There are many possibilities for online poker, perhaps different sites wil offer different experiences. One thing I've often found troubling is that the grinders have software that allows them to assess the playing tendencies of others. This s a great advancement in poker, but makes newbies weary of playing because they feel at a disadvantage.

Perhaps the sites can completely include poker stats so everyone can see, or totally exclude software that mines Data. If we do display stats, perhaps this can be used in a ranking system to give that feeling of progressing as a player. Think about someone new to poker, they will have much more to learn when looking at stats, kind of like figuring out what all that information is when you go to the track. They may have to make a few more deposits and be more attached to mastering what they think they can control.

Also, people love free crap.


I think if a site can make poker more 'real' that might be a big draw, if you have the ability to speak and trash talk other players, people might really buy into that, as well as the option to use a webcam.

All in all, you have to have tv glorifying the sport in order to bring it mainstream. You have to inspire people to believe they can put some effort in and be the next big thing, or that it's fun and socially acceptable to blow $200 and a few hours playing online.

There has to be big rewards, a fair ranking system, and transparency that there aren't bots or cheaters around every corner.

Getting a group of well-known poker professionals together that pooled money together to make it happen would be great. It sounds a lot like FTP3. Doesn't change the fact that it could be great. The poker pros would be very good advertising as they'd be in the poker world daily.

I just want to say that I think this part is close to impossible. Eventually there will be computer programs that just read the moniter of another computer and do all of the work on the original comp. Maybe this sci-fi stuff is just thoughts in my mind tho.

Great read

The easiest solution would still be to get rid of the parasites aka affiliates who take money out of the pool without really generating net deposits from losing players.

It's true that rake doesn't matter to them personally, but as a group the fish will notice their money isn't lasting as long which definitely makes a difference.

Regarding the software issue: I personally knew about hem and pt for a long time before I actually used them at all, well aware that other grinders were "assessing my tendencies" and although I was a marginal winner I didn't mind that I was losing ev in failing to use it.. My rationale being that I wanted to improve my own perception skills and not rely on stats. I now can't live without it and believe it or not my win rate has actually dropped, despite the games on my site being soft as ever. For this reason I don't think the fish know or care about software. Someone who plays. 50/10 and stacks off with J10o and the like is most certainly not concerned whether his opponent can analyse his game to the finest degree.. Instead he "has a feeling" about a hand he "likes the look of" and wants to gamble. New players sign up daily and this won't change. Someone who has been playing for 2 months, like we all once did, will think he has the game worked out when he goes on a heater, or conversely, will bemoan his bad luck when he loses money. That won't change as long as online poker is available.

Regarding edges diminishing: this won't ever be a huge problem at 50nl/100nl and below. Perhaps on stars, but god knows why you people insist on playing against the toughest opposition on the internet. I discovered a small european site recently and I'm not exaggerating when I say that every morning when I fire up tables, at least HALF my 50nl tables are 40/5 donks.. Sometimes all 5 at my 6 max table are absolute fish who either limp call their stacks away, or play like aggro monkeys and either win or lose 3 buyins in an hour. Take the time to find a soft site and your edge, or lack thereof, won't concern you anymore. Your win rate is determined by reasonable study and mental application to the game.

If you're whining that 400nl isn't as beatable as it was in 2006 then you're greedy and expecting too much. I could make a reasonably comfortable living at 20nl (6-8 tables), 100k hands a month and I don't regard myself as theoretically knowledgeable or talented as a vast number of members of this board. If you're losing, you're weak.. This won't change unless you work hard at it.

haha

making 30-40k/yr playing NL20 is not making a living....what happens when the game continues to get harder, disappears, or increased rake and your income is 0-30k/yr and you've got a huge resume gap and nothing to show for it?

Then poker is ****ed in any case and we should all play the lotto, thats where the skill is at

I wasn't clear, I apologise. By a "living" I'm referring to a student making enough for rent, or a traveller funding a trip, or anyone who can pay all their bills and survive. I certainly don't mean long term. I'm a barrister by profession, but poker has allowed me an extended sabbatical where I can support my lifestyle playing online and sometimes in casinos. My reference to 20nl was meant as hyperbole to make a point. There is no reason why you can't double your income playing 50nl. Indeed my main point was that 20nl will never get much harder than it is now if you look hard enough for soft games. With study, practice and proper use of databases any person with average intelligence and marginal aptitude should crush 50nl.. Or 100nl..

I do acknowledge that I live in a cheap(er) third world country and I have a high-earning career to fall back on, however for a young student or bored office worker there is nothing in "the future of poker" ominous enough to prevent one from winning decent, sustainable cash. Aside from bots perhaps.

I just think people who moan about the games being too tough aren't working hard enough to find soft games and to improve. If $3k isn't enough for a young single person to live comfortably and put a little away every month, you're asking too much from a computer game..

....youll probably never burn out or need a break from 1.2 million hands a yr at NL20...lol.


Games are going to get worse online no matter what; lets just hope they bring the internet back to the USA within 18 mos. so we can save live play.

Its whatever; I saw long ago where things were going and got into mixed/non holdem games and playing more donkaments....online cash is just a joke now.

Lol at playing well over a million hands to make 30k a yr or something, are you nuts?

Yes there is a massive difference between making a living and supporting yourself while in school.

Sorry to say that poker isn't that profitable from within the US due to the risk of losing your entire bankroll overnight and it taking 6+ Weeks to get checks from some sites. Also, very few students are going to put in enough hours to play 100k hands. It's a very good part time gig, but it sure as hell shouldn't be your life focus to make $36k/yr playing online poker. Not sure what country you live in, but $36k -taxes -living -living expenses isn't going to leave much of anything behind. US Employers don't look kindly upon you if you quit your career and then play poker for a while and say "I want it back!" They're going to assume you'll just quit again, why would they waste their resources on you, the unreliable entrepreneurial spirit?

Your first point isn't correct at all. Las Vegas has completely revamped their marketing in the last several years. Now it's all about entertainment: "what happens here stays here" "Camp Vegas - summer camp for adults", etc. Gambling is only one minor aspect of it. It is also now all about the restaurants, clubs, shows, shopping, pools, etc.

Vegas has also become the largest convention market in the USA. There have even been hotels on the Strip built that are non-gaming to be sure to attract meetings that don't want to associate with the casino stigma. I would even dare to say that the convention industry is the only thing keeping Vegas' head above water during this economy. They almost had a stroke when Obama talked about "not going to Vegas for business meetings" in '09.

I'm also a facebook "fan" of Vegas.com, their main travel/tourist site, and I would say about 90% of their posts don't mention gambling at all.

I think the OP is wise that the sites need to consider changing their strategy. Gamblers are going to always gamble, but there are ways to widen the market to thrive in changing times.

Everything you've stated as a counter here I've explained above. Firstly, I don't seriously mean one would play 20nl for a living - I was merely making the point that 20nl will never be much more difficult than it is now in the future.. As an "entry level" stake it's always going to be filled with fish willing to drop $100 in a session or two while enjoying the gambling aspect. If it were filled with regs, I'd find a site where it isn't.

As for $36k a year being a small amount - where I'm from a three year post-qualified attorney would be lucky to be making that amount. I did make it clear my (and other people from the developing world) most likely have a different set of financial circumstances. if $36k isn't enough, then surely $50k playing 50nl and some well-table-selected 100nl must be? (Once again: for a young unattached adult).

I don't think poker as a full and secure living is something I'd recommend to anyone except the very gifted (by gifted I mean tilt-free and having excellent money management skills over and above poker ability).. Not now and not in 2006. The future of the legality of gaming is unsure, as you've said, so surely it is too risky.. I'm not certain why you mention the US.. In my mind yours is a foregone conclusion until some major changes suggest otherwise.

As to your last point: why would anyone quit their job with a family, mortgage, children to feed, clothe and educate to gamble? Unless you're a huge proven winner as a semi-professional and have massive savings it's such an irresponsible concept it's absurd. Students, travellers and young adults in between jobs or newly qualified in a trade are the only people for whom I'd ever say it were a viable option.

Please stop repeating the 20nl professional concept. It applies in a very limited context. To reiterate for the last time: the games from 50nl down will never be so tough as to be unbeatable for a decent win rate for the simple reason that fish mess play recreationally at those stakes now, in the past and most certainly as long as the online game is running.. There will always be enough of them.

plenty of fathers/mothers were playing poker for a living, most of them were highly successful individuals making significantly more than they could in the real world (100,000+)

I knew you already said you're from a country of lower incomes

Your first post made it sound like a good idea to go professional playing 20nl. My whole point in posting was to make sure somebody didn't come in and read that and say, "hey this is a good idea." Clearly, it's not. When you say **** on a forum that could have the potential to alter people's perception of reality and the course of their lives, I'm going to make sure it's clear exactly what you're trying to say.

I'm not stupid, I realize there are differences in income levels and tax rates in various parts of the world. As mentioned, I did read your posts and saw you are from a poorer country.

It seems as if you continue to say, "it's ok to play professionally, so long as you're not playing professionally." You need to work on clarifying your definition of professional and distinguish it from semi-professional/part-time/supplemental income. Playing while in school? Not professional. Playing in between jobs? No. Playing for a year after college while you travel? No. Professional means relying on that income for the foreseeable future. If you don't have a plan if poker disappears in a few years, you simply aren't a professional. You're just floating through life without a plan (it works for some people, I'm not judging).

Recreational players have figured out that they can't win playing online, especially in cash games. Recreational players who have left are gone forever. They were sold on the idea that it's a skill-based based game where they odds are actually in their favor if they play "solid" poker. This hasn't been the case for several years now. They realize that they are better off betting sports or playing table games.

everything under 10nl or 2$ sngs should just be rake free IMO.

Don't get me wrong I think it would be revolutionary. I just think it would take A LOT of time, energy, and money to work.

+1 to your idea about huds too

Unfortunately, I think the above is probably true.

Has anyone ever run numbers taking into account variables like number of recreational players active, replacement rate and average loss per some time period per recreational player to calculate the number of pros that can be supported from that base? It seems to me that should be doable. I keep having this thought that there are way too many more people trying to be pros than the available cash can support. I think there will always be room for the very best skilled people but that cut is thinner than most appreciate.

Most people on 2+2 don't understand that the fundamental rule for online poker is that the deposits must be in par with the rake + withdrawals. They can't get into their heads that new money is needed to facilitate the games to run. Most are so caught up in a thinking of entitlement where they see some inherent right to the money of others for nothing and this is where they come short. While they are clear to point out that they are better then the fish or recreational players they won't admit that the games are to though for them and they keep on whining about rake, nitty games, to many regs at the tables, etc. While it is entertaining to read these threads it soon become tiresome to read the same pathetic whining post after post and page after page.

You are also correct in your assessment of the poker pros most of them are terrible at what they do and can't beat the games without bum hunting and bonuses. Online poker will survive but it is only natural that the players who can't win money need to give up their dreams of becoming a pro and stop whining about not winning.

The fact that most posters in this thread hasn't addressed the fact that liquidity more or less has dried up outside the poker economy show how short sited and stupid they are. While they may believe that recreational players want nothing else then to hand over their money to a poker pro they are wrong. The recreational player want to have fun and if they get short on cash things like gas, food, rent, loans, etc will come before depositing money at a poker site by far.

I'm sure this post won't stop the feeders from posting their rants about how bad they are, but know that I'm not the only one who is getting tired reading them. Not to say that Gioco is one of the whiners.

What I whine about is the number of people who fail to understand the need for playing poker to be fun, who fail to view it as getting paid for providing an entertainment service; I skinned a few sheep before I learned that gently shearing them was much better in the long run.

Here's a second thing I whine about, or would like to, I have seen people I know from Las Vegas made fun of in this forum because they are not perfect nits. These are players who tourists actually search out to play with, because they are fun to play with. Instead of making fun of these guys, people should thank them. Even if they are not always winning players (though sometimes they are), the overall good they do is enormous.

Something like 10-15% of Stars rake comes from these, doubt their gonna make it rake free.

Disagree wholeheartedly.
If the developments in the poker world during the past two years taught us anything, it's that poker players are terrible businessmen.

It's a bit like this.

http://www.nature.com/scitable/conte...model-13286071