Why I Suck at Online Poker (The Difference between Live and Online)
I hate when people think that online poker is the same as live poker. From a deeper understanding, they are completely different games.
To be a successful online player, you have to have solid fundamentals and a very strong foundation in math. While both live and online require calculation of ranges and equity in decisions, it is so much more vital online. My opinion is that NLHE is very close to being a solved game, especially MTTs, in an online setting.
Live poker, on the other hand, will never be solved. It has much different subtle nuances than online poker, especially in terms of reading tells. Hand equity calculations don’t need to be exact because you can narrow hand ranges so much more through live tells and this, rather than exact calculation, provides you with a lot of the edge in the game. This is not to disparage online poker or say that online players are better/worse than live players, it is simply my opinion that both of these arenas utilize completely different skill sets and mine are much more suited to live play.
I was just goofing off playing some 100NL on Full Tilt today (i rarely play online, probably less than 5000 hands/year), and I had someone tell me my PT stats through my session. I was playing two tables running 32/18/10. This style is pretty donkish for an online microstakes player/requires a tremendous amount of skill to pull off successfully. Of course, I could not do this (lol) and I eventually lost something like 20 bucks in a game that I should be able to crush after I lost a huge pot pushing a big overbet on the river on a board of 4-7-j-4-7 to a weak player with j-k (i had no pair no draw through the hand).
This is the perfect example of a case where playing live, I would probably be much more successful since I would be able to see if this guy was willing to fold his hand. I pretty much knew he had a jack but I thought I could push him off his hand (I heard you can’t do this in online microstakes, but with $40 in the pot and a two-barrel bet on the turn/river, very few live players could make this $40 call on the river).
Online players totally disparage the importance of live tells, mockingly referring to the practice as “soul-reading.” You better believe that feel is vital for live play, though, or you’re probably a losing/break even player. Playing ABC poker is not good enough to be a winning player the higher up in limits you go – good players will pick up on this right away if you are playing mechanical and run you over.
If you enjoyed this post, please consider to leave a comment or subscribe to the feed and get future articles delivered to your feed reader.
Comments
This is a pretty standard response. There’s not much I can say to defend this except that my opinion and experience makes me disagree with you completely. You are entitled to your opinion though.
It is true that there are a lot of fish in any live game, no matter the stakes, but I will take a good live player over a good online player any day in a live setting. Playing online, I think the online player would crush the live player. It is silly to compare the two equally though, they are so vastly different.
You will not have as big an edge live if you are a good online player if you don’t recognize and utilize tells. They are everywhere – listen to Barry Greenstein on the pokerroad podcasts or read what any of the big players have to say about it. Just a few weeks ago I called off $400 with ace-king high, a play I could never make online, because I had a solid read on a guy. Most of the time, tells will not play a factor but poker, especially NLHE, is a game of very small edges and if you can find a couple of extra spots per session to pick up pots through tells, it will make a vast difference in your overall winrate.
Perhaps we are talking past each other. I only play limit games 
and you can see from my post on “Inducing with K-high” that you can easily pick off a bluff online. In the very high stakes games it really doesn’t matter if you are good at one or the other setting, you just play where you have the edge and pray. My comment was more geared towards small (not micro) to mid-limit games and again, I mostly have limit games experience (the classical HORSE games).
... po♠t by PokerSift.♣om an♦ ♠oftware by Elliott Ba♣k T♥i♠ entry i♠ file♦ un♦er Un♣ategorize♦. You ♣an follow any ...
I’m with Azn_cutie on this one. There is just so little fold equity in online games. I’ve gotten river calls in NL cash games from players with A high on a board reading QQJ98. They can’t possibly beat any hand I have, but they just don’t want to be bluffed. I once moved all-in on the first hand of a tournament with AK and got 4 callers with premium hands like QTs to A3o. That’s insanely frustrating when you want to bluff, but pretty nice when you have a made hand.
I’ve played far less live – only tournaments – but I’ve made calls live that I would NEVER make online, like calling an all-in bet w Q high on a KK7 board late in a tournament (it was the best hand, and it held up). In my limited experience, live is at least 50% table image, table talk, and intimidation. It’s why TJ Cloutier still crushes tournaments after all these decades.
There was an interesting article by Daniel Negreanu on this topic a while back. He is obviously one of the greatest live players around, but he admitted that the online stars like Patrick Antonius were just schooling him because the game is so different.
I think sometimes people get confused by the word “tells” and they think it means that you gotta see someones nostrils expanding or something. But live tells are everywhere that can help you and if you don’t use them you are missing out live. The most simple and profitable “tell” would be simply to look left preflop (and sometimes after the flop) and you can often know by mannerisms whether someone is going to fold or play the hand. Effectively, this gives you an extra spot or two of position which can be extremely valuable over the course of time.
I’m with AznQT I don’t like live vs. online arguments either. I think for either one to dismiss each other is a mistake.
In general, I find that good online players are better at putting pressure on others, maybe even better at value betting. This is because of playing so many more hands. But they are not nearly as good at adjusting to table conditions. Aslo, you find more recreational players live, alot of players who don’t take the game as seriously. Don’t confuse them with the good live players. Good live players are very good.
Nice post Azn.
I am not a math player and have been extremely successful live versus not successful at all online. I am reluctant to think that the disparity is simply bc there are better players online. I agree with you in thinking that they are just hugely different skill sets. I can make a lot of money live with knowing basic odds and relying on feel, betting patterns, aggression that is less often called down, and yes, tells. That same skill set feels pretty useless online where aggression gets blindly called down and math is king. Wish I could be a whiz at both, maybe someday.
You say that NLHE MTT is pretty close to being a solved game, got any good posts or articles about that? I’d love to read more.
there are differences between live and online play and it stems from mostly from experience and a little bit from personality.
live players have much more experience seeing people, so they are much better at visual tells. the way someone handles their chips, a look in the eyes, how they place their chips into the middle and even though i am not a live player, i do not underestimate this visual tells. live players have more experience playing full ring and deep stacked, so they are better at full ring deep stack.
internet players are better at playing short handed. internet players are more aware of non visual tells such as timing and at par if not better at bet sizing tells. it’s simply b/c they have played a buttload of hands and have come across the same bet sizes and timing of bets over and over again, more than live players.
if either live or internet players had as much experience as the other, they would be equally good in either cateogory.
but i do also think a certain personality is probably drawn to live/online. a more action proned person who needs a lot of stimulus to stay entertained may gravitate towards online.
take the best online player and make him play at a live deep stack game with live pros and they’ll take him to lunch. it’d be the same as taking the same live pros and making them multitable 3 short handed online HS games.
PS. daniel neg. although one of my favourite players is FAR FAR from one of the best cash game live players (you could make a case for him in tournaments.). also, patrik antonius would consider himself a live player although he puts some good hours into online nowadays. patrik and ivey are great examples of live players (who imo have no live tells) who made a nice transition to internet poker.
... Azn_Cutie wrote an intere♠ting po♠t to♦ay on W♥y I Su♣k at Online Poker (T♥e Differen♣e between Live an♦ Online)Here’♠ a qui♣k ex♣erptLive poker, on t♥e ot♥er ♥an♦, will never be ♠olve♦. It ♥a♠ mu♣♥ more ♠ubtle nuan♣e♠ t♥an online poker, e♠pe♣ially in term♠ of rea♦ing tell♠. Han♦ equity ♣al♣ulation♠ ♦on’t nee♦ to be exa♣t be♣au♠e you ♣an narrow ♥an♦ range♠ ♠o mu♣♥ … ...
... to quote Azn_Cutie at Poker♠ift: To be a ♠u♣♣e♠♠ful online player, you ♥ave to ♥ave ♠oli♦ fun♦amental♠ an♦ a very ♠trong foun♦ation ...
I think that the two disciplines require different skill sets and you are either suited to one or the other. My preference is live where I just simply enjoy the poker a lot more. The “30 hands p/h” format allows you to study people and their play and their tells.
When faced with a tough decision you generally get more time (even if someone puts a clock on you). The social side of live poker is attractive and for me the fact that all my energy is used focusing on one tournament and not watching TV, multi-tabling or drinking to much makes my live play profitable!
Internet poker bores me and I tend to tilt too easily. If i get bad beat live then I’ve got a couple of minutes to refocus before the next hand.
One other (important) point is that it is a lot harder for online/inexperienced live player to carry off the aggressive internet style of poker in the card room because they have to physically move the chips into the middle! It is hard to do this (without experience) when your hands are shaking because your tournament life is hinging on a J3o bluff on the river!
Anyway, interesting discussion. I say its horses for courses and I don’t think we will ever see the WSOP played out on the internet.
Meh! I think tells are overrated and that often the “tells” thing is just an excuse for people to justify why they win live and lose online. Truth is that live players are extremely fishy and that even online small games play like the mid-limit games live.
.
I have plenty of experience in both and have only benefited from “tells” live when people soft-play against me and literally tell me that they have the nuts and that I should lay it down. I don’t think that would happen if I were a guy
Anyway, once you are proficient online, it should be second nature for you to be good live. However, you might die out of boredom sometime as you only see 30 hands per hour