analyse this!

[MANTIS01]

Nah, I still don't get what your saying James. I said that I think internet players don't appreciate individual situations as well as live players. You say that you appreciate situations on-line very well. But what does that prove? You are someone who rates yourself as having an edge over the field. So how you think can't be indicative of the thought process of the average internet player.....who wont appreciate situations as well as you.

Anyways, moving on

Posted by: LuckyLloyd

In that it has been explained numerous times why the individual scenario cannot make -EV into +EV and yet ye come back and repeatedly say "I only do this the odd time" or "there is no long - term" etc, etc.

   
This interests me. I don't agree with it but I do appreciate it is how a lot of good players think. I think it kinda adds something to what I'm saying about the lack of appreciation of individual situations.

Example: I'm playing at Walsall Grosvenor on Tues night. There are 13 left and we are playing down to a final table of 9. I am playing off a tight image and have not entered a pot in like three rounds but am well chipped. UTG is a good regular player and is also well chipped. He has been chatting to another regular about how he hasn't made a final table in over a month and it's pissing him off. He raises UTG on my bb. As the action is coming round to me I am thinking if the ss in the sb folds I will call. The sb folds and I call. I haven't looked at my hand. The flops comes three bricks and I bet half the pot. UTG gives a good performance before folding A-K face up. I look down and see J-2. Now I would say that A-K vs J-2 is pretty much a -EV situation for the J-2. So what? I was sure that UTG's determination to get to the final meant he was never going to tangle with me unless he had a big hand. This makes the situation +EV for me.

I don't know how people can say that this individual scenario is not +EV for me because I'm holding J-2 and that is -EV in the long run. The thing is that in live play the information you receive is more abundant and much clearer than on-line. This guy, while chatting to his mate, was telling me how he was feeling. Whilst poker players are generally habitual the fact remains true that people are people. If you are lacking confidence you will play differently, if you are bored or emotional or drunk or pissed off you will play differently. The state of mind people are in is quite easy to pick up on when playing live but very hard to do on-line.

There was a thread I read on Blonde recently asking people if they thought poker was a science or an art. A very good question I thought. LuckyLloyd's strat is science and it is supported by many. The problem I have with this is that poker is played by people. If it was played by bots then the science method would be unbeatable. But as it is the game is played by people, and people are much more difficult to strat against because they have emotions that can change their play.

I have become much more scientific in my strat since I have been using Blonde but I don't want to approach poker with a rigid mentality that those 2 cards are -EV vs x range because then you lose the art. I try and play at least one hand without looking at my cards when I play live to keep in mind that cards are not the be all and end all of the game.

[EvilPie]

This discussion seems to have developed in to analysing the difference between live and online play so I will add my opinion.

I play both live and online and find online mtts much harder. If you play a straight game, only raise with premiums and always fold your weak aces you will do reasonably well live imo. Do this online and you are unlikely to have any real success.

I believe that long term it is correct to make funky plays such as reraising a 3 better all in with a weak ace. They will usually fold and on the occassions when they don't you will win 30% anyway.

What it comes down to is that in live play there isn't really a long term. You can play 4 tournaments  in a week and it will take 6 weeks to match what the likes of Flushy / Moorman play on a Sunday. Play for a year and you have matched what they will do in a little over a week. There just isn't the sheer volume live for long term prospects to work out.

In live play you make 1 mistake and you're out whether it was correct long term or not. You can make the same move online knowing that if it goes wrong you can start up another tournament and proceed with your long term aims.

So the J10 hand. Play this online and you are likely to face a raise when you bet the flop with nothing and you are therefore wasting chips by calling. Play it live and you are far more likely to have a chance to play at it on the flop without any resistance.

[PocketLady]

What it comes down to is that in live play there isn't really a long term. You can play 4 tournaments  in a week and it will take 6 weeks to match what the likes of Flushy / Moorman play on a Sunday. Play for a year and you have matched what they will do in a little over a week. There just isn't the sheer volume live for long term prospects to work out.

I disagree with this.  Online the game is now so hard that ROIs have fallen for most winning players and thus volume is a means of keeping a decent income even though their ROI isn't as good as it used to be.  Live there hasn't been this massive increase in the general standard of play.  Although live players have always had more problems with variance (ie downswings lasting a lot longer) because they are not seeing as many hands, as Flushy has already said his live ROI is better than his online ROI, and I'd imagine this to be the case for most players who play both.  What you are basically saying there is that live players are not going to be able to make a living from just playing live, which is wrong quite frankly.  If you are saying that they are not going to be able to make a living from MTTs alone then yes, it is very difficult, but live cash games are the best you can get. 

But even then there are very very few online players who are winners from playing MTTs alone.

[ShatnerPants]

What it comes down to is that in live play there isn't really a long term. You can play 4 tournaments  in a week and it will take 6 weeks to match what the likes of Flushy / Moorman play on a Sunday. Play for a year and you have matched what they will do in a little over a week. There just isn't the sheer volume live for long term prospects to work out.

I disagree with this.  Online the game is now so hard that ROIs have fallen for most winning players and thus volume is a means of keeping a decent income even though their ROI isn't as good as it used to be.  Live there hasn't been this massive increase in the general standard of play.  Although live players have always had more problems with variance (ie downswings lasting a lot longer) because they are not seeing as many hands, as Flushy has already said his live ROI is better than his online ROI, and I'd imagine this to be the case for most players who play both.  What you are basically saying there is that live players are not going to be able to make a living from just playing live, which is wrong quite frankly.  If you are saying that they are not going to be able to make a living from MTTs alone then yes, it is very difficult, but live cash games are the best you can get.

I kind of interpretted it as saying on line you can rely on the long run as being your friend.  As long as you play the +EV move it doesn't matter if it works out or not, you'll see enough hands so that eventually it will sort itself out, and you'll be quids in.

Playing live though, you can't  rely on the long term sorting you out.  You can't just play the technically correct move assuming that eventually you'll even out variance.  So every opportunity can be looked on as 'unique' because of this.  So occasionally making a move that statistically is -EV in a live game is not necessarily bad, because the ever changing variables can make it this one time a +EV move.

[PocketLady]

From what I could gather I thought EvilPie was saying that it's better to just be playing ABC live, and making moves online because the standard of play is so good that you have to make these moves to win.  Where as live if you call with J10 then it's ok because you won't be up against someone who is going to try and outplay you with A high on the flop.  Although I don't agree with some of it, I agree with the last part, and because I know that Claw can fold. 

[EvilPie]

What it comes down to is that in live play there isn't really a long term. You can play 4 tournaments  in a week and it will take 6 weeks to match what the likes of Flushy / Moorman play on a Sunday. Play for a year and you have matched what they will do in a little over a week. There just isn't the sheer volume live for long term prospects to work out.

I disagree with this.  Online the game is now so hard that ROIs have fallen for most winning players and thus volume is a means of keeping a decent income even though their ROI isn't as good as it used to be.  Live there hasn't been this massive increase in the general standard of play.  Although live players have always had more problems with variance (ie downswings lasting a lot longer) because they are not seeing as many hands, as Flushy has already said his live ROI is better than his online ROI, and I'd imagine this to be the case for most players who play both.  What you are basically saying there is that live players are not going to be able to make a living from just playing live, which is wrong quite frankly.  If you are saying that they are not going to be able to make a living from MTTs alone then yes, it is very difficult, but live cash games are the best you can get.

I kind of interpretted it as saying on line you can rely on the long run as being your friend.  As long as you play the +EV move it doesn't matter if it works out or not, you'll see enough hands so that eventually it will sort itself out, and you'll be quids in.

Playing live though, you can't  rely on the long term sorting you out.  You can't just play the technically correct move assuming that eventually you'll even out variance.  So every opportunity can be looked on as 'unique' because of this.  So occasionally making a move that statistically is -EV in a live game is not necessarily bad, because the ever changing variables can make it this one time a +EV move.

This

[EvilPie]

From what I could gather I thought EvilPie was saying that it's better to just be playing ABC live, and making moves online because the standard of play is so good that you have to make these moves to win.  Where as live if you call with J10 then it's ok because you won't be up against someone who is going to try and outplay you with A high on the flop.

I didn't mean to generalise it quite so much but I can see how you would interpret it this way. I also didn't mean to suggest that online players are better or worse, just different. They have to be different because they are playing in a different environment. They have learnt that they can make moves against a button steal because in the long term it will work out. In live games you have to be more careful as you are more likely to run in to something genuine and if you do you're out and on your way home.

Flushy has said that his live ROI is better than his online and I can definitely believe this. I'd be interested to know if this is just for mtts or if it includes cash. If cash is involved then it's a whole different ballgame because the differences between live and online diminish to almost nothing if you are playing cash. The fact that you can reload at any time means that there is very little difference between the two. In cash it simply comes down to who is the better player. There are no differences between live and online other than seeing the reaction on peoples faces.

[PocketLady]

From what I could gather I thought EvilPie was saying that it's better to just be playing ABC live, and making moves online because the standard of play is so good that you have to make these moves to win.  Where as live if you call with J10 then it's ok because you won't be up against someone who is going to try and outplay you with A high on the flop.

I didn't mean to generalise it quite so much but I can see how you would interpret it this way. I also didn't mean to suggest that online players are better or worse, just different. They have to be different because they are playing in a different environment. They have learnt that they can make moves against a button steal because in the long term it will work out. In live games you have to be more careful as you are more likely to run in to something genuine and if you do you're out and on your way home.

Flushy has said that his live ROI is better than his online and I can definitely believe this. I'd be interested to know if this is just for mtts or if it includes cash. If cash is involved then it's a whole different ballgame because the differences between live and online diminish to almost nothing if you are playing cash. The fact that you can reload at any time means that there is very little difference between the two. In cash it simply comes down to who is the better player. There are no differences between live and online other than seeing the reaction on peoples faces.

Ok, I can see where you are coming from with your other post now  but I have to say I couldn't disagree more about the cash games.  Live cash games are sooo unlike online cash games it's unreal.  Standard raise live is like 5/6BBs+ for a start, the whole world wants to see a flop most of the time, and although this is somewhat down to the fact that some of the players are worse, it is also down to this "different environment".   If you are a winning player your ROI is going to be far far higher at live cash than online.  But like you say, it is a whole different ball game to MTTs.

[david3103]

Ok, I can see where you are coming from with your other post now  but I have to say I couldn't disagree more about the cash games.  Live cash games are sooo unlike online cash games it's unreal.  Standard raise live is like 5/6BBs+ for a start, the whole world wants to see a flop most of the time, and although this is somewhat down to the fact that some of the players are worse, it is also down to this "different environment".   If you are a winning player your ROI is going to be far far higher at live cash than online.  But like you say, it is a whole different ball game to MTTs.

you've obviously never played 10p/20p HE at your local Rileys......
'just like playing online but with the tactile joys of cards and chips to rattle'

[PocketLady]

Ok, I can see where you are coming from with your other post now  but I have to say I couldn't disagree more about the cash games.  Live cash games are sooo unlike online cash games it's unreal.  Standard raise live is like 5/6BBs+ for a start, the whole world wants to see a flop most of the time, and although this is somewhat down to the fact that some of the players are worse, it is also down to this "different environment".   If you are a winning player your ROI is going to be far far higher at live cash than online.  But like you say, it is a whole different ball game to MTTs.

you've obviously never played 10p/20p HE at your local Rileys......
'just like playing online but with the tactile joys of cards and chips to rattle'

I'm talking about when you get to the stakes online where the software adds a very unorthodox "fold" button to the screen 

[david3103]

Ok, I can see where you are coming from with your other post now  but I have to say I couldn't disagree more about the cash games.  Live cash games are sooo unlike online cash games it's unreal.  Standard raise live is like 5/6BBs+ for a start, the whole world wants to see a flop most of the time, and although this is somewhat down to the fact that some of the players are worse, it is also down to this "different environment".   If you are a winning player your ROI is going to be far far higher at live cash than online.  But like you say, it is a whole different ball game to MTTs.

you've obviously never played 10p/20p HE at your local Rileys......
'just like playing online but with the tactile joys of cards and chips to rattle'

I'm talking about when you get to the stakes online where the software adds a very unorthodox "fold" button to the screen 

I can only imagine what an unorthodox fold button would look like....

Finding myself at such stakes would be like watching the Cobblers go 2-0 up at Sunderland and would probably have the same sad 'rivered' ending 

[PocketLady]

Lol, yep the Cobblers suck atm, even I have to agree with that.  Must be due to variance...

[ThatsSoMinusEV]

dry flop. he's c/c'ing either a weak made hand or big hand(Q9/99/33), possibly air to see if you check the turn and bet the river. But seeing as he c/r'sd the turn unlikely he has air in this spot.

Turn you check back. If he has a weak made hand like T9/98 he'll fold but you have a ton of equity against his range anways, and if he does have a monster your opening yourself up for getting priced outta your draw.

Based on river i think he has a strong hand and were drawing to 10outs. (9 for flush - pairing the board + (4tens - 10h)). So we're nt priced in.

Cbet flop - prob check flop to turn some more outs - check back turn - fold river

[George2Loose]

Awesome thread. Wp Louis

[Claw75]

Awesome thread. Wp Louis

ha! it was a good thread in the end.

Not sure Simon 'Simon Galloway' Galloway will be impressed with the bumpage though.....