Does playing live help your online play?

Often times people talk about online players and the amount of hands they get to play. But I been playing in some tournaments at casinos and coming back online is much easier for me. I dont have as much patience with the micro MTT but the confidence I have in what to do in each situation is more apparent to me. Just wondered what others felt.

I think playing live increase your chances of becoming a better poker player opposed to playing online.

I've experienced the opposite. Online play has improved my technical game which I've incorporated into my live play. I think both have their merits though.

I agree with AUen. Online play is far superior in getting your technical experience up, because of the ability to multi and get far more volume in a shorter time span.

Although I do think that live play can vastly improve your ability to read the tells, and further understand the psychological/mental/meta aspects of the game.

For me, I think the analogy is Online = Quantity, Live = Quality.

Both have increased my game, I still think live helps alot more due to the fact that you can read peoples moves gives you more of an advantage to call a bluff

Here's what I want to know...

Does using PokerTracker stats/hud make you overly reliant on software, making your live game suffer?

My major reason for not buying PT is that I never want to be at a live table with a big decision to make and think "If only I had my HUD...."

I think the online play has definitely helped my live play. In live play theres a lot more to read than just raw stats that you can get from pokertracker and other softwares.

I couldn't disagree with some posts in this thread more. Entirely and tremendously. Here's my argument...

Point 1: Playing online should make you a much better player live.
Why? : You are playing a lot of hands. A lot more than a live grinder ever will because you have the opportunity to play whenever you like, see more hands (even at a single table) per hour, as well as multi-table. Unless you're a zombie, you should be learning and becoming better with the practice/experience.

Point 2: You shouldn't be reliant on HUDs, it should help you.
Why? : Again, unless you're a zombie (live this time) you should be able to slot players into the "TAG" or "LAG" or "MORON" categories when sitting at the tables. You know how to play against these types because the HUD helps you immediately ID these people, whereas at a table it might take 30 minutes. It's up to you to pay attention.

Point 3: Live players are just as bad (if not worse) than online players.
Why? : I play $25nl online (usually 4 to 6 tables). When I play live I play either $40 or $100nl (with $1-2 blinds). There is no doubt, whether I am playing here in LA, or in Palm Springs, or even Vegas - that the players live play looser and worse than the $25nl players online at FullTilt or PokerStars. Nobody goes to the casino to fold and usually they just go to have a good time, not necessarily be profitable. Playing strictly live will make you a worse online player because at these levels the players live are worse. Period.

Point 4: MTT Players (and structures) live (sub $150 buy ins) are HORRIBLE.
Why? : Most live tournaments feature 15 minute blinds ... which basically means that every 9 hands the blinds go up. They also shortstack you to begin with (especially in Vegas) so after 3 (or 4 if you are lucky) rounds you are shortstacked and it becomes "coin flip fever" rather than Poker. The structures you see online are far superior (more hands, more poker) and you can actually play much like the better structures of the higher buyins which attract the better players. The smaller buyin tournaments feel more like a crap-shoot than poker-skill.

Icemonkey makes many good points.

I think the biggest advantage a live game will give you in terms of developing your game compared to playing online is that you've got a lot more time available to think through your actions. Online you've got the pressure of the clock always counting down so sometimes your decision making may suffer - live you don't really have that problem and you can perform the kind of analysis at the table that online you'd really only be able to do as a post-mortem.

Eventually a lot of these decisions will become quicker, but when you're starting out the extra thinking time can be helpful.

Live is, of course, the only place you can develop other live-specific skills like reading players, keeping track of pot and stack sizes, learning rules and so on and as Icemonkey points out, it's a great place to play against awful players for lots of money. Both have their merits. For sheer volume of hands seen though, it's impossible to beat online play.

Online has provided seasoning and accelerated experience. It has improved my live play. As being profitable, live by far is the way to go.

Online is a great way to pick up the technical skills and I believe that online players can be good live players but live players cant be good online players.

Why, exactly, don't live players make good online players?

Live players rely on tells and the type of player that he faces more than the cards. Online players are generally more experienced from all of the hands and experience.

No offence, but that's complete nonsense.

I agree if you learn that they are different and adjust accordingly. You can have success at both. I prefer live more loose players

Online players generally have more of a technical game than live pros.