Don't you get the feeling that almost all poker players are getting broke? - Page 14 - Poker News

grabber · 10-20-2010, 11:07 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by skillsaw777

Tony isn't close to his brother Joe on the obnoxious scale.

also, just because your brother has money doesnt mean you do. people like to keep the money they earned, not give it away to others, family or not

fireflytea · 10-20-2010, 11:10 AM

+1 for Egypt...

IoNlYsAyThInGsOnCe · 10-20-2010, 12:51 PM

this whole thread makes me wanna participate in some egyptian home games. OP lives in a dreamworld and probably has first hand information about all kinds of things.

also lol @ this adam dude, that caught gus hansen being massively overrolled just in case he takes villains exposed aces for fours or misclicks 64 big pots in a row...

smokrokflock · 10-20-2010, 01:25 PM

some people u think are rich are broke. some people u think are broke are rich. The type of players you look up to prob arent as good at poker as some others.

Bluffzorz · 10-20-2010, 01:27 PM

Me and Adam W were playing PLO last night at the Bellagio. Durrrr showed up and ended up busting his roll. He then asked us for money to rebuy and confirmed he was broke and living off Loans cause of the Durrrr challenge.

Hardball47 · 10-20-2010, 05:17 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by MrJenka82

to a billionaire 5million is like 500bucks to any normal person, it stings but it makes no difference in the grand scheme of things.

This is a common misconception "poor" people have about "rich" people. Rich people value their dollar probably more than you do.

runLOLArun · 10-20-2010, 07:17 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ShizzMoney

this

OP, you have nothing to be ashamed about....you have just realized one of the key secrets in the poker industry today, that the bluffing is occurring on more than the river. It was a great piece with tons of excellent, descriptive, and hilarious observations; one I believe every poker player should read, it's that good.

Few points:

A) The Tommy Vedes and Tony Hachem stories absolutely made me LOL!

B) You mention most players look like bums and wrecks. Well, at the end of the WSOP, most are stuck/pressure to pay off their backers and have been playing poker for almost a month straight. And they want to dress comfortable b/c it makes them feel comfortable (that and the place is just wayyyyy to cold; they really cranked up the AC when I played there this summer!).

It's a good observation on your part about how players play in relation on how they've been running a la Dwan, or a guy like Mercier who seems sick to his stomach whenever he plays cash b/c he's an obv tournament pro and is uncomfortable playing the stakes these other players play at on TV. Those guys usually get kick back from their websites for the promotional aspect of their play on television, which leads to.........

C)

First, according to Doyle, players go broke several times in their career (if not hundreds, he claims he has). It just happens; bad run of cards, bad beats, game selection, as well as new learning curves that take chips with them.

BUT you said people seemed to be "programmed" to think all these big name pros are gods and have all this money. You are so right! "Programmed" is a good word for it b/c it is mostly due to poker media (not all) and television spinning out propaganda for the casino corporations (online and brick & Mortar). They WANT players to feel the chance to be as rich as these pros (even though most get stakes) to just get them in the door to patronize their casino. That means more volume in rake and casino store/food sales.

It's incredibly dishonest for FTP, PStars, Harrah's, etc. to give people the false impression it's so easy with expert play/good luck to run that needle into a haystack. That's while I LOL @ chat violations/dress codes like at Moheghan (you can't wear hoodies, wear a backpack, WTF?). and casino operators acting on a high horse in their dens of degeneracy.

It takes INCREDIBLE amounts of luck to turn a $1.10 Step sat into a WSOP seat, or even an $11 rebuy into one (and I am sure during that turbo you had some wild all-ins!). Yet in the commericals, it is shown that all you need to do is deposit and play and your in!

But in the end, they don't care if you piss all your money away (even if they give you the number for GA), in the end, they are still getting their money, while 80%-90% of us and stuck their with our hands in our pants wondering how will afford the taxi cab home. Lederer, Loveman, all these casino people will tout how poker is a great skill game and "the best player will win the majority of the time" but will still not acknowledge the fact that most poker is up to luck, and that some players will get luckier more than most over the course of their careers. Just happens.

The best pros are usually the ones who don't make millions and win big tournaments (although some of those who do are the best). Most of the best, the ones I admire and respect, are the ones who grind the levels they are most comfortable at and make a steady living. The quote in Rounders about being a Kanish or going for it like Mikey is so true....most like myself want to try to balance both....but is it mathematically possible? I truely doubt it (unless you get stakes or have a vagina to play at that volume, then maybe).

+1

Thanks to OP, fun read full of little morsels of truth.

runLOLArun · 10-20-2010, 07:21 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Adam W

btw the red pros can see your hole cards( something I kinda wondered but not really)

essplain??

rbnn · 10-21-2010, 09:46 PM

I do not know whether almost all professional poker players are going broke. Normally, more evidence than OP adduces is required to show such a thing.

That said, it would not surprise me in the least if this were the case. I think it is quite plausible and, if anything, the burden would be on the skeptics to show that poker players are solvent.

There are basically three main reasons I think it is quite possible that professional poker players may have substantial financial problems: (1) Changes in the environment; (2) the nature of the game; (3) past experience.

Lets look at these one by one:

(1) Changes in the environment:

The poker environment has dramatically changed in the past decade: it has gotten much tougher. There are three reasons for this.

First, the vast dissemination of knowledge over the internet. Not just books, but routinely available practice. Second, the UIGEA, making it much harder to get money online out of casual fish and increasing the risks and costs of online play for US players. Third, the recession, making fewer rich fish willing to waste money.

Given that the environment has changed to that extent, it would not be at all surprising if existing players, adapted to the old environment, failed to adapt quickly enough. These players would lose a lot of money based on their existing lifestyles, accommodating another era, and actually losing money (or making much less) in the games themselves. In this situation a lot of people go broke, in any field.

(2) The nature of the game.

Poker as normally played and analyzed requires players to care about one thing: EV. Variance is rarely discussed in depth, usually a footnote to existing texts. Neither is rake for that matter.

Thus, a typical text might well suggest betting all-in in a situation where a player stands to gain 1% on average. Repeated over many trials, with a huge bankroll, this makes sense. But the analysis suggests many people do these kinds of bets for a big part of their bankroll, when they will quickly go bankrupt.

Also, the very idea of betting, say $100,000 for a 1% win to me shows a fundamental misunderstanding of the value of capital in most cases. If someone has $100,000 to burn, there are surely many better - safer - invetsments to put it in. Most poker analysis just disregards things like taxes, safety of money, and so on.

The average person who bets $100K on a hand of poker for a 51% chance of winning has a particular idea of money, one which, carried over into other areas of life is likely to bankrupt him rather quickly. It is a philosophy which disregards the value of capital, the opportunity cost of capital, the tax situation, the legal risks, and the physical risks of gambling (in most cases, the Andy Beals of the world notwithstanding).

(3) Past experience.

Each of us knows of poker players, including very famous, successful ones, who seem unable to manage money. They bet on table games. They bet on sports. They do prop bets. They act in ways that indicate a lack of understanding of and appreciation for preservation of capital (as in point (2) above, this lack of appreciation is nearly a prerequisite for playing good poker).

Whether OP is correct or not that most pro poker players are in financial difficulties, I believe OP's hypothesis is eminently plausible. Whether it is true, I don't know, but I think it very well could be, and should be treated seriously.

thefallacy · 10-24-2010, 05:47 AM

"All the really talented guys are really wasting their lives, doing this instead of something else more productive. Because if they're really talented at this, they could be doing a lot of other stuff."

In short: 1,000,000 watts of intellectual brain power + 1,000,000's hours of time wasted grinding felt or virtual tables = zero net gain for society.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=A4txU...eature=channel
@ 14:35

Blatch_CO · 10-24-2010, 08:05 AM

I'm so sick of seeing "getting broke" when I click on NVG I want this thread to die.

CursedbyaGypsy · 10-24-2010, 08:12 AM

Wow

I think this episode explains every single word I said in my opening post!

Thanks for reminding me about this great series.

I think Diego Cordovez says it right starting 18:30

Here's the link again:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=A4txU...eature=channel

canoodles · 10-24-2010, 08:20 AM

interesting post even though i disagree with it. you're basically criticizing people for following through with bankroll management (with the exception of the players you condemn for NOT following through with bankroll management) when it is common knowledge that it is IMPOSSIBLE to win all the time. You act like not wanting to put up 200K for a big cash game means the pro is broke? Maybe they're just under 50 buy ins and are rebuilding safely. As for pros who complain about they're luck sometimes, what does that prove? - that poker pros aren't exempt from being humans? Everyone would like to believe that pros have the perfect life and always emit 100% class, but really, everyone has bad days. I think if you hadn't won on your trip, another person could have written this article about you.

spino1i · 10-24-2010, 08:25 AM

if the sites and casinos didnt rake so goddam much there wouldnt be so many broke poker players.

s1zeist · 10-24-2010, 08:40 AM

Quote:

I'm so sick of seeing "getting broke" when I click on NVG I want this thread to die.

haha, i want it too