why do you care so much about him going to school? seriously its his life and anyone can be successfull at whatever they want to do as long as they work on it. poker isnt any different.
Maybe I picked the wrong forum to voice this opinion, where obviously I am the minority.
I'm in total agreement with you Jim. I personally think no matter how good a person is there's going to come a time where he's going to need his education. I don't believe I ever met Mike, but at his age, and with his newly found wealth, I personally think he should continue his education.
I have no doubt he is a skilled player, but even the most skilled players have gone broke.
you really think if you work at poker, you can be successful at it and maybe make a decent living? sorry, but like all games of chance, poker is no different. Doesn't matter how skilled you are, when you factor in the element of luck, its very difficult to make a profit consistently. Granted, some are able to achieve success, but the vast majority are not. I'm just an advacate for education over gambling for a living. Maybe I picked the wrong forum to voice this opinion, where obviously I am the minority.
The thing is I expected a post like this from some newbie, online poker is rigged, or mothers against gambling poster. As far as I know you've been playing poker for a while, making strategy posts, so I don't know where this is coming from?
I think we are all for education over gambling for a living, but everybody is different. If you have certain talents that don't require a "piece of paper", then go for it. Plus Mike has said he is going back to school after, finish his degree, and get a real job. If he can take advantage of the poker boom now, he should be all over it. He'll be way up ahead.
Now about consistantly making profit, yes it is difficult and the majority can't do it. But if you are part of the minority, why not milk it? In athletics there is always an element of luck. Investment banking/trading, same thing.
I made a post a few weeks ago about being a full time pro-poker player. For 99% of people even thinking about this - it's not a good idea. I agree with pokerJAH to a degree.
I think that being "semi-pro" is the best way to approach this hobby. Have a steady job and make a little extra on the side.
In Mike's case I don't see anything wrong with putting off University for a year or two - granted that he does go and complete his education at that time.
The only reason big name pros are making any money today is from endorsements IMO. Mike "the mouth" gets about $100,000 each month from FTP. Phil Ivey's piece is around $600K a month last I heard. So with this kind of income you can see why these pros are able to "gamble" their lives away - not just in poker but golf, sports, dumb props, etc... It also explains why Phil Ivey doesn't have the drive to play poker anymore, he only plays to endorse FTP and wear the fuggly hat and T-shirts on TV.
The rest of the tournament pros, and other players are all just slowly going broke.
Look at Nam Le (when was the last time he won anything substantial, yet he plays almost all the WTP events along with their crew of JC Tran and Co.) Paul Phillips - very good and successful tournament player - admitted he had a year where he was over $200K in the red from tournaments. The list goes on and on.
One last thing - it's ok to be young and broke but it's totally different to be old and broke.
... its very difficult to make a profit consistently. Granted, some are able to achieve success, but the vast majority are not....
And that's basically what Mike said in an interview on Kitchener CTV news.
He sounds like he's got a good head on his shoulders and takes his win for what it is.
I have talked to Mike about this a little bit. I think that he would agree that it is a bad idea for most people to try to make a living at poker. I can't say that I know him well, but he seems to have a very level-headed attitude about playing poker for a living. He started out playing 1 cent/2 cent games and slowly built his bankroll online to eventually over 1 million dollars. That is not not luck - he worked hard to improve his game. He is taking this time now because he is old enough to play legally in these EPT events. It is also the time in history where poker tournaments have huge payouts.
My analogy is that lots of us play recreational sports, but very few people can play professionally. However, there are a few that have the talent combined with the discipline to be one of the elite. From what I have seen, Mike fits that formula.
You do need to be lucky to make a million within the timeframe that Mike did it, but lots of skill also.
Is mike a skilled player - absolutely. Does that mean he will succeed long term as a tournament pro - No, and odds are if he ONLY plays tournaments he will probably go broke.
I don't think that tournament poker can be profitable LONG TERM, I'm talking over 5-10+ years. You may win over 10 million in lifetime earnings, but you're also spending close to that in entry fees over the years.
To make money playing tournaments you need to be backed by a financial source outside of poker (ie: having horses, etc...) or you hit and run. There is just too many "good" players in the big tournaments today and being 0.5% better then the field is not enough.
I don't think that tournament poker can be profitable LONG TERM, I'm talking over 5-10+ years. You may win over 10 million in lifetime earnings, but you're also spending close to that in entry fees over the years.
It might be profitable, but not when you factor in the cost of travel/accommodations etc..
Thats the politically correct way of saying 'dropped out'.
No...
Most players on this forum aren't good enough... bottom line.
No offense anyone.
Mark
P.O.T.Forever
JAH, I think you underestimate that universities today are nothing more than 4 years of 'supervised post(pre)-school' playgrounds where people go to get shitfaced one last time before being ground into dust in the real world.
Speaking as a 2001 UW engineering grad myself I am glad that I finished school before I started playing poker.
If I was single I would be spending much more time playing poker than I do now, quite possible that I would play professionally. I have a wife and kids which allows me to play as a profitable hobby, and I love every minute of playing, even the bad beats.
I don’t fault anyone for taking time off, or even for dropping out of university. Post secondary is not for everyone, it’s just what some people do after high school.
If he has become this successful at poker in that period of time, school may not be the right thing for him. It’s not luck. Congratulations to him.
Comments
What is the point of this post?
I'm in total agreement with you Jim. I personally think no matter how good a person is there's going to come a time where he's going to need his education. I don't believe I ever met Mike, but at his age, and with his newly found wealth, I personally think he should continue his education.
I have no doubt he is a skilled player, but even the most skilled players have gone broke.
The thing is I expected a post like this from some newbie, online poker is rigged, or mothers against gambling poster. As far as I know you've been playing poker for a while, making strategy posts, so I don't know where this is coming from?
I think we are all for education over gambling for a living, but everybody is different. If you have certain talents that don't require a "piece of paper", then go for it. Plus Mike has said he is going back to school after, finish his degree, and get a real job. If he can take advantage of the poker boom now, he should be all over it. He'll be way up ahead.
Now about consistantly making profit, yes it is difficult and the majority can't do it. But if you are part of the minority, why not milk it? In athletics there is always an element of luck. Investment banking/trading, same thing.
- You clearly don't fully understand his future prospects.
I think that being "semi-pro" is the best way to approach this hobby. Have a steady job and make a little extra on the side.
In Mike's case I don't see anything wrong with putting off University for a year or two - granted that he does go and complete his education at that time.
The only reason big name pros are making any money today is from endorsements IMO. Mike "the mouth" gets about $100,000 each month from FTP. Phil Ivey's piece is around $600K a month last I heard. So with this kind of income you can see why these pros are able to "gamble" their lives away - not just in poker but golf, sports, dumb props, etc... It also explains why Phil Ivey doesn't have the drive to play poker anymore, he only plays to endorse FTP and wear the fuggly hat and T-shirts on TV.
The rest of the tournament pros, and other players are all just slowly going broke.
Look at Nam Le (when was the last time he won anything substantial, yet he plays almost all the WTP events along with their crew of JC Tran and Co.) Paul Phillips - very good and successful tournament player - admitted he had a year where he was over $200K in the red from tournaments. The list goes on and on.
One last thing - it's ok to be young and broke but it's totally different to be old and broke.
Kind of hard to when EPT is over in April and there is no other tournaments besides WSOP in which he can't play in for the summer months...
And that's basically what Mike said in an interview on Kitchener CTV news.
He sounds like he's got a good head on his shoulders and takes his win for what it is.
My ears are ringing. I will contribute 1 cpf buck to said fund.
Edit: and you ARE jealous, funny, for creating this spin off thread...but definately jealous.
My analogy is that lots of us play recreational sports, but very few people can play professionally. However, there are a few that have the talent combined with the discipline to be one of the elite. From what I have seen, Mike fits that formula.
Most players on this forum aren't good enough... bottom line.
No offense anyone.
Mark
None taken.
Wow...
Really?
I mean.... really?
Of ALL the people I figured MIGHT think they're pretty good... I mean... damn
mark
Is mike a skilled player - absolutely. Does that mean he will succeed long term as a tournament pro - No, and odds are if he ONLY plays tournaments he will probably go broke.
I don't think that tournament poker can be profitable LONG TERM, I'm talking over 5-10+ years. You may win over 10 million in lifetime earnings, but you're also spending close to that in entry fees over the years.
To make money playing tournaments you need to be backed by a financial source outside of poker (ie: having horses, etc...) or you hit and run. There is just too many "good" players in the big tournaments today and being 0.5% better then the field is not enough.
It might be profitable, but not when you factor in the cost of travel/accommodations etc..
Thats the politically correct way of saying 'dropped out'.
P.O.T.Forever
JAH, I think you underestimate that universities today are nothing more than 4 years of 'supervised post(pre)-school' playgrounds where people go to get shitfaced one last time before being ground into dust in the real world.
The truth hurts...
Speaking as a 2001 UW engineering grad myself I am glad that I finished school before I started playing poker.
If I was single I would be spending much more time playing poker than I do now, quite possible that I would play professionally. I have a wife and kids which allows me to play as a profitable hobby, and I love every minute of playing, even the bad beats.
I don’t fault anyone for taking time off, or even for dropping out of university. Post secondary is not for everyone, it’s just what some people do after high school.
If he has become this successful at poker in that period of time, school may not be the right thing for him. It’s not luck. Congratulations to him.
Jah, that's exactly what I thought each time I read one of your posts. You're not winning and you are rehashing, quit while you think you're ahead.