As a former pro with U.S. citizenship who has since joined the real world, I've come to the conclusion that being unable to carry forward losses makes playing the main every year a losing proposition if you don't play enough to cover the $10k loss with a reliable $10k in earnings each year. New tax legislation obv did nothing to remedy this, other than bringing down personal rates a bit.

Without moving forward losses, the American semi-pro who is unable to file a Schedule C and only plays a couple tournaments a year, must overcome tournament fees, dealer tips, travel expenses, and a 35%+ tax rate since most of the equity is at the FT. I've played the ME 7x and while I know it is still quite soft for being a $10k, I'm skeptical that even above-average semi-pros can make much money with all that rake. I think it's safe to say that the generous 100% ROI estimations of the boom days are over for all but the toppest pros with decades of live/online experience. Harsh reality for most semi-pros is they're not much better than the average donk these days. Even with the ME's structure, tournaments still largely come down to winning flips. Unless you've got White Magic™ powers, the skill ceiling is fairly low.

The other thing that bugs me is the opportunity cost of vacation days. Vegas is great and all, but I don't plan on making it my summer destination every year when there are 100+ countries worth visiting and life is short. I may weave in some ME trips simply to scratch the itch and hang with old pals, but it no longer feels like a must-play to me. Hoping someone here can convince me otherwise or point me to a thread where this has already been discussed.

Sorry to be a downer during the holidays. Hope everyone had a nice '17. Be safe on NYE!

I wouldn't consider the player you are describing to be a "semi-pro" (someone who only plays a few tournaments a year, doesn't have $10k annually in poker earnings, and can't take more than a couple weeks off from a full time job). Semi-pro means that poker is on the same general level of importance as some other source of income, both with respect to time and money.

Splitting hairs, no? Whatever the term is for a former online pro who doesn't want to waste away 1-tabling at casinos. Online poker isn't a legal option for the vast majority of people living in America and live poker isn't fun enough for me to justify playing 200 hrs/yr @ $50/hr in addition to the massive timesuck that is the WSOP ME. Surely, I'm not alone. "Retired pro" might be more apt if a mod wants to change the title.

Buy $10k worth of the most expensive scratch off's you can find and deduct the loss.

Can you no longer write off loses against wins?

The ME is simply a lottery ticket with a skill component.

Don't think it needs to be analyzed further than that. At most you can probably only play 50 of them in your lifetime so analyzing long term profitability seems pointless.

Get me to the final table, bro and I won't give a damn about theoretically not being to overcome those taxes, tournament fees, and dealer tokes if I somehow became a vampire and could play it forever.

well, I don't know if your numbers are accurate but your reasoning skills are on point, I'd probably follow your instinct on this one.

Most of the argument is centered around this statement

If the average roi of a retired, former online pro is only slightly > the roi of the average 'donk' then yeah, pokers in a rough spot!

Luckily that still isn't even close to being true

The WSOP ME is simultaneously all about poker, and nothing about poker. I work with several players who play it regularly, and for them it is a pilgrimage to a life-defining experience with a chance at a life-changing experience.

Kudos to the WSOP for making it so iconic. Let's hope some of the attempts at creating equally iconic poker experiences live and online in the next year are any part as successful.

WSOP and moneymaker together changed poker forever. The fact you "dont see its worth" anymore is disrespectful to poker as a whole.

You should be ashamed of yourself imo.

You are also missing the fact that there are several states that do not allow gambling losses to be deducted from gambling winnings. So if you play a bunch of events and break even, say +$50k -$50k you owe state income tax on $50k in earnings. Anywhere between 4-10%.

Connecticut*
Illinois*
Kansas
Indiana*
Louisiana (Itemized Deduction Limitation)
Massachusetts*
Michigan*
Minnesota (State AMT — Impacts Amateurs)
Mississippi (allows a deduction only for losses in Mississippi)
New Hampshire (10% Gambling Tax)
New York (Itemized Deduction Limitation)
Ohio
West Virginia*
Wisconsin*

SOURCE: https://ttlc.intuit.com/questions/30...duct-my-losses

On another note if you are a recreational gambler the new tax bill will generally be worse for you if you don't normally itemize deductions (most of the time because of mortgage interest). You lose the now $12,000 standard deduction as you must itemize to deduct gambling losses from your wins.

The conclusion is that for the recreational gambler the US tax code really sucks.

It's almost like the government is trying to discourage people from gambling..

Well, that's not true. Though, it may not be a smart option for most, as the gubment could close the doors on WPN and the likes at anytime. For 90% of America if they chose, they could perfectly legally be an online pro.

Agree with your logic, but someone playing a few MTTs a year shouldn't really be worrying about such things. Just treat it for what it is and play or don't play.

We're talking about a mandatory ~50% ROI before we start making a dime. Do you really think the avg retired pro is that much better than the field? We're not talking about cash games here. Darvin Moon got 2nd with Ivey at the FT :/

I think you're overestimating how good the avg retired pro is, underestimating the avg donk, and overestimating the effective skill ceiling for 90% of the field. Last few years of the main the entire table on day 1 was talking about ranges and we barely saw any flops. Sure, some still make considerable mistakes, but your edge drops significantly the minute your opponents start playing tight and thinking about ranges. You also can't discount the fact that the tournament attracts a ton of world class players that you're giving equity to. I wouldn't be surprised if true ROIs for a lot of experienced players were <50%. Think about how much better than the field you have to be in order to justify 50% ROI in a game mostly based on winning flips.

The ME used to be wildly profitable, but not being able to file a Schedule C takes a huge chunk out of that profitability. That's the crux of my argument. Factor in the avg entrant being much more educated than the boom years and it's a stretch to even get to breakeven for most retired pros with ~50% rake.

It's obviously fine to still play the ME since there are many reasons to make the trip, but this thread is about profitability. To each their own, but I personally despise -EV gambling.

whatever, he threw in a dumb comment about pros being not that much better than donks, but reading comprehension much? That's not what the argument is centered on at all, it's really a matter of taxes, fees, and opportunity cost.

have you heard of the concept of EV?

Poker is dying......it was a fad for a few years....just check bravo out to get an idea.....games all over the country are dying out.......

The main event being tougher in recent years was brought up on one of the Joe Ingram podcasts this year(I think around wsop time). I cant really remember which one, but what was said is the days of any decent player having the the +100% roi are over. Obv the best players still have absurd rois, but expecting a player like yourself who once was possibly a crusher and just plays a few times a year and doesnt have time or desire to do off the table work to beat that 50% roi is going to get tougher every year.

All the serious players keep improving and working on there game with new tools to stay in even footing with the competition in mid-high stakes. We dont have a ton of new players entering poker every year, more likely players who cant beat or enjoy the game quit more then new blood enters. So as time goes on ROI's will shrink for everybody unless you're German.

Ya but what's gonna happen in 10 years where half the states in the US will have regulated intrastate online poker and they are all sending players to the WSOP? Seems like you "poker is dying" cats forget that online poker is also changing, this current era is a trough between 2 peaking waves imo. If things keep on as they are which seems highly likely then poker will be just like cannibus and eventually all the states will hop on the money bandwagon and there will be uber sattys to the WSOP bringing on tons of players. Right now poker is in a slump cuz it just got gang raped by politicians, doesn't mean it's over.

Online poker is going to **** for a lot of reasons besides politicians.

Poker contracted as it should have. Too many table were put into many markets in boom boom days. Vegas being the worst over supply.

Certainly not anywhere near dead.

As one data point, WSOP 2017 put up some pretty big numbers.

http://www.wsop.com/news/2017/Jul/9265/2017-WSOP-MAIN-EVENT-IS-3RD-LARGEST-EVER.html

Regarding edges in live tourneys, we've got to consider that the structure of the ME is so much better than most tourneys and we get to play very deep for long time. In that sense, the edge of a skillful player is much greater than it is in most tourneys.

When I play nightly tourneys at Playground, with 20K chips and 20 min levels, I'd say my ROI is in the 30-50% range (since half the players really don't have a clue how to play tourneys, but I'll have to win a couple of flips to make it deep).

If I play the WPT Montreal with 30k chips and 60 min levels, I'd say my ROI stays in this range (because there are a larger percentage of skillful players, but I have a bigger edge over the fish due to the structure).

The ME combines these two factors together in a positive way. It's at least half fish who don't know how to play tourneys (especially deep-stacked) combined with a great structure where the edge over the fish is enhanced.

As such, as a skillful part-time player who gets to pick which events I play each year, the ME has to be the most profitable opportunity by a large margin.

Having said that, I've played it four times without cashing :-(

Live poker is booming, not sure how you can debate otherwise. A legal US market that enforces rules to prosecute the cheaters and bot makers would also boom. I started playing at the end of 2010 and the same conversation was taking place on 2+2. "ZOMG, poker is dead, only 1 year left!" Here it is in 2017 and the game is still alive and well if you know where to look.

Hmmm marijuana sales and prices are dropping fast. What happens when pot prices drop, less tax. You can get a pound of funk for $1400 in Cali and about $1200 American in Canada, last year in Cali prices were around 22 Hundo for a pound. If more states legalize pot prices will plummet even more leaving a fraction of taxes collected as a couple years ago.
Yes WSOP will get bigger due to satties from all the online rooms but go play live action around the mid west, games are full of nits, look at how many young guys were at WSOP this past year compared to years before. Poker will be around yes but if your expecting it to be like the boom I’ve got news for you.

What is the news?

Oh... unfortunately this is correct.