Las Vegas or So. Cal. ?

raptor · #1 02-11-2003, 02:35 AM

Trying to decide on the two. Will be moving this Spring to one or the other. Not just concerned with game selection, but also things like cost of living, ( L.A. obviously higher), weather,(L.A. better), the advantage of L.A. being smoke free, things like that. Any comments from those who have lived and played poker in both places for a substantial period of time, would be appreciated.

Dynasty · #2 02-11-2003, 03:15 AM

The two largest rooms in Las Vegas (Bellagio and Mirage) are also smoke free. And, the weather here is fantastic except from about late May until early September when it gets over 100 degrees routinely.

andyfox · #3 02-11-2003, 04:27 PM

"the weather here is fantastic except from about late May until early September when it gets over 100 degrees routinely."

That's about 30% of the year. "Over 100 degrees routinely" is a euphemism for a suburb of hell. It's frigging hot in Las Vegas. We're told it's a dry heat. It's a hot heat.

When the Veteran's Administration wanted the spot with the best climate in the country in the 1920s, they picked the west side of Los Angeles. It still has the best climate in the world, including everywhere. The smog is forbidden to go west of La Cienega Blvd. by order of the city council.

Dynasty · #4 02-11-2003, 06:57 PM

the heat in Las Vegas bothers me a lot less than the cold of Massacusetts did.

JTG51 · #5 02-18-2003, 02:51 AM

We're told it's a dry heat. It's a hot heat.

I've always felt the same way. I can't stand hot weather. I've got to admit though, as I look out the window at my car (or at least what I think is my car) and see snow almost up to the roof, that hot heat is sounding pretty darn good to me.

bad beetz · #6 02-12-2003, 09:13 PM

I'm no poker pro, but you can't possibly be touting the benefits of nevada's climate against Souther Cali, the best climate On the planet.

Dynasty · #7 02-12-2003, 11:54 PM

I'm not saying it's better than CA- just that it's excellent.

Randy_Refeld · #8 02-11-2003, 12:14 PM

I have lived in both Vegas and LA and I like both of them. If you want to be at the casino 24/7 then you want to live in Vegas; you can't get away from a casino. If you want to live in the real world and just visit the casino to play poker than go to LA.

Randy

mdlm · #9 02-11-2003, 12:34 PM

If you want to be at the casino 24/7 then you want to live in Vegas; you can't get away from a casino. If you want to live in the real world and just visit the casino to play poker than go to LA.

I was just in Vegas and lived in Orange County (just south of LA) for 8 years.

The point that Randy makes is the key point. Las Vegas is a horrifying, sickening, disgusting city during the day and outside of the casino. That is why poker pros sleep until 1pm and then go straight to the casino. Unless you are sitting at the poker table LV is simply hellish. It looks like a ghost town. My guess is that most people will go insane.

LA, on the other hand, is a real city in a real state with beaches, mountains, state parks, Hollywood, basketball teams, etc.

Clarkmeister · #10 02-11-2003, 12:59 PM

"The point that Randy makes is the key point. Las Vegas is a horrifying, sickening, disgusting city during the day and outside of the casino. ..... Unless you are sitting at the poker table LV is simply hellish."

If your only experience off the strip is limited to heading to the Gamblers Book Club, then you have no basis for making that arguement. Its similar to making a judgement about LA if all you have seen is Compton. Once you have seen Summerlin, Green Valley, Red Rock and Mt. Charleston you can make a judgement about quality of life in Vegas.