see what your VPIP and PFR and other stats are and see how they compare to long-term winning players in the micro and small-stakes forums.

Lots of players who THINK they are playing just fine but can't understand why they are losing come back and say..."well..you wanted my stats so here goes. My VPIP is 24 and my PFR is 4" and it becomes pretty obvious to everyone else that they really aren't very good at all and that there is a definite reason why they are not winning long-term.



[ QUOTE ]
I have been mostly playing low limit live games and have probably picked up bad playing habits which is causing me to lose money online.

[/ QUOTE ]



'picking up' bad habits is one possibility.
But you should also consider the possibility that your game has never been that ideal to begin with.
If you haven't been clobbering the micro-limit games then this a very strong possibility.

Doing as well as you have done in the low-limit live games is probably kind of meaningless.
If you aren't a full-time player then it is unlikely that you have played enough hands to have a decent sample-size to really analyze your win-rate anyway (in other words...if you've played 200 hours or less of live poker then it's VERY possible that you play barely-better than a break-even game but have been running a bit better than average...these types of 'swings' are common).


anyway - surf around in the micro and small-stakes strategy forums and pick up some GOOD habits and continue to focus on improving your game.
good luck.

[mike4bmp]

Thanks for the compliments...:)

I tried using the pokertracker demo version and was little overwhelmed with the amount of info...but then again I didn't spend much time with it I guess...so I will start using it again...
Do you know if Statking is useful? I've seen it advertised somewhere and the ad says it helps calculate your WR and other things...ever used it?

[aces_full]

I am living proof that you don't have to be good at poker to be a winning player. I consistently win both online and live, and my game is full of holes big enough to drive a [censored] Mack truck through. The thing is, and a few others pointed this out, is that the signal-to-noise raito is very low when playing in games where your opponents are loose gamboolers. Their horrible mistakes are the "noise" that drowns out the "signals" that SHOULD be telling you that you have leaks. When some moron gives you his entire stack with middle pair/no kicker, it's easy to forget the hands where you made bad plays.

I too learned this the hard way. I started out at the bottom online and I was absolutely crushing the lowest stakes. When I hit the mid limits, reality, and humility set in-I realized that I was no longer the shark, but a fish! I often remarked that I felt like I was the only player at the table playing with my cards face up for all to see. My monster hands almost never got paid off, but then my AA would get outflopped and whamo, there goes my whole stack, and no matter how hard I tried I couldn't make up that lost ground from ONE SINGLE COSTLY MISTAKE. I found that my biggest leak was overplaying big pair type hands. So after dropping ten buy ins over 10,000 hands and nearly swearing off poker for good, I cashed out out nearly all of my bankroll, and literally started over at the bottom.

It's worth repeating that you don't have to be a good player to win at poker, but what you MUST be good at is game selection. If you are playing at a full ring .5/$1 limit table where every pot is contested 2 or 3 handed, you are playing in the wrong game. Get the hell outta UB and open an account at Party or one of the skins ASAP. You need to maintain a buddy list, and get PT so you can not only track your stats, but you can get a good read on your buddies. When selecting a table, look for loose tables with big pots. Also 6-max tables are where the action players are. Full ring is tight even at the micro-limits.

I suppose the downside to this is that constantly playing low stakes against bad players really isn't going to improve your game very much. If you want to learn to beat good players, you are just going to have to play against good players and pay for your education. Still I'm lazy, and I would rather practice good game selection and prey on the weak than play against trick aggressive players who must be outplayed to get their cash.

[ZenMusician]

I was going to flame this tired online conspiracy theory thread, but
anyone who ever thinks this should re-read these gems:

You don't have to be a good player to win at poker, but what you MUST be good at is game selection (aces-full)

I routinely place lucky-drawing donkeys on my buddy list and check up on them. Without fail, I later find them losing big. (Ignignokt)

Seriously, it is easy to forget that these georges lose when you seem to
be their target. You are never betting that your current hand will win
the current pot...YOU ARE BETTING THAT IT WILL SHOW A PROFIT OVER
TIME. There will come a day, with great effort that you will suddenly
"get" poker...and it isn't really in any book.

Good Luck man,

-ZEN

[McHonts]

I loved this post and almost all the responses. I played fulltilt .05/.1 NL then got a deposit bonus on party. Well, their cheapest game is .5/1. I won huge the first night. I was up $80. I then proceded to lose $15-20 almost every time I played. After running through the bonus and another hundred, I went back to fulltilt and played .25/.50. I win almost every time. The difference was poker tracker. (and re-reading sshe ten times) I bought it and realized I was playing 44/3 ish. I had no idea that I was that loose a player. I have now stats at full tilt of 26/9. (this is maybe over 1500 hands. I currently play tighter than that.)What really gets me is that when I go back to party, I still lose. I have only played two or three sessions so I know it is not statistically significant, but I also can tell a difference between the players. Party players are way more loose aggressive. The effect is a huge swing. I play in very few hands now but you can really tell a difference in the tables. Here is my question : Are the tables more passive at other sites? Tilt is definately tighter and more passive than party where I routinely see some guy call me to the river with nothing and my middle pair wins. I find it hard to fold on the turn or river becuase people routinely raise any two cards. Party is almost like playing for play money but it hurts when you lose. So, let me know if you all think is there that much difference or what.

And thanks for all the great responses to mike4bmp's post.