B&M vs online?
This is a question for the people who play both. I've been playing online alot now, and think I'm above average in SNG's and low limit games online, but I've never played in a B&M. My questions are:
1) What is the difference in level of play (on average)?
2) Is it possible to compare the two? ie. $1/2 online = $5/10 B&M?
Basically I want to know if I'll be at a comparable level or get eaten up and spit out? Any input would be appreciated...
1) What is the difference in level of play (on average)?
2) Is it possible to compare the two? ie. $1/2 online = $5/10 B&M?
Basically I want to know if I'll be at a comparable level or get eaten up and spit out? Any input would be appreciated...
Comments
I've been a long term winner of just over one big bet per hour at both the PartyPoker 2-4 and Brantford 5-10 using roughly the same strategy. I'd say these particular games are fairly comparable.
However, this doesn't exclude other comparisons. For example, I have no idea how the skill level at Pokerroom 5-10 compares to the 2-5 at Casino Rama since I've never played those games.
ScottyZ
I would much rather play online. But as for the skills level I am not too sure as I haven't played that much of either.
I couldn't disagree more. You would have to be a highly skilled low-limit player to beat the murderous rake at 2-5.
Part of the skill is adjusting your own play to the charactristics of your opponents. I have seen a lot of players who think they are good (any may very well play well in other kinds of games) that cannot do this.
I completely agree with sitting back and waiting for a good hand. The *number one* skill you need to have for a low-limit game is correctly judging what a good hand actually is. This is probably much, much harder than most people think. What a good hand is, and in particular what a good flop is, in low-limit is *miles* away from what it would be in a "standard" solid game. (Yes, it's so far away I can't even use metric.)
If you're the kind of player who would never consider checking and folding Ah Kd for one bet on a flop of Kc 7c 3c, you'll probably get destroyed in a low-limit game. Or at the very least, you'll be belly-aching to someone about how all of your "good hands" get rivered. :cool:
ScottyZ
I've played in Sarnia a few times (I'm originally from there), and I'd say it's fairly close to the Brantford 5-10 in terms of opponent skill level.
ScottyZ
In B&M when some one is raising fast (on the flop or pre-flop) that usually means they have a good hand. If they check or call that usually means they have either a very weak pair or want more cards to help them out. I also find in B&M people hardly bluff so when they are raising you chances are they have something.
On-line you don’t get that and people will bluff more often. Also when I play on-line I always wonder about the people that take they time playing. I wonder if they are using a calculator or something trying to determine there outs and what chance they have of a certain card coming up, where in B&M you have to use your head.
This is what makes it high variance maybe, but also much *easier* to beat than a standard game (forgetting about the rake for a moment).
What you might call "opponents chasing crazy draws, calling you to the river with anything, and seeing every flop", I would call "making a lot of mistakes, making a lot of mistakes, and making a lot of mistakes".
Isn't that a Rounders line? "Some people, pros even, won't play low-limit. They can't handle the swings."
As long as you know how to take full advantage of the mistakes your opponents are making, you'll easily win the money if you can handle the swings and occasional wild draw-outs (both psychologically and in terms of bankroll). That's true in all poker of course.
I sometimes don't know why I even try to argue this point. If all the sharks hate low-limit because they think it's "bingo", that's more of the fishes' money left for me.
So let me end by saying, damn straight, low-limit is hard to beat. You should move on up to the higher limits where your opponents are more reasonable and play better. :cool:
[Note: All good sarcasm contains some truth. Low-limit is *not* as easy to beat as most people think (though it's by no means excessively hard either), especially with the effect of the rake taken into account.]
ScottyZ
Anyways.... the Sarnia 5-10 is quite soft from my experience. I go once a week and am up most of the time. There are lots of wild betters and huge calling stations. If you play tight and make the right reads and are getting the cards when you need them its very easy to leave up.
I like playing B&M way more because I can put people on hands alot easier. Reading weak players body language is a huge asset. Online because of different computers and internet connections you can never tell if someone is coming out betting strong or pondering a call ect.
Are you sure it was NL? I thought Mikey was about to sit some 4-handed $3-$6 holdem. That's the only game that really makes sense in terms of "butting onions".
Hmmm.... maybe that explains the outrageous buy-in. I see.
Seriously now, I agree that Sarnia was quite soft the (few) times I've been. I couldn't see any major differences in opponent skill between the Sarnia 5-10 and Brantford 5-10.
ScottyZ
ROFLMFAO - INPM (I nearly Pi$$ed myself).
This is either the funniest or 2nd funniest one-liner I've ever read on here. Bravo Scotty, I like your style.
The other beauty was (i think) in an all_aces trip report to Vegas where he is talking about his hotel room and he says the shower "puts you to a decision for all your chips"....LMFAO.
How bad?
The 2-5 rake is $1 per $10 (i.e. 10%), max $5.
Hehe, thanks very much.
I remember this one well also. I became an instant fan of his writing after reading that particular line. :cool:
ScottyZ
So tough to pick up on it sometimes :banghead: