Quote:
Originally Posted by pokervintage
The biggest difference that I find between the old and new is desire, plain and simple. In my case for example I have lost a lot of my youthful desire to be the best I could be. I played in Vegas from 2001 to 2009. I was a consistent mid limit winner (Bellagio regular). Granted I did not start playing for a living until after age 50 but I put a lot of effort into studying the game, discussing the game and trying different things to improve my game. Now, I could care less. I doubt any old school player has the heart, desire and energy to do the things necessary to really upgrade their game.
I left Vegas because I felt that poker was a dead end game. Well, the main reason I left was a new grand child but it was easy because I found poker a drag. By that I mean that once I became competent and a consistent winner I felt that poker was a brain dead game. Now to me Poker is a grind and I play very infrequently. The thought of the grind reminds me of why I quit working. I don't like to work.
Young players might want to consider the fact that if they are good enough to grind out a living at poker they might be smart enough and have the drive to do a lot better, money wise, working at something that leaves a lot of room to grow and doesn't end in a dead end.
I am 55 years old, and my timing hasn't exactly been great. I started playing in 2006 (the end of the poker boom) and I decided to play full-time, online, about a year ago.
Even so, I don't consider poker a "dead end", I consider it a means to an end. I'm transitioning to mostly live play, and I'll be ready when poker legislation comes to the USA and we get the next online boom.
I never worried much about whether or not poker could be a long-term career. I thought that I could make more money playing poker than doing anything else for which I was qualified. But making money doesn't tie you to a career--just the opposite. More money = more options.
With money, if I want to do something else, I can. I need about 10 courses to finish a bachelor's degree. I could take those courses without incurrining debt. I am a retired army musician, and with some extra time and money to brush up my skills and get a few professional quality instruments, I could play music for fun and profit.
Some of those options may or may not get me as much money as poker, depending on when the next boom is. But I have options. I don't consider anything where I can make a significant income as a "dead end". I don't care what the job is--give me enough money and I'll roll around in a pile of manure for your amusement.
With more money, we could do a lot of traveling when my wife retires. Money puts all kinds of options on the table.
The great thing about poker is that it can be whatever you want it to be. You can grind 70 hours a week and make a pile of money, and be, like Elmer Fudd, a millionaire with a mansion and yacht. It can be a hobby and/or a second income. You can grind on your desktop, or travel, and play when you feel like it, on your laptop. You can work a "regular job" and play poker at the casino one weekend a month.
Poker is a job where you can choose your hours, and make some good money. Poker isn't a dead end; it's flexible enough to be anything you want it to be.
Last edited by Poker Clif; 05-31-2011 at 12:59 PM.
Reason: punctuation and usage, no content change