Hey, was Aaron as much of a goofball around you as he was around me?

Basically - I had the same kind of reading/reaction as Ruse on the redline thing that set off alarm bells, so I was making sure we weren't completely losing you there

Not sure if you're just choosing ex post facto, but I'd screamingly choose Player A and his 5% redline going forward. Choosing Player B reads to me the same as differentiating between lottery players based on past results.

And apparently some of us now speak Google Latin

Easy then, take $10 and run. The other half of the equation has too many unknowns to judge and therefore is the lesser of the two.

zero

Hey. Well, the total hours will depend on which specific games they are and how much you are averaging per hour (more tables would probably be needed in your case).

However...let's just break down a few possibilities.

10$/hr = 2000 hours... /52 weeks = ~38hrs/week
15$/hr = 1500 hours... /52 weeks = ~29hrs/week
20$/hr = 1000 hours... /52 weeks = ~19hrs/week

However, this assumes you play this amount EVERY week which realistically is difficult. If you fall behind one week, you have to catch up, etc.

Also, when you say 20k, what currency? That changes a lot.

Rakeback can help though and that's not included in this.

The most important thing is to create smaller goals. Let yourself succeed right away to build confidence. Start with a 1 day goal, then week, then 2 weeks, etc and build up to that 1 yr goal.

If you have any other questions, feel free to ask.

bankroll wise...50 buys may be ok for 9s.

however, your real life financial situation is more important than bankroll especially if this is your only source of income.

Hi Glitlrhiii

Interesting to read from the perspective of a retired player from the outside looking in - so to speakya, kinda weird too

A few questions

- given where poker is at in 2012, do you feel the professional player is now dealing with a severe diminishing returns scenario, which is unlikely to reverse itself? Wow, you used the term "diminishing return." GREAT choice of words. This is exactly what is happening, however there are many things that can at least help prevent this. Playing against the grain so-to-speak helps a lot with that.
I think, however, the biggest thing that can help reverse that is marketing in the media. PokerStars needs to expand even further to help draw in new players.

- how would you feel if your son (hyopthetical as I am not sure if you are a father?) said he wanted to become a poker player?I wouldn't allow him.

- you said you felt much better with life once you stopped playing poker, how do you reconcile that with being a poker coach? Great question. I'm not really sure of the answer tbh.

- does anyone truly understand the red line in stt poker? Does it really matter or is it just a dangerous red herring?I think the redline is just an excuse people use to validate that they "run bad." People want to know that they are good at poker and seek self-validation. So if the redline says they are "better than results show" or "unlucky" etc, people will tend to latch on to that to validate themselves.
Many people say it takes thousands of games to know your ROI or how good you are, etc...
I can tell how good someone is just by talking to them and picking their brain.

Thanksyou're welcome

P.S - are you related to Gary Glitter?must not be, no idea who this is

Aaron is hammer, which is a type of tool.

ya i totally understand what you mean. if i had an actual choice in real life, I'd choose neither player a or b. and actually, i'd want to still know value of "I" because based of that info I can't find out what 5% represents in terms of money.

and that's exactly why i've always felt the concept of expected value is inherently flawed.

Hahahahaha best post ITT.

You dont like hypotheticals do you

The value of I is one unit. Obv for this situation theyre playing the same buyin and anything not otherwise stated is the same. In this situation i really dont see how you take the 5% greenline 0% redline over the the 0% greenline 5% redline guy. It is completely counterintuitive to me.

Obv there is a better way of picking a horse than just redline or greenline. But if that is all you have, redline is going to be a better indications of their skill than greenline.

Enough derail of your well w redline. We have the redline thread for that.

Kinda interested about full time coaching. Is it hard to stay in top form wo playing? Do you think there any advantages full time coaches have over pro players who coach on the side?

I totally understand your point of view about the redline.

I'm not really sure if anyone else full time coaches actually. Are there?

I feel like I'm a better player now than I was when I could play. Staying in "top form" is much easier because I get to speak to tons of people about all sorts of topics.

I've always been the kind of coach and player who thinks for himself rather than following "rules" and stuff like that. That is one reason it's easier to stay in "top form" as you put it. So when I coach, I try and teach people how to think for themselves and be creative instead of saying "go memorize these boring ranges and you'll probably win eventually."

Aaron is #1 on my list of players. However, that list is in alphabetical order...

Hey man,

Do you find that students get confused between what is a profitable play (push,call) and optimal? If so, how do you explain it?

Can't play, we teach

Hey, you just teach too? Do you live in US? Wow, that would pretty cool. I thought I was all by myself in this.

To answer your question, I find that students get confused about profitable play vs. optimal. The biggest reason is that it pretty much arises from a) how they originally learn "the way you are suppose to play" and b) indirect peer pressure (ex: continuously reading the same things about push/call and thinking that is what is expected of a player).

I love the whole idea of playing optimally because, in essence, there is no way to gauge how "optimal" optimal play may be. There is no defined answer for what to do. I love that! It makes poker exciting.

When I coach, I like to make sure that basics are in tact (like decent shoving ranges, a basic understanding of the foundations) and build from there. Mainly I can tell right off the bat - about lots of stuff - by just asking questions. This is much more effective than just waiting to see a hand then discussing it and then moving on to another. A lot of my coaching sessions usually branch out into areas that students aren't expecting. I find that many students (mine or otherwise) expect coaching sessions to settle around "correct ranges" when realistically that only helps just a bit. Playing optimally centers around not only playing better than a standard game allows but mainly having the ability to think. So I try to explain to students that I'm here to help you think correctly instead of just teaching you how to regurgitate a script.

Once a player knows how to think, he or she can improvise, create, bend rules, break rules, and invent things on their own.

Cool beans