oh, by the way, i quit.

[DrawingDeadInDM 0]

Online Players > Live Players ..I can beat a 3/6 LHE game live pretty handily; I'd get absolutely murdered--long term--on line.

[Izzy 0]

OP, you offer encouragement and inspiration to other online poker losers, like me, who should wisely follow in your footsteps. :wink: And yes, live poker, way way more fun for the social apsect alone. Good luck to you, sir.

[silkyjonson 1]

good decision, sounds like your losing, no point to keep kicking yourself in the head. Might as well stick to what your good at.

[HowMuchIsIt 0]

A huge thing to keep in mind for anyone who complains about the perils of online poker compared to live is the hand per hour ratio...let's say you see 3 sick beats at a live game in an hour...you see anywhere from 4-5 times more hands online an hour so you can expect to see 4-5 times more beats than live...it's part of the game. I have lost online and come back to look at my plays and reread sections of books we have all read before and the bottom line is you will take beats but if you are continually learning your game should progress. The learning curve is not always so fast for some...it's taken some folks a lifetime to see success and others just have a natural raw talent and ability to play much like any other competitve game. I wish the OP well and can understand his decisions. Not everyone has to walk the same line...that's what makes free will so free.

[pokerkid 0]

To the people arguing about who's better, Live pros or Online pros, please stop, ur embarassing urselves cuz u have absolutely no clue how good those players are unless u've played with them.LOW LIMIT LIVE IS EASIER TO BEAT4,000-8,000 mixed is probably the toughest game to beat in the world. It is played live. It also has no bearing on whehter a 3/6 live or 3/6 online game is easier to beat.

[speedz99 145]

To the people arguing about who's better, Live pros or Online pros, please stop, ur embarassing urselves cuz u have absolutely no clue how good those players are unless u've played with them.LOW LIMIT LIVE IS EASIER TO BEAT4,000-8,000 mixed is probably the toughest game to beat in the world. It is played live. It also has no bearing on whehter a 3/6 live or 3/6 online game is easier to beat.

Uh...the way you compare the competition is by looking at the same game/same limit in both mediums.aside: is medium the correct term there?So, you see, while you were making a good attempt at outwitting everyone involved in the argument...you actually made the least amount of sense. It is very possible to say which game is easier to beat for any given level (live or online). The answer is "live" probably up until 100/200 when it becomes fairly indestiguishable...I could be wrong about that exact limit where it shifts, though.

[Tiltinagain 973]

Play money players are the best

Finally someone makes sense around here!

[TheCinciKid 0]

To the people arguing about who's better, Live pros or Online pros, please stop, ur embarassing urselves cuz u have absolutely no clue how good those players are unless u've played with them.LOW LIMIT LIVE IS EASIER TO BEAT4,000-8,000 mixed is probably the toughest game to beat in the world. It is played live. It also has no bearing on whehter a 3/6 live or 3/6 online game is easier to beat.

Uh...the way you compare the competition is by looking at the same game/same limit in both mediums.aside: is medium the correct term there?So, you see, while you were making a good attempt at outwitting everyone involved in the argument...you actually made the least amount of sense. It is very possible to say which game is easier to beat for any given level (live or online). The answer is "live" probably up until 100/200 when it becomes fairly indestiguishable...I could be wrong about that exact limit where it shifts, though.

Kudos to Speedz, this post made about the most sense of any in this thread. I haven't played a ton of live poker, but I'd say it's roughly equivalent, or more donkified than .5/1 online, at all live levels up to about 5/10 depending on where you go.

[Izzy 0]

A huge thing to keep in mind for anyone who complains about the perils of online poker compared to live is (...)

There seem to be 2 or 3 main facets to the game of poker: math, psychology and instinct. The online game really is suited for the disciplined math-oriented players, whereas the live game the later. If you are playing online and you don't have a sound understanding of the math/odds involved, you may as well toss your cash out the window. It's why many pros fail online, because their expertise is in reading players, which they can't do online (just listen to Doyle's opinion on the subject). The OP's frustration stems not from bad luck, but perhaps from a failure to truly grasp the math/odds involved, because if you play correctly most hands, you will win more than lose in the long run. Bad beats are part of the game but they are mathematical anomalies, and need to be understood as such.My $0.02

[BIG_L_RIP 0]

I for one agree with you. I've taken too many bad beats and tilt too easily playing online. I fare much better live, and not for the easier players. I am a successful mid/higher stakes NL player live, but online I can't handle the swings. My very first hand of my most recent live session, guy put me all in for $1K (buy-in). There's no way I could've made that call online given the flop texture. Just 2 or 3 pots like that in a session make all the difference. Online I exacerbate the situation by trying to play lower limits to minimze potential losses, but then I grow impatient and end up playing poorly.To the OP, good choice.

[nell789 0]

That's too bad Ajs, are you still gonna be hanging out and posting here on the forums? And you're not quitting online hockey pools too are you??

[PhilHellmuth 0]

To the people arguing about who's better, Live pros or Online pros, please stop, ur embarassing urselves cuz u have absolutely no clue how good those players are unless u've played with them.LOW LIMIT LIVE IS EASIER TO BEAT4,000-8,000 mixed is probably the toughest game to beat in the world. It is played live. It also has no bearing on whehter a 3/6 live or 3/6 online game is easier to beat.

Uh...the way you compare the competition is by looking at the same game/same limit in both mediums.aside: is medium the correct term there?So, you see, while you were making a good attempt at outwitting everyone involved in the argument...you actually made the least amount of sense. It is very possible to say which game is easier to beat for any given level (live or online). The answer is "live" probably up until 100/200 when it becomes fairly indestiguishable...I could be wrong about that exact limit where it shifts, though.

pokerkid's post made complete sense. all he was saying is that ppl shouldnt say that just cuz the 4k-8k game is the toughest game in the world, and it happens to be live, that live players are better than online; because, as we know, the 3-6 live games are easier to beat than the 3-6 online games. he wasnt trying to outwit anyone, he was making a very good point - that the people who say lo-limit online games are easier are embarrassing themselves.you added nothing with your post, and made yourself look like an idiot.

[speedz99 145]

ppl...cuz...live...poker...idiot

You failed to understand pokerkid's post, my post, and I have a feeling you don't even know what the hell you just wrote. Do you see why you're an idiot? I bet you don't.Yikes.

[PhilHellmuth 0]

ppl...cuz...live...poker...idiot

You failed to understand pokerkid's post, my post, and I have a feeling you don't even know what the hell you just wrote. Do you see why you're an idiot? I bet you don't.Yikes.

wow, you're one of those people who says things with a lot of conviction, yet is completely logically impaired. and the tragedy of it is that whatever it is in your brain that made you like this will prevent you from understanding as usual. i have one or two people like you in my life and dealing with them is always a struggle. i feel bad for the ones that have to deal with you.there was nothing complicated about pokerkid's post. ok, you may have thought that in that particular post, i thought that he explicitly commented on which 3-6 game was harder to beat, when what he was doing was saying that the "4k-8k live is toughest" argument doesnt have any bearing on which 3-6 game is tougher. all i was doing is filling out the implied rest of his point, which was obvious given his earlier post. 3600 posts. wow. i shudder to think how many of them flame other people while making completely nonsensical statements.

[Pupsta 0]

I agree 100%....live players are better than on-line. And I go to the KC Boats also....$2/$5 NLHE at Harrahs. I'm decent...maybe more than that but I'll hold off judgement for a bit longer. Going to go on-line for the first time at month's end.

Glad to see someone esp. from KC agrees with me.....I have played at Harrah's .... only Limit...they don't have a kill.. which I don't like... I have not played NL there....I'm really not a big fan of their poker room... Ameristar....it's ok.... but there.. it's No FOLD'em Hold'em..Good luck at on-line... it will be a big adjustment... took me awhile and money to figure it out.

way to completely invalidate your point, too."live players are better....but it's NO FOLD'em hold'em"....good job working $30 into $850 or whatever, but try playing 4/8 limit online compared to 4/8 limit at your casino and tell me which is better.play 2/4 or 3/6NL online and see how many see a flop each hand, and play 2/5NL live and see how many see a flop each hand. record these, and tell me which is easier.

[Actuary 3]

my dilemna:I think PhilHellmuth (the poster) is a dildo while I like speedz and Cinci; however, PokerKid was simply saying that Live is easier. You might have to read his earlier statement to get the context correct. His 4-8k comment was just throwing in there that he recognizes what game is the absolute toughest, but that does not make Live overall tougher.so Hellmuth is still a dildo.

[Bill_Brasky 0]

ppl...cuz...live...poker...idiot

You failed to understand pokerkid's post, my post, and I have a feeling you don't even know what the hell you just wrote. Do you see why you're an idiot? I bet you don't.Yikes.

wow, you're one of those people who says things with a lot of conviction, yet is completely logically impaired. and the tragedy of it is that whatever it is in your brain that made you like this will prevent you from understanding as usual. i have one or two people like you in my life and dealing with them is always a struggle. i feel bad for the ones that have to deal with you.there was nothing complicated about pokerkid's post. ok, you may have thought that in that particular post, i thought that he explicitly commented on which 3-6 game was harder to beat, when what he was doing was saying that the "4k-8k live is toughest" argument doesnt have any bearing on which 3-6 game is tougher. all i was doing is filling out the implied rest of his point, which was obvious given his earlier post. 3600 posts. wow. i shudder to think how many of them flame other people while making completely nonsensical statements.

Actually, Speedz is one of the most reasonable people on this forum, and he rarely flames anybody. You on the other hand....You're right. There's nothing complicated about pokerkid's post. It just didn't make any sense. There was no constant stream of logic to follow. I actually happen to agree that 3-6 online is a tougher game than 3-6 live, but mind your manners when you're talking to Speedz. He is a good contributor to this forum, and he will own you.

[PhilHellmuth 0]

my dilemna:I think PhilHellmuth (the poster) is a dildo while I like speedz and Cinci; however, PokerKid was simply saying that Live is easier. You might have to read his earlier statement to get the context correct. His 4-8k comment was just throwing in there that he recognizes what game is the absolute toughest, but that does not make Live overall tougher.so Hellmuth is still a dildo.

my dilemna: actuary is a pitty case whose avatar was a calculator until the very day i pointed out that he was a loser who's never gotten any. since that day until now his avatars have been hot girls to try and cover up that fact, which by the way, he never even tried to deny.i dont know speedz from adam. if he is a logical person, then dont fcking jump in and tell someone that what they wrote makes no sense, when it made perfect sense, and what you wrote was nonsensical and contributed nothing. actuary even admits that speedz was off the ball on this one. im not trying to start any wars with anyone. but if someone accuses someone else of not making sense, when he's the one that doesnt make sense, im gonna point it out, i dont care who the fck it is.

[speedz99 145]

I was wrong about pokerkid's point. I didn't understand it because the way his post was structured made the argument completely unintelligible. I was also blinded by the "cuz" "ur" "u've" and other ridiculous 14 year old girl shorthand words and assumed that he was an idiot. Apparently I was only partly correct. This comment also threw me off:

u have absolutely no clue how good those players are unless u've played with them.

It makes no sense in the context of what he's saying. Anyways...I misunderstood.As for my post for hellmuth, by that point I realized I made a mistake. I was just trying to annoy him because (as we all know) he's a tool...and apparently it worked because he got all fired up. I was going to keep baiting him, but since you guys were cool enough to stick up for me I just figured I'd say what happened and move on.

[speedz99 145]

if someone accuses someone else of not making sense, when he's the one that doesnt make sense, im gonna point it out, i dont care who the fck it is.

as you should.nh and ggAnd I don't actually know if you're a tool...I was just taking Actuary and Brasky's word for it...I assume you starting posting after I had already backed off. But if they don't like you, it's probably because you suck.Just sayin'.Goodnight all.

[Actuary 3]

my dilemna: actuary is a pitty case whose avatar was a calculator until the very day i pointed out that he was a loser who's never gotten any. since that day until now his avatars have been hot girls to try and cover up that fact, which by the way, he never even tried to deny.

Not sure what you are saying I did not deny; but, my Avitar had been the Calculator for a long time. Then I would swap between Calculator and Hot Chick, depending on whether I was at work or not.The HotChick, as I stated back on that thread, was there well before your accusation.Anyway, wait a minute, are you saying the avitar someone picks is relevant in some way?why am I defending thisedit to add: I also use food and Speed Racer

[PhilHellmuth 0]

I was wrong about pokerkid's point.  I didn't understand it because the way his post was structured made the argument completely unintelligible.  I was also blinded by the "cuz" "ur" "u've" and other ridiculous 14 year old girl shorthand words and assumed that he was an idiot.  Apparently I was only partly correct.  This comment also threw me off:

u have absolutely no clue how good those players are unless u've played with them.

It makes no sense in the context of what he's saying. Anyways...I misunderstood.As for my post for hellmuth, by that point I realized I made a mistake. I was just trying to annoy him because (as we all know) he's a tool...and apparently it worked because he got all fired up. I was going to keep baiting him, but since you guys were cool enough to stick up for me I just figured I'd say what happened and move on.

1 - at least u could admit u were wrong. 2 - if ur going to make up a story [that ur post was just to bait me] at least make sure it sounds slightly plausible. nobody believes ur bullsht, so before you spew something, at least make sure it has a chance of sounding like it makes sense. this, btw, seems to be a continuing problem for u.3 - u can all say what u want, if u saw somone post something so absurd u'd hav all jumped in and stuck it in their face just as quickly. i've seen u do it before. so get off ur high horses and shut the fck up.

[PhilHellmuth 0]

my dilemna: actuary is a pitty case whose avatar was a calculator until the very day i pointed out that he was a loser who's never gotten any. since that day until now his avatars have been hot girls to try and cover up that fact, which by the way, he never even tried to deny.

Not sure what you are saying I did not deny; but, my Avitar had been the Calculator for a long time. Then I would swap between Calculator and Hot Chick, depending on whether I was at work or not.The HotChick, as I stated back on that thread, was there well before your accusation.Anyway, wait a minute, are you saying the avitar someone picks is relevant in some way?why am I defending thisedit to add: I also use food and Speed Racer

notice btw that actuary continues to not deny that he's a loser who's never gotten any.LMAO. just noticed the avatar. im sorry that i reminded you that ur a loser. maybe you should try sticking ur calculator up ur a$$ for some sexual stimulation.PS - check out the sig

[lister14 0]

I'm not trying to offend you or get into a flame war, but honestly if you can't beat the game online, what makes you think you'll have better luck playing live?  Are your reading abilities really that good, or is it time for a new hobby?

Honestly...I am willing to bet that most ONLINE players can't beat the live games....Only reason I say that is A)People online are hiding behind their monitors and will give away their stategies live.B) Most online players don' have the access to Real games... (Casino, B&M's) home games don't count.C) Online players will not have the patience for live games... they are used to a 100 hands an hours where as live games maybe 20 hands an hour.... Just sayin, that because everyone can't beat online games does not mean that they suck at poker....Online is a different animal...Anyway to the OP... .GL with live... you will be a better poker player.. most live players are better than online players.

wrong wrong wrong wrong wrong. live players ARE NOT better than their online counterparts. they are far far worse on average. i have extensive experience in both. no way any sane person can say that and be serious.

[Actuary 3]

notice btw that actuary continues to not deny that he's a loser who's never gotten any.[/quot]I was unclear what you said I did not deny.Ok, I deny I have never gotten anyI've been married for 10 yrs.I've had sex.I also took a future Miss TN and 4th? place Miss USA/America to her senior homecoming (HS).I actually was quite the catch when I moved to town my sophomore year Girls came pretty easily, even though I was shy. You don't have to believe it. Hardly makes any difference trying to dispute that over a forum, as there is no proof. Man, I thought I was above replying to this.