Hmmm a decent living? no. it is damn unhealthy but i guess playing online is making that slighty better. Even so everyone know's hold'em is the crack cocaine of gambling.
I think most of the pros treat it as much like a job as we treat our day jobs. Casino's/Card Rooms are their office. Some days are good others a bad. its the "business of poker"
I am in finance/business (and I play a little cards too) so I'm going to start a new topic called "Money" and discuss the business comparisons I suspect pros would or should use.
I'm not making money yet, but I'm not losing enough to quit playing. SO consider me an amateur!
I think most of the pros treat it as much like a job as we treat our day jobs. Casino's/Card Rooms are their office. Some days are good others a bad. its the "business of poker"
I am in finance/business (and I play a little cards too) so I'm going to start a new topic called "Money" and discuss the business comparisons I suspect pros would or should use.
(1) Recreational players. These are players that play "for fun." They may be obssessed or not. They may have poker in a healthy place or not. The tie that binds this group together is that they are losing players in the long run.
(2) Talented amateurs. These players are not professionals. They play for recreation and enjoyment and they are profitable players in the long run. Some of this group will log a lot of hours (I place myself in this group and I am known to play between 500 and 1000 hours a year). They do not view themselves as pros. They probably make the bulk of their money elsewhere.
(3) Screw-up pro. This group is made up of people who make the bulk of their living from poker. They are, however, gambling addicts. They do not have a life that looks too interesting too me. They play A LOT. They are driven to play. In my experience, this group dominated the pro ranks among the mid-limits. LOTS of 20-40 pros are in this group.
(4) Healthy pros. This group makes their living player poker. It is a healthy part of their lives. They do not let it rule their existence. It is a healty facet of it.
How would you place tournament players... One or two great showings in any particular tournament (ie. WSOP or WPT Events) and you can make enough to live on.
Where most players can make a daily, weekly, or monthly income playing limit table games they have to play everyday or often enough to generate their "income"
In the case of tournament players, one two wins a year can fund you (modestly) for life....
Let me know how you view them. I am interested cause I had a talk with a buddy and he is much more inclined to enter a $250 buy-in event then sit 10/20 or 20/40 with the same $250.
The best tournament player in ANY $250 buy-in tournament will have an EV between 2 and 3. Translation: you can EXPECT to double your money or a little better. Turn that into hourly rate and my guess is that $250 buy-in tournament will be about the same as a $10-20 game for a skilled player.
The difference is VARIANCE. You are much more likely to go broke putting your bankroll into action in the tournament ring. Tournaments offer the same attraction as a lottery ticket -- a possible BIG payday.
If your friend wants more than anything to make some money tonight he should play 10-20. If he wants to give himself a chance at a big score he should play a tournament with the understanding that 90% of the time he will go broke.
You need a HUGE bankroll to make it go as a tournament pro.
Cool, I see you point and the math makes sense. I guess overall profit is profit. Dave do you think you could assist me in the "money management" topic I wanted to post.
I seem to have a problem with it and have swet my self up with some systems to prevent losing big. I remember my first few big nights on the tables. However I lost track of the small losses. Overall I know know I have come away marginally up, but the quick math in my head makes me feel like a real player. I fear a lot of guys could run into the same trouble.
www.pokercharts.com
Keep track of every single game you play and soon you will know EXACTLY where you stand.
I know where I am a loser and where I am a winner and exactly how much money I am up since Jan 27 04.
I have mentioned this system to a couple fellow players but they insist on keeping track in their heads, and telling me how they are up big money. Good for them.
Me I prefer the correct way.
Let me know how you view them. I am interested cause I had a talk with a buddy and he is much more inclined to enter a $250 buy-in event then sit 10/20 or 20/40 with the same $250.
First of all, for a limit cash game where you have a $250 buy-in, you're going to have to stick to a limit $3-$6 or less to be able to play effectively.
I think whether to focus of tournaments or cash games is very much dependent on the individual player's skills and preferences.
Don't get fooled by the large payouts of the large tournaments though. When you see someone win a $100,000 prize in a WSOP event, what you probably didn't see was them losing a lot on their previous tournament entry fees. While one big score may provide the illusion of success, tournaments are incredibly high variance in the long term, and also very streaky. It's not out of the ordinary for a decent player to finish tournaments out of the money 10 times in a row, or even 20 or 30. Also, since tournament payout structires are normally insanely top heavy, there is going to be an abnormal amount of luck involved in your short and medium term results. This can hamper even highly skilled players if they lack emotional discipline.
Play the formats you like best, and perform best at, and you'll maximize your long term success.
(2) Talented amateurs. These players are not professionals. They play for recreation and enjoyment and they are profitable players in the long run. Some of this group will log a lot of hours (I place myself in this group and I am known to play between 500 and 1000 hours a year). They do not view themselves as pros. They probably make the bulk of their money elsewhere.
I'd place myself into this category as well. I play online everyday and come out will profit usually, but there are some nights where the cards weren't nice to me. I usually just play $5 SNG's. Sometimes I'll give the limit tables a shot, if I feel good about it. When I turn 19(less than three weeks), I'm giving the casino limit tables a shot and see how I fair up to the players there.
I like the mentioning of www.pokercharts.com. I've been using that site for almost a month and it's a great tool for tracking your sessions. I'm up $900 for the month, not bad for a student. 8)
I am definately not a PRO and I wouldn't quit school to play poker full time.
I feel that I can make some side cash and enough to pay off a bit of my tuition, but obviously not enough to live on. Maybe on day I can become that good.
Comments
So, no.
ScottyZ
all day all night 24/7 ??? :?: :?: :?: that would be krazy? or not?
thanks,
CO
I am in finance/business (and I play a little cards too) so I'm going to start a new topic called "Money" and discuss the business comparisons I suspect pros would or should use.
I'm not making money yet, but I'm not losing enough to quit playing. SO consider me an amateur!
look fwd to it
(1) Recreational players. These are players that play "for fun." They may be obssessed or not. They may have poker in a healthy place or not. The tie that binds this group together is that they are losing players in the long run.
(2) Talented amateurs. These players are not professionals. They play for recreation and enjoyment and they are profitable players in the long run. Some of this group will log a lot of hours (I place myself in this group and I am known to play between 500 and 1000 hours a year). They do not view themselves as pros. They probably make the bulk of their money elsewhere.
(3) Screw-up pro. This group is made up of people who make the bulk of their living from poker. They are, however, gambling addicts. They do not have a life that looks too interesting too me. They play A LOT. They are driven to play. In my experience, this group dominated the pro ranks among the mid-limits. LOTS of 20-40 pros are in this group.
(4) Healthy pros. This group makes their living player poker. It is a healthy part of their lives. They do not let it rule their existence. It is a healty facet of it.
How would you place tournament players... One or two great showings in any particular tournament (ie. WSOP or WPT Events) and you can make enough to live on.
Where most players can make a daily, weekly, or monthly income playing limit table games they have to play everyday or often enough to generate their "income"
In the case of tournament players, one two wins a year can fund you (modestly) for life....
Let me know how you view them. I am interested cause I had a talk with a buddy and he is much more inclined to enter a $250 buy-in event then sit 10/20 or 20/40 with the same $250.
Let me know your thoughts.
The difference is VARIANCE. You are much more likely to go broke putting your bankroll into action in the tournament ring. Tournaments offer the same attraction as a lottery ticket -- a possible BIG payday.
If your friend wants more than anything to make some money tonight he should play 10-20. If he wants to give himself a chance at a big score he should play a tournament with the understanding that 90% of the time he will go broke.
You need a HUGE bankroll to make it go as a tournament pro.
I seem to have a problem with it and have swet my self up with some systems to prevent losing big. I remember my first few big nights on the tables. However I lost track of the small losses. Overall I know know I have come away marginally up, but the quick math in my head makes me feel like a real player. I fear a lot of guys could run into the same trouble.
what do you think?
Keep track of every single game you play and soon you will know EXACTLY where you stand.
I know where I am a loser and where I am a winner and exactly how much money I am up since Jan 27 04.
I have mentioned this system to a couple fellow players but they insist on keeping track in their heads, and telling me how they are up big money.
Me I prefer the correct way.
First of all, for a limit cash game where you have a $250 buy-in, you're going to have to stick to a limit $3-$6 or less to be able to play effectively.
I think whether to focus of tournaments or cash games is very much dependent on the individual player's skills and preferences.
Don't get fooled by the large payouts of the large tournaments though. When you see someone win a $100,000 prize in a WSOP event, what you probably didn't see was them losing a lot on their previous tournament entry fees. While one big score may provide the illusion of success, tournaments are incredibly high variance in the long term, and also very streaky. It's not out of the ordinary for a decent player to finish tournaments out of the money 10 times in a row, or even 20 or 30. Also, since tournament payout structires are normally insanely top heavy, there is going to be an abnormal amount of luck involved in your short and medium term results. This can hamper even highly skilled players if they lack emotional discipline.
Play the formats you like best, and perform best at, and you'll maximize your long term success.
ScottyZ
...but variance matters a lot too. (unless your bankroll is enormous, and you are emotionally solid as a rock)
ScottyZ
I'd place myself into this category as well. I play online everyday and come out will profit usually, but there are some nights where the cards weren't nice to me. I usually just play $5 SNG's. Sometimes I'll give the limit tables a shot, if I feel good about it. When I turn 19(less than three weeks), I'm giving the casino limit tables a shot and see how I fair up to the players there.
I like the mentioning of www.pokercharts.com. I've been using that site for almost a month and it's a great tool for tracking your sessions. I'm up $900 for the month, not bad for a student. 8)
I feel that I can make some side cash and enough to pay off a bit of my tuition, but obviously not enough to live on. Maybe on day I can become that good.