Can you make a living playing live 3/6 poker?

[ QUOTE ]
In the defense of live play, the few 3/6 and 5/10 live games I've played were softer than party's .5/1. Yes the rake is higher, the play is slower and you only get to play one table. But, damn, those games are sooo much better than party's 3/6 or 5/10.

[/ QUOTE ]

I definitely agree. Actually, i would say almost all 3-6 live games I have played play softer than online .5 1 or 1 2. The 8 16 kill game @ my local cardroom/casino plays like an online 1 2 game ... I can't wait until I have the br for it ...

[habsfanca11]

Couple of things - I think everyone agrees that playing 3/6 live full time as your only source of income would be hell. Take what you hear from the (so-called) pros with a grain of salt.

If you play to supplement your income - doesn't that make you a pro (of sorts)? I think what you are hearing is that people are playing for income, therefore they're defining themselves as being a pro.

I keep running into the same pro (I define him as that) at the Flamingo in Vegas at 7 stud and 2/4 hold'em year after year. No way is he making a living doing this, but is he earniing money that he uses for expenses? Absolutely. So he is a pro.

I wouldn't sweat the definition too much.

[sawseech]

toking and vigging kills in that game
anything less than 20/40 is a waste of time imo

Ah. You're one of those players who colds my PFR w/8To then "traps" me when you pair and I don't. Someday I'll figure out how to beat you.

Implied odds, baby!

[MyTurn2Raise]

I lived off 5/10 in the Chicago area for a short spurt (about 3 months). The play is so ridiculously bad that it makes up for the rake.

But, I learned this from a wisened veteran in Vegas
"Do you know any great 4/8 players? No, you don't, because they are not playing 4/8."

I quickly moved upto 10/20 and 20/40 live. Lower BB/whatever, but more $$$.

Is it possible to make a living at 3/6? I say yes, but it's ugly. My friends and I commonly go down to New Orleans and stop for a night in Tunica. We get pissy drunk and I'll play some 3/6 for the drinks and poker room rate for our stay. Drunk off my @$$, I always leave $50+ up after 5 hours. So, I think it's possible, but a terrible waste of time and potential.

In "Play Poker Like the Pros" Phill "Hellmouth" Helmuth claims that he went +20000$ and paid off his student loans from just playing 2/4 for a year. (This is taken from memory but I am sure it was something like that). If what he says is true, why shouldnt it be possible making a decent living from 3/6?

Especially with the multi table options, even if you average only 1BB / Hour you should be able to make a very decent living off it.

Don't forget that it was a pretty bad book. Are you sure he played limit hold 'em? Maybe he played in some crazy retarded NL games?

I'm sure playing 3/6 live is closer to the minimum wage spectrum of the pay scale. It's hard to live off of minimum wage even without expenses.

[Adam22]

[ QUOTE ]
In "Play Poker Like the Pros" Phill "Hellmouth" Helmuth claims that he went +20000$ and paid off his student loans from just playing 2/4 for a year. (This is taken from memory but I am sure it was something like that). If what he says is true, why shouldnt it be possible making a decent living from 3/6?

Especially with the multi table options, even if you average only 1BB / Hour you should be able to make a very decent living off it.

[/ QUOTE ]

that book was horrible and i definetly don't think it's beyond hellmuth to exagerate his win rate. also he said that that game was full of wealthy lawyers so i assume it was no limit. the strategies he gives of only playing the top 10 hands is more suited to no limit anyway.

the point is that yes you could live off of 3/6 but there would be essentially no reason for you to not move up to 5/10 and so on.

[wudrow]

I would have to disagree with the fish going away theory. I believe for them one could make the comparison to slot players. They get just enough wins to keep them coming back for more. And even if they lose, they get that one big rush on a suck out. The fish are here to stay.

I agree w/ wudrow. The fish will always be there. Intermittent reinforcement is a very powerful motivator. There have been many studies on it. The fish will get their occassional suckouts and will always be back for more. Some will smarten up and get better. Some will go broke. And some will continue to view it as entertainment and not be cognizant of exactly where they stand.