This is an interesting question...I am not a big fan of online poker, soley because it seems to lack the human element. Can betting alone capture what poker is? Or is the human component necessary?

Is online poker, really poker proper?

Humans bet in patterns. Those patterns are bigger tells than Oreo cookies.

__________________

BOOM!!

Betting paterns are the biggest tells you can get from an average poker player... of course if you play with tourist who cant contain themselves when they hit hard, its another ball game, but really obvious physical tells are really hard to get without knowing your opponent very well...

KJ

__________________
Originally Posted by Girevik
Heck, I've seen people go nuts with middle pair!

Betting patterns...So are you saying that focusing on how much, with what hands, and when, is enough?

Then why not play a computer game? We can certainly program a computer to do all those things.

People do use bots online and they're minimally successful. The advantage is that they can play 30 tables at a time.

What a computer can't do is read fear levels, trends/swings that are affected by recent activity. Either way, money's money. Poker is about romance- it's about money. The frequency of how people bet in what positions with what hands under what circumstances given what prior actions in the hand can't be interpreted by a bot. Nor can the percepetion of how others perceive you.

__________________

Hence why bots are a problem, although not a huge problem.

while I agree about patterns I disagree that online poker is "real" poker.

It has as much similarity to poker as softball does to baseball. The rules are generally the same, but the game is played very differently.

online is lacking much more than the human element. It is lacking the discipline element. A lot of these ADHD kids who crush the online game wouldn't stand a chance in a cardroom. they just don't have the patience for it.

One of my biggest strengths is reading people (which probably explains why I don't really like playing online compared to live). Online I'm another decent player, in a cardroom I eat people up for some reason. Online I try to avoid good players, live I have absolutely no fear of them.

I just read a book which explained micro-tells, these are tells that are incredibly subtle where the person seeing it doesn't even realize it but they still act on it. I genuinely think I have this ability and am working on recognizing it, instead of it being completely instinctual.

I also pay substantially more attention live than online since there is nothing else to grab my attention. I completely immerse myself in the game and therefor play better.

The strange part for me is, I get bored playing online but I have played live for 20 hours straight and only left because I was falling asleep. Most people say the opposite

__________________
Thank you John McCain for picking a woman who represents the worst-case scenario: A cute wild buffoon who is proud to be dumb.

I said in manguy's "PokerStars rigged?" thread that I have a lot of problems with online poker and I guess I'll put them out, but they can be misunderstood. The "real poker" thing, I find to be a bit snobby. I'll just say that they require much different disciplines.

Online, you can a hand per minute and not be playing too many hands because of multitabling. So, if you have to be playing a hand while you're playing, you can get away with it. Online play require better analytical skills than live play though. The math in limit is fairly simple and loosely known. In NL, you can be horrible at math and succeed live, but not online. Pull that online and you'll go broke because you'll get trapped by reverse tells- mainly time.

Av8 and others have railed me during tournies and such and ask what I had if it took me a while to act thinking it was a big laydown or a posturing move when I was really just grabbing another beer from the fridge.

Basically, strictly analytical players can't survive is tough NL and hi-limit games live and the reverse goes for strictly feel players playing online. The reason why internet players are rampaging a lot of big tournaments now is because softwares have taught them to map patterns which goes along with their strong analytical skills. These pattern mapping skills have a larger margin of error online, so you're confidence is wrecked slower through a bad read online than live. This has created a poker world where most great online players can play great live, but live players without the oppurtunity to massively exercise their analytical skills live will have problems online in softer games.

I admire that Devilfish and Esfandiari play so many hands online to exercise those abilities and be more versatile. Online poker is a new game, a medium that requires emphasis on different disciplines, but still poker.

__________________

I agree with most of what you said except the above quote.

The "big" money in poker is live. If these guys really could all last live then they are either A) not trying, B) or not cutting it.

I think you are overlooking the patience neccassary in a live game compared to online. This is a major hurdle for many players who could be great but fail. Online, patience is not an issue you just open another table or browse the web or whatever. Live YOU HAVE TO BE PATIENT, you have no choice. no matter how well you you know the game/math/psychology if you have pronounced streaks of undisciplined play you will be a loser.

Additionally you don't have to focus on your opponents or rely on memory, you have poker tracker or notes to do that for you.

I'm not saying online poker is a joke, I said "real" poker because live poker has been around a lot longer, not because I think it is wiffleball. Like I said, it's softball.

__________________
Thank you John McCain for picking a woman who represents the worst-case scenario: A cute wild buffoon who is proud to be dumb.

i am exactly the same for some reason.