I will stick my foot in my mouth one more time; if you are able to turn $100 into $1MM, there are 9999 other people that have lost there $100 along the way. Granted, Mike likely has some poker skills that give him an edge, but to accomplish this luck plays a huge factor. If luck wasn't a huge factor, as Phil would say, he would win the main event every year. Skill only will take you so far, and to win a big event, luck is a huge factor.
Lets take Sir Watts as an example. I would say that Sir Watts is as skilled a player as Mike McDonald. Sir Watts total earnings from major live tournaments is approx. $35k in winnings (based on Hendon Mob stats). I would say he has likely spent more than that on entry fees for all the live major tournaments he has played in so he is likely a losing player (this ignores online tournaments where we know he is ahead) at this point in time. Does this make Mike M. a better player? I would say no, he has just been lucky and got the cards when he needed them and happened to place in a couple more events that Sir Watts. Granted they have played in different tournaments against different competitors but I think you understand my point. Even if Sir Watts is ahead at this point, skill has only taken him so far in live tournaments.
I look forward to the Sir Watts poker seminar, assuming I can take it online.
I don't think anyone here has said timex hasn't been lucky...we are merely saying he would've gotten to the point he's at eventually, but maybe just not as fast if he hasn't been as lucky as he has been...
fuck this place. i had a totally awesome post ripping jimmy a new one and i'm told i'm not logged on and poof all those beautiful words are gone. fuck fuck fuck fuck. fuck.
It is very rare that you can get through a major tournament without one or more of these 20/80% hands coming up that you are behind. Very rare, as anyone who has won a major tournament will confirm.
But in the major tournaments you are talking 2 hands out of maybe 1000 hands you may play so were are talking only very few hands that you need to get lucky and maybe they were not even allin in these 20/80 situations.
In a tournament, your skill will put you in position to get lucky. i.e. I have eoungh chips that I can gamble knowing I am a dog given the proper odds.
Greg, your the last person who should get into a luck vs skill argument after your Ching Hill run. Especially after you somehow came back to take away that tournament from me. I welcome all forum members to come out to Ching Hill and show me the skill element of poker.
it seems like you wouldn't recognize skill if it bismarked you in the face.
my original post had some sweet paraphrase of abraham lincoln. you can win sometimes with no skill. you can't win a big one without some luck. but you can't win consistently withoug a great deal of skill. or something like that.
Im sure if he ever went broke he would give up trying to be a poker superstar and go to school. whos saying he wouldent ? Just because he traveling the world and playing poker at 18 years old, does that mean he will never go to college or Univeristy i dont think so lots of people take a couple years off before they go. not being rude just saying how does anyone know hes not goona go to a higher education?
How did this thread get to be such a big issue anyway????
Bottom line:
Should Mike finish university at some point? YES
Has Mike been lucky in poker to get his roll to 7 figures so quickly? - YES
Is Mike a talented poker player? YES
now if I can get Beanie42 and Zithal to add their comments, then we are getting somewhere.
I didn't bother posting since I had nothing useful to add. Everyone on the forum has already tried to educate you, but you just don't get it, so what's the point in me saying the same thing. However, since you decided to call me out personally, I will add a somewhat unique twist to this thread...
HOW DARE YOU!!! It's just luck, no skill involved? As Kristy pointed out, I started from $40 I won in a freeroll, and built it up to 5 figures which I used to take my family to Disney and a few other places, as well as pay off some debts. I did get a couple "lucky" scores in tournaments, but I've lost more in tourney's then I've won. However, I purposefully spent a portion of my cash games on tourneys for the sheer enjoyment of it, and to take a shot to hopefully get lucky with a bigger score (which unfortunately didn't happen). All the profit I "lucked into" was a result of spending a lot of time riding the variance roller-coaster, knowing that if I played correctly, in time I would come ahead. And I did - not massive amounts like some others, but I started at low stakes, and cashed out rather than move up.
What I did was "grinding". Just in case you're unfamiliar with the term, it means to spend long hours making slow but steady progress (hopefully this definition will start you on your poker education, since you obviously haven't learned much yet). This means work - lots and lots of work. Now you're telling me that all the long hours I put in, the discipline I maintained, and the sacrifices my family made so I could work (yes - we considered this period of time "playing" to be work) was just "luck". Thank you very much for slapping me in the face and belittling what I did. Doesn't hurt much though - my memories of what I was able to do with my family help sooth the pain.
As far as Timex goes - congrats to him, he EARNED it. He needed some luck, but he's obviously worked very hard to get where he is. I read his story on 2+2 (thanks for the link obv), and I noticed some striking similiarities with how he started and my own journey. The difference is that when I hit 10k I cashed out - decided it wasn't worth the effort or emotional stress anymore. Timex continued to play, reached out to some good players who helped teach him, and kept going forward. As far as quitting school and playing, I think he's made the best possible decision. For good players like him, right now is an amazing opportunity. I don't have the desire to play full-time, but even if I did, I don't have the opportunity since I have a family to support and other responsibilites that come with age. He's young and doesn't have those sorts of things to cosider, so why pass up a golden opportunity. So you can be impressed with his degree?
Go buy a clue. If you can't afford one because your degree and good-paying job leaves you living paycheque to paycheque, maybe ask Timex to buy it for you. He can afford it - he's lucky...
Most players on this forum aren't good enough... bottom line.
No offense anyone.
Mark
P.O.T.Forever
Personally, I'd go with this one:
Can it be possible? You've gone from totally results oriented to now thinking that results mean so little that anybody with excellent results must just be really lucky!?
As another of the numerous "work from the micro limits to a 5 figure plus BR", I'm fairly offended at the notion of summarizing the win as luck. Sure variance hit him over the head, you don't win multi's ever without getting lucky. But clearly this kid's doing something right.
I don't know the kid, but from what I've read in the Record, he sounds reasonably level headed. To be as successful as he's been in his short poker career probably implies he has some grasp of variance. He's young, he can go to school whenever, but if he wants to travel now, he might as well. He has the time, money and desire to do it, why would he pass up an opportunity like that? He can get his education when he has a desire to pursue it. Otherwise he'll just be wasting his time there anyways.
And is it just me, but is every other poster on this forum a former/current UW math/eng grad? (CompEng '04) It's borderline ridiculous.
And is it just me, but is every other poster on this forum a former/current UW math/eng grad? (CompEng '04) It's borderline ridiculous.
Only the skilled players carry a math/eng degree from UW. The rest of us fish have math/eng degrees from lesser schools.
Am I the only one who thinks he started this thread to spark discussion in an otherwise dead forum? Am I the only one who thinks the forum administrator/moderators are conspiring with him to pump some life back into this forum? I feel like he's going to "Gotcha!" anytime now...
Either that or he must be desperate for CPF bucks now that they've gone up in value...
Am I the only one who thinks he started this thread to spark discussion in an otherwise dead forum? Am I the only one who thinks the forum administrator/moderators are conspiring with him to pump some life back into this forum? I feel like he's going to "Gotcha!" anytime now...
Either that or he must be desperate for CPF bucks now that they've gone up in value...
Ahhh the conspiracy theories..was wandering when they will come out... Actually, not really.
Might as well add Kristy to your list of guilty parties in our "forum-go-active" campaign.
I think an example worthy of discussion is Shannon Shorr. Shorr had a great 2006 on the tournament circuit, followed by a terrible 2007. Along the way he jumped into some big PLO games online, and he turned out to be in way over his head.
He has decided to go back to college and play part-time. Who knows how much of his initial winnings he has left.
The real risk to young players winning big in tournaments is to think that they are invincible, and that the big wins will come along every so often, so why worry about managing the bankroll.
They should take out a good portion of their winning and invest it in bonds or another safe financial instrument.
1) Luck plays an overriding factor when it comes to increaing your bankroll from micro limits to becoming a millionaire. If the top 1,000 skilled players were to be each given $1000 to play poker online, I would say that none of them would be able to achieve this feat. Why, because to increase their bankroll to this magnitude, skill is not the overriding factor, luck is.
Skills will help you achieve success at poker and will help you overcome negative variance, but this level of achievement is as a result of getting lucky.
I don't think your understanding the history of these top online players, pretty much all of them started with nothing and played micros. mtt or cash players. And all of them are doing it within the same time span.
I don't think your understanding the history of these top online players, pretty much all of them started with nothing and played micros. mtt or cash players. And all of them are doing it within the same time span.
Correct, as far as it goes. But if you juxtapose the (relatively) few who actually "make" it, a la M.M., against the thousands (10's of thousands, or more?) who try, but fail, then I think Jah's point is made. The final summation to Jah's point would be that the key is knowing which category you fit into, "luck-box" or "savant". If you have the skills that Mike appears to possess, enjoy your new career. If you lucked into the "Big One", take the money and RUN. As always, knowledge of self is the key. Here endeth the lesson.
1) Luck plays an overriding factor when it comes to increaing your bankroll from micro limits to becoming a millionaire. If the top 1,000 skilled players were to be each given $1000 to play poker online, I would say that none of them would be able to achieve this feat. Why, because to increase their bankroll to this magnitude, skill is not the overriding factor, luck is.
Skills will help you achieve success at poker and will help you overcome negative variance, but this level of achievement is as a result of getting lucky.
2) Today's youth are better off getting a formal education than chasing some poker dream that will more than likely lead them to become broke and very disappointed.
I mean no disrespect to Mike McDonald and what he has been able to achieve and I hope he eventually takes the money he has earned online and uses it to secure his future.
Do you really think that all these 18-24 year old online stars started with huge bankrolls? No, they started at the small stakes and worked their way up. The 2 that come to my mind right away are annette_15 (who i think turned freeroll winnings into being one of the top online tourney players and the WSOPE main event title) and green plastic who started off with like 50 dollars and turned it into millions by working his way up to the highest stakes cash games online. Did these players get lucky on their way up... probably, but getting lucky just helped them get there faster. They have played 100s of thousands of hands and have spent more time than you could imagine working on their game. I guess using your logic the so called top 10 online players are just the 10 luckiest players.
If you took the top 1000 skilled players and gave them a 1000 dollar starting bankroll I would say the vast majority of them could turn that 1000 dollars into 500K+ within 2 years or so... most of them have already done this.
In case somebody still doesn't understand that timex is one of the RARE exceptions and dropping out of school was the correct decision to become a poker professional, watch the EPT episodes at Rogers Sportsnet. Sportsnet has been showing since last week how timex used his skills, not luck, to win the EPT championship and $1.4 million. Despite being too young to play in any US tournament, timex remains in the top 3 for Player of the Year.
How did I miss this thread? I guess it was while I was on hiatus. Jah, obviously you have no concept of poker as a skill game and obviously that your naivety or stupidity (I still can't decide!) gets you lots of attention in which you bask.
I stopped reading at page 4 or 5 -- since you started this thread, what is your education and what incredible job has it afforded you?
Comments
I don't think anyone here has said timex hasn't been lucky...we are merely saying he would've gotten to the point he's at eventually, but maybe just not as fast if he hasn't been as lucky as he has been...
(that if you want to get a thread off the ground you need to a: reference Mike McDonald, b: insist on craziness)
But in the major tournaments you are talking 2 hands out of maybe 1000 hands you may play so were are talking only very few hands that you need to get lucky and maybe they were not even allin in these 20/80 situations.
In a tournament, your skill will put you in position to get lucky. i.e. I have eoungh chips that I can gamble knowing I am a dog given the proper odds.
my original post had some sweet paraphrase of abraham lincoln. you can win sometimes with no skill. you can't win a big one without some luck. but you can't win consistently withoug a great deal of skill. or something like that.
there's more. much more. stay tuned.
Bottom line:
Should Mike finish university at some point? YES
Has Mike been lucky in poker to get his roll to 7 figures so quickly? - YES
Is Mike a talented poker player? YES
I didn't bother posting since I had nothing useful to add. Everyone on the forum has already tried to educate you, but you just don't get it, so what's the point in me saying the same thing. However, since you decided to call me out personally, I will add a somewhat unique twist to this thread...
HOW DARE YOU!!! It's just luck, no skill involved? As Kristy pointed out, I started from $40 I won in a freeroll, and built it up to 5 figures which I used to take my family to Disney and a few other places, as well as pay off some debts. I did get a couple "lucky" scores in tournaments, but I've lost more in tourney's then I've won. However, I purposefully spent a portion of my cash games on tourneys for the sheer enjoyment of it, and to take a shot to hopefully get lucky with a bigger score (which unfortunately didn't happen). All the profit I "lucked into" was a result of spending a lot of time riding the variance roller-coaster, knowing that if I played correctly, in time I would come ahead. And I did - not massive amounts like some others, but I started at low stakes, and cashed out rather than move up.
What I did was "grinding". Just in case you're unfamiliar with the term, it means to spend long hours making slow but steady progress (hopefully this definition will start you on your poker education, since you obviously haven't learned much yet). This means work - lots and lots of work. Now you're telling me that all the long hours I put in, the discipline I maintained, and the sacrifices my family made so I could work (yes - we considered this period of time "playing" to be work) was just "luck". Thank you very much for slapping me in the face and belittling what I did. Doesn't hurt much though - my memories of what I was able to do with my family help sooth the pain.
As far as Timex goes - congrats to him, he EARNED it. He needed some luck, but he's obviously worked very hard to get where he is. I read his story on 2+2 (thanks for the link obv), and I noticed some striking similiarities with how he started and my own journey. The difference is that when I hit 10k I cashed out - decided it wasn't worth the effort or emotional stress anymore. Timex continued to play, reached out to some good players who helped teach him, and kept going forward. As far as quitting school and playing, I think he's made the best possible decision. For good players like him, right now is an amazing opportunity. I don't have the desire to play full-time, but even if I did, I don't have the opportunity since I have a family to support and other responsibilites that come with age. He's young and doesn't have those sorts of things to cosider, so why pass up a golden opportunity. So you can be impressed with his degree?
Go buy a clue. If you can't afford one because your degree and good-paying job leaves you living paycheque to paycheque, maybe ask Timex to buy it for you. He can afford it - he's lucky...
It is just insane to come down on Timex for being lucky. Of coarse there is luck in poker but there is also alot of skill involved.
Pokerjah stop playing playing if it is just luck to win 1mil. and you should play the lotto, bigger payout for you.
Greg at ching hill, well I was there, and yes luck did play a factor but I am pretty sure skill played a part to.
Greg Props to you and your ching hill domination last season...
Sorry about that bro.
Great posts from beanie, pkrface and yes even Cole! I wish I had a better education so I could put my thoughts into words like you guys.
Johnnie
My 2 cents:
I disagree with this (being POF):
Personally, I'd go with this one:
As another of the numerous "work from the micro limits to a 5 figure plus BR", I'm fairly offended at the notion of summarizing the win as luck. Sure variance hit him over the head, you don't win multi's ever without getting lucky. But clearly this kid's doing something right.
I don't know the kid, but from what I've read in the Record, he sounds reasonably level headed. To be as successful as he's been in his short poker career probably implies he has some grasp of variance. He's young, he can go to school whenever, but if he wants to travel now, he might as well. He has the time, money and desire to do it, why would he pass up an opportunity like that? He can get his education when he has a desire to pursue it. Otherwise he'll just be wasting his time there anyways.
And is it just me, but is every other poster on this forum a former/current UW math/eng grad? (CompEng '04) It's borderline ridiculous.
It's because Math is just a cover for the degenerate gambler that exists in them all.
Only the skilled players carry a math/eng degree from UW. The rest of us fish have math/eng degrees from lesser schools.
Am I the only one who thinks he started this thread to spark discussion in an otherwise dead forum? Am I the only one who thinks the forum administrator/moderators are conspiring with him to pump some life back into this forum? I feel like he's going to "Gotcha!" anytime now...
Either that or he must be desperate for CPF bucks now that they've gone up in value...
Ahhh the conspiracy theories..was wandering when they will come out... Actually, not really.
Might as well add Kristy to your list of guilty parties in our "forum-go-active" campaign.
pshhh, 'parties' I'm the goddamn ring leader
He has decided to go back to college and play part-time. Who knows how much of his initial winnings he has left.
The real risk to young players winning big in tournaments is to think that they are invincible, and that the big wins will come along every so often, so why worry about managing the bankroll.
They should take out a good portion of their winning and invest it in bonds or another safe financial instrument.
I don't think your understanding the history of these top online players, pretty much all of them started with nothing and played micros. mtt or cash players. And all of them are doing it within the same time span.
Do you really think that all these 18-24 year old online stars started with huge bankrolls? No, they started at the small stakes and worked their way up. The 2 that come to my mind right away are annette_15 (who i think turned freeroll winnings into being one of the top online tourney players and the WSOPE main event title) and green plastic who started off with like 50 dollars and turned it into millions by working his way up to the highest stakes cash games online. Did these players get lucky on their way up... probably, but getting lucky just helped them get there faster. They have played 100s of thousands of hands and have spent more time than you could imagine working on their game. I guess using your logic the so called top 10 online players are just the 10 luckiest players.
If you took the top 1000 skilled players and gave them a 1000 dollar starting bankroll I would say the vast majority of them could turn that 1000 dollars into 500K+ within 2 years or so... most of them have already done this.
I stopped reading at page 4 or 5 -- since you started this thread, what is your education and what incredible job has it afforded you?