On-Line vs. B&M Play - Where do you do better and Why? (Long)

[Barry]

I have been tracking my on-line play and my B&M play for a big chunk of the year now. I have noticed a significant difference in my win rates at these 2 venues. I am interested in the experiences of others and, if there are differences, what might be the cause. Yes there are all of the factors that the folks cite as the benefits of online play, such as more hands per hour, multiple tables, lower rake, etc. But what about other factors, such as the quality of opponents, the value of being able to see the other players at a casino, less distractions, etc. Do they have a greater impact?

For what it is worth, I play a fair amount online, typically at 1 or 2 5/10 tables 3-5 times a week in the evening after work. Although I try to go every other weekend to Foxwoods, my schedule has prevented that and maybe I get there 3-4 weekends every 3 months. When I go, I play pretty much all of the time except to sleep and to eat, which sometimes I do at the table (eat that is), so I get in about 30 hours on a weekend. I have been to Vegas 3 times this year for a 5 day (more or less) trip and will be going again later this month. Typically I play 10/20 at Foxwoods and the Mirage and started out playing 8/16 at the Bellagio, but played 15/30 the last time that I was there. I am just starting to think about moving up to 20/40, but I don’t think that I am quite ready for that yet.

For the specifics, I am earning about 2.5 BB’s per hour in live play and with my recent bad streak online I am earning about 1.3 BB’s per hour in online play. Now I don’t really know how to calculate my SD on my live data, but my Poker Tracker has my SD at 13 BB’s per hour.

So why do I think this is true?

In my view, I think that the biggest factor is the quality of players. While there are quite a few fish online, there are a growing number of players that take it serious and are pretty decent such that they make it harder to get their money. At B&M there are still folks that view poker just as another form of gambling, expect to lose, and view it as an entertainment cost. Or perhaps they view it as their “social” activity. Plus there is also the inebriation factor as many still consume alcohol at the table. So in general, I think that the games are much softer live than online.

The other important factor in my judgement is being able to actually see the other player. When I make a post about a live hand, I try to give some information about the table and the other actors so others can get some sense of the player specifics that I considered with respect to my play. Perhaps Mike Caro overemphasizes it, but I think that the more time that you spend playing live in general and playing against any particular opponent the more you get a feel for styles of play and how well they really like their hand. Also you get to see the same players more often and for longer periods of time at B&M than on-line. Even in the 3 trips this year that I have made to Las Vegas I have a “mental” notebook on a number of players that I have seen over and over. This knowledge, in my view, is critical in making decisions regarding whether to lay down or call down a hand; whether a flop check/call by a player is just a loose call or whether you might be getting set up for a turn checkraise; or any other decisions that you make in the course of your play. On several occasions I have sat down with some folks that have played quite a bit online, but are just starting to play live. Many times they get hammered because they don’t pick up on the subtleties going on or they give off obvious tells and don’t control their emotions as well.

These are just my thoughts. Are there any concurring or opposing views? Does anyone else care?