Edge of Top Players

Do you think that the edge of great players over average to good players increases massively in live poker from internet poker?
I would imagine the presence of physical tells and psychology means that skill increases for live tournaments, with there being more to read, so they are better for the pros.

I think the answer is obv yes they have the edge.

The premier poker players over the years did not learn the game online

They learned it live

So the answer it yes they will always have an advantage over a newbie or even a successful online player

like pc said, its an obv yes.

the tells that a "pro" can pick up are amazing.

anything from facial expressions to hand movements to how they handle their chips to betting patterns even to how their voice is..if it changes anytime.

Yes and no.

A good online player is playing a much more solid game than most live players.

So an online player has the potential to gain a greater edge than most live players provided he is able to pick up on tells and mentally judge things like vpip pfr f3bet and all the other stats we use.

So its not as simple as just entering a live game.. the online player has to work at live play, but his game is already very solid. So if he can learn to play the same game live.. he can add tells etc to his already solid game.

This is why a lot of live payers struggle online. Firstly online is tougher than live play and secondly weapons like tells are removed from their arsonal.

Alot of live players would get destroyed online, the top live pros can probably beat most games online but they are pretty rare indeed.

If you are playing pros live anyway you should probably find another table lol, if its tourney well... not much you can do there. But yea obviously they will have some edge from years of watching people.

No question about it. Especially all the old pros, they didn't have computers back then and they learned the game from Live play.

Physical reads are overrated. Psychology is just as present online as it is live. The edge great players have over good players is mostly a better understanding of how ranges play against ranges and how to adjust their range estimates to the table dynamics. That's relevant the same way both live and online.

Good players have a bigger edge over fishes live. That's all.

This is the reason online player play a much more solid game.

A decent online multitabler will play at least 500 hands per hour, which is equivalent to around 15 hours live play.

Someone playing online, 20 hours a week for just one year will play around 5 years worth of of full time live play.

Someone playing full time online play is clocking up over a decade's worth of live hands in just one year

That is assuming the live player is full time. If he playes just once or twice a week, then the full time online multitabler clocks up as many hands in a year as the casual live player plays in a lifetime.

I would disagree with belgo on the tells.

Sure, if you're playing 1/2 there is not much financial pressure so physical tells will not be so evident... unless of course the pot is large and players are betting their full stacks.

However, if you are planning to play the main event, where most players have put up 10,000$ and the potential winnings are huge... then the physical tells will be much more evident.

It make take you a few hours to really determine the tell(s) of just 1 or 2 players at a table. But if you recognise a tell and see it against you it can make a huge difference.

Of course... you need the courage to act on this... and this is what separates great players from good players... the ability to ACT on a tell

good players whether theyre live or online have a significant edge over your average player (obv assuming we're deep).

online pros have a edge over live pros imo.

example: tom dwan over PH in cash games. lol

Hardly a fair comparison - pretty much all pros both live and online have an edge on Hellmuth in cash games. You could just as easily substitute Negreanu, Greenstein, Kenny Tran or any number of others for Dwan in that sentence.

Now - FWIW I think yes, the edge live pros have over the average players in their games is bigger than the edge online pros have over the average players in their games. That's a combination of a bunch of things though.

For one, the average player in a live game (even the stakes pros play at) is a lot worse than the average player in an online game.

Second, I think the people who say tells are overrated are overrating the idea that tells are overrated. It makes about as much sense as a live player saying HUDs are overrated online. If you know how to read physical tells (and one of the most important parts of being a live pro is being able to do that) you've got a big edge over your opponents who don't know how to.

EDIT: one other thing. This is all largely a moot point anyway because like a lot of other things, it's $/hr and not the size of your edge that matters.

Who cares if you can have a 15% edge on your opponents live and only a 5% edge online. The game you should be playing is the one where you make the most $/hr, not the one where you have a larger theoretical edge.

lol yes, PH is a big cash game donk. But the best internet players have a significant edge over any life pro: DN, Barry, etc etc imo.

As for the physical tells thing, I truly believe they are one of the most over rated things in poker. For example, if I am a thinking player, and I can reason out a hand do I really care if that persons hand shakes when he throws his chips in? or something of that nature? no. I really dont.

Take Tom on HSP. He was absolutely dominant over the other players(except for dario imo cuz darios sick too). Tom doesnt even play much live, but hes obv a thinking player and can reason out hands and figure out bluffs etc. Its not all about tells imo.

The $/hr thing, yeah pokerplayers want as much profit as possible, so they'll play where they can have the best winrate. But look at it this way, I could grind out a significant $/hr just playing like 50nl Full Ring, but even though youre making a decently hourly rate, youre not improving as a player. youre not playing tough opponents or getting yourself into cool spots where you can improve as a player.

imo most live "tells" are really figuring out how the player plays. I think more sick calls are a product of "well I know he doesn't vbet that thin so he's got nuts or air and a few draws mised..." than "well I saw a facial tick and that told me everything".

I think in live game I have a big edge on the average player whereseas online I am about break even.

I think tells are a big part of live poker especially when you are 'in the zone' when you can pickup a unbeleivable amount of information on your opponents holdings. Sometimes I get reads online too, but they aren't nowhere as easy to pickup as in a live game.

Another aspect you have to consider is table talk. It is very interesting how much control you can have on your oponents with table talk. I have literally talked people into making calls, calling instead of raising and so on. One part of table talk is also making a image that differs from the way you play.

Then there is false tells, acting, etc which can be used to the players advantage, so atleast the way I see it there is a host of more ways to gain a edge on your opponents in live poker.

Since we are on the subject of $/Hour, I would say live games are better since bad players with bigger blinds = happy flint