Reply to thread

Message: [QUOTE="zachvac, post: 806576, member: 26306"] I'm not going to argue with you, we've been over this before and neither of us is convincing the other one, but imo the majority of this is dead wrong. Oz makes a great point about the integrity of live games (we've had multiple instances of cheating and this is just a home game among mostly friends). And it's nice to know that on stars the only collusion evidence you have is someone who got busted. Most collusion is heavily noticable, and from what I know Stars has an automatic analyzer that can see these things. When several players play extremely loose, when a bad hand in position min-raises just to build the pot for a player with a monster, when these really loose players put the chips exactly where they want them every time, it's noticeable. And the less they do this stuff, the smaller their edge is. In terms of software, no good online player (winning online player) RELIES on it. Instead they rely on their ability and use the software as an ADDITION. Almost no good experienced online winning player uses odds calculators. Instead they can do these in their head in a tiny increment of time (most users of this software multitable). Of course they can use the software to charactarize a player, but most online winning players I would say are better at odds calculations, reading abilities, and general poker skill than the average poker player. I'd take a solid 200nl winner who multi-tables vs. a solid live 1000nl winner in a single table cash game no doubt. The online games are tougher, these players have mastered the basic concepts to the point where they are next to basic instinct. And when they're not playing 20 hands/minute they'll have time during folded hands to pick up reads that would be picked up from the software. The ONLY place I would expect to see an edge for the live player is in the manner in which they sit at the table and tells. But even the pro (live) players will tell you that despite what you see on TV, the best reads they get in live play is from betting patterns and not from an eyebrow flinch. And in that category the online winner would eat the live winner for lunch, picking up betting tendencies and exploiting the hell out of them. If you don't like online poker that's fine, don't play it, but the myths that online players use software as a crutch and that more old-school live players would destroy the young internet players is just a fantasy. Hell look at the live pros that play online. I know for a fact that Gus Hanson and Allen Cunningham do frequently and then you have players like Barry Greenstein, Daniel Negreanu, Phil Ivey, and although I hate to use him, he is a solid player, Phil Hellmuth, who all play at least some (I've seen them all play online aside from Hellmuth). Then you have someone like Brian Townsend who's a total unknown in the live poker world and comes in and holds his own on high stakes poker with some of the best live pros around. Didn't seem to bother him that he didn't have all his software. But hey, if it makes you feel better about yourself, go ahead and believe that live players are superior. But I'm not going to let you say this with no opposition where other players will read it. I'll let you have the last word because I have no use in arguing here, but for the record I think you're absolutely dead wrong, and hopefully anyone reading this understands why. [/QUOTE]

Verification

Search

Reply to thread

About CardsChat

Our Community

Our Site

Follow us