Ed Miller "Going Pro" article

[OldTexan]

In Ed's article this month, he says:

[ QUOTE ]
Say you estimate that you can generate approximately 2 BB/100 hands playing $3-$6 limit hold eem. You should count on playing multiple tables, usually at least four, so you might see about 300 hands per hour. Thus, your theoretical win rate is about 6 BB/hour or $36 an hour.

[/ QUOTE ]

My question is -- does anyone see these tables -- $3/$6 -- tightening and improving in quality of players (this year especially) such that it isn't possible to "4-table" them anymore. It seems that it takes much more focus and careful knowledge of players to make money at these tables lately -- most players seem to be <20% VPIP and very aggressive.

I use PT to find the best tables I can, but perhaps I'm not doing it the way I should.

Any constructive comments would be appreciated...

[BarronVangorToth]

I think we're FAR away from seeing any reasonable level of competence at the $3-$6 level from John Q. Sixpack...

Barron Vangor Toth
www.BarronVangorToth.com

[sfwusc]

Really.

Have you seen some of the play there. Awful.

-SFWUSC

[ptmusic]

I haven't seen the SS online tables get tougher this year, but I can say with certainty that, in my experience, live tables are MUCH SOFTER than online tables. I've made 3/4ths of my profit live, although I've played online more. Online is soft too, but live is better in my experience.

I don't understand why Ed believes that online play is so much easier. More profitable? Perhaps, if you multitable, bonus whore, and rake return. Softer/looser? Not for me.

-ptmusic

[Ed Miller]

[ QUOTE ]
I don't understand why Ed believes that online play is so much easier. More profitable? Perhaps, if you multitable, bonus whore, and rake return. Softer/looser? Not for me.

[/ QUOTE ]

I never said online play was easier. I said that it's more profitable by far.

[Beavis68]

pretty hard to play 300 hands an hour live.

[ptmusic]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I don't understand why Ed believes that online play is so much easier. More profitable? Perhaps, if you multitable, bonus whore, and rake return. Softer/looser? Not for me.

[/ QUOTE ]

I never said online play was easier. I said that it's more profitable by far.

[/ QUOTE ]

Fair enough - is it fair to say that you don't believe that online play is necessarily "easier", but that it is easier to make a profit?

From my experience (and actually from what I've read about your experience), I've been more profitable with live play.

That's because I find higher stakes live (e.g. Commerce 9/18) to be softer than lower stakes online (e.g. Party Poker 2/4). Commerce is full of players who play too loosely preflop and go too far with their marginal hands.

These are exactly the kinds of opponents you talk about in SSHE. And SSHE is a big reason for my profits live and online, by the way!

Back to the recent article: I really enjoyed it. But could you expand on the following sentence?

"Playing live for a living drastically increases the bankroll and skill level required to generate a given income."

I think I know the bankroll reasoning (gas, rake, tipping, higher-stakes-to-offset-the-fewer-hands-and-bonuses), but why is more skill needed to make a living playing poker live?

Thanks,

-ptmusic

[ptmusic]

[ QUOTE ]
pretty hard to play 300 hands an hour live.

[/ QUOTE ]

Indeed, but it's pretty hard to play anywhere near your best when playing on enough tables to get 300 hands in per hour. Your BB/hr will suffer.

Plus, the automatic shufflers at the live casino I play have added some hands per hour, even as much as 33% for some dealers (from ~30/hr to ~40/hr).

There are other advantages to live play as well, such as remembering players better and picking up more tells. I use Pokertracker online (of course), but I think I have an even bigger edge in that department when I play live.

-ptmusic

-ptmusic

[Ed Miller]

Here's the bottom line. Multitabling, you can get 300-600 hands per hour in. Live you get 30-40 hands per hour. While I agree with you that live play features many "fringe benefits"... and some not-so-fringe ones... over online play, you simply can't make up for the 8x or more hands per hour you get online. You can't even come close.

You can multitable as low as $3-$6 with a $5,000 bankroll (plus personal savings) for a healthy living. If you want to make an equivalent living playing live, we're talking at least $15-$30 and more like $20-$40 with a $20,000 bankroll or more.

And if you can beat that live $20-$40 game for $40/hour for your decent living, you can use that same time and bankroll and multitable Party $15-$30 or $10-$20 6max and make $200/hour.

I played/play live, not because it's more profitable, but because it's more fun for me. If I played poker primarily for the cash, I'd play online, and it isn't close. [img]/images/graemlins/tongue.gif[/img]

[uncleshady]

Im pretty much a rookie, but I have an opinion of this. Ive played 2-4 Holdem live and all sorts of microlimits on the net. The pros of net play outweigh the cons of live play x10.

Live: smoke filled casino
Net: comforts of home
Live: 40 hands per hour
Net: two or three tables at once (for me)
Live: free drinks still cost a buck (tip)
Net: drinks in the fridge
Live: poor table selection, almost no prior knowledge, cant avoid the sharks
Net: Get up and find a new table
Live: win a 10 pot, pay 10% rake, then a dollar tip
Net: win a 10 pot, pay 50 cents rake, no tip.
Live: dollar an hour comp for crappy buffet or whatever
Net: Clear a 100 bonus while you play

I used to be a big fan of live poker, but I'm not so sure anymore...