Casino Pros Are Dinosaurs

[GoodTiMes]

Online I average 400 hands per hour at 3 to four tables short handed, usually heads up to four people. At a casino you play about 40 hands an hour and its hard to find a shorthanded game.
I would say playing an hour shorthanded is atleast 3x more valuable then playing an hour full handed.
So by my rudimentary calculations an hour online is about 10 x 3 = 30 more valuable then playing at a casino.

And to pile on to these numbers, the competition online is much stronger, b/c they are also gaining experience at an accelerated rate.

So, I can confidently say I would take a player who has been an online pro for a year, over a casino pro who has been playing 20 years of his life.

Thoughts?

[damaniac]

Take them in terms of expecting them to make more, or being better players? The online player is certainly earning far more at comparable levels, but multitabling leads to more mistakes than a single live session, so if we were comparing tbe quality of poker being played I'd assume that, in general, a good live player would outperform a comparable multi-tabler at least looking at their sessions in comparison.

[timprov]

If the live player is a tyrannosaur, online guy doesn't stand a chance.

[phish]

Generally true, except for a couple of things:

The best casino pros tend to play many games well, whereas the best online pros are one-dimensional.

Playing live, the casino pro would notice tells and reads that the online pro would not be aware of and may be giving out himself.

In general, casino games are much softer than online games and the pro there can focus completely on the one game. His edge is much bigger and hence any downswings are also much smaller.

Online pros talk about trying to win 1bb/100 at the 100/200 games. That would translate into about 0.40BB/hour live. A good casino pro should be able to make 3 to 4 times that playing 200/400 (or even higher) mixed games.

In general, I think the best holdem players today are online, but not true of other games.

[soko]

Casino pros will be around longer (forever) than the internet poker boom (years).

[DeadMoneyOC]

"So, I can confidently say I would take a player who has been an online pro for a year, over a casino pro who has been playing 20 years of his life."

Almost all your arguements are flawed. Do you see why? Probably not, I will let someone else elaborate. Besides being a 'dinosaur' and playing in big mixed limit games or huge NL games with no cap is about 100x cooler than multi-tabling on line.

So, I can count on not seeing you at one of my B&M tables?

I can live with that.

[img]/images/graemlins/grin.gif[/img]

[B Dids]

"If the live player is a tyrannosaur, online guy doesn't stand a chance. "

Clearly the best post in this thread.

[bernie]

Everything being the same, if both were playing live, I'd take the Casino guy longterm. He's more used to playing through bad swings that last, time-wise, much longer than an online guy would likely experience.

20+k hands is alot different live than it is online.

b

[lighterjobs]

I know a guy who moved from here (tulsa) to be a poker pro in atlantic city (he has family there) around 2001. i didn't know anything about poker at the time but i've started talking to him recently about it online. he said he started out playing 5-10 and now plays 75-150 daily. he said he would never play online for a living because he finds it to be boring and more of a grind. granted, he could definately make more online, but he likes live action more. plus, if you're averaging 1bb/hr at a 75 game, you will have a pretty good living if you are a solid player.