+ 1, expressed exactly what i felt.

hello everyone thanks for the sharing with us..............

Haha it did?

Absolutely and Ultimately legitimacy is unlikely even if "poker is good for you".
imo

wp

I didnt read through this thread and sorry if this has already been mention.. but something good for a part 3 to this article is that poker teaches you to not worry about what other people think. For example, poker teaches you to not worry about doing something embarrassing like making a bad call or bad bluff and rather just making the best decision at any given time.

Also poker teaches bankroll management which is obviously extremely important to life.

First of all; If you are really believing poker is good for you, please read my post as subjective as you can.

I do believe that there are people who are very substantial/material and winning money does make them very happy and that it is "good" for THEM.


For me poker is all about the false imagination of having control to decide your move or being able to make a decision.
But after a couple of hundret of thousands of hands played,
every normal thinking intelligent person should realize that u in reallity have 0% of influence in the game.

Even if u make the right decision/play/move 100% of the time,
you CAN just be a winner a small % of the time.
but mostly you are ether on the lucky side, or on the unlucky side!

Maybe one thing that poker is teachingyou, is that you dont have to make always the right decision to win.
Or better; you can FAIL at everything but still be a big winner by getting lucky.
(It also teaches you that you should accept losses by making right decisions in the game to be a winner in the long run)

But thats not a good thing for you or your live, that concept maybe works within the game with millions of decisions in one single session,
but never in life. Thats completely against the basis of society.

Becasue u will win only a small % of the time u have to invest too much time in the game unless you are really lucky.

on a side note:
Before some one comes up with having an "edge" is making you a winning player, where is the "edge" nowadays?????
Do you really believe there are still people NOWADAYS depositing $100-$500 not nowing at least basicly what they are doing.

NO, the edge is not in making your opponent fold or bluff him by some deeper thinking (level >3) or whatever.
Thats some brainless farytale ********!
(well, maybe and only in 100K NL or higher this may be a slightly bigger part of the game)
Serious money will only be won when two or more opponents having really strong hands and the "cards" on the table decide wich one will win (wich is always LUCK).
Every one who says other is an ignorant dreamer or a lier to himself (like many degenerate gamblers here on this forum are)

So basically, as you can imagine, poker was never good for me.
Yes i won in the game, but never even nearly enuff to retire or really use it.

BUT i lost friends, girlfriends, familie, career. Didnt had social activitys in general for years, becoming an unsocial bitter person etc..
I used to believe in the false imagination of the "long run". Investing all my time into a "game" in wich you HAVE to be lucky to win (and i am deffenetely NOT lucky).

Poker is never good for anybody, winning or losing.
It doesnt make you happy (not in the long run)!

This goes against basic mathematics as it relates to poker.

1. It has been proven mathematically that over a statistically significant number or hands, luck is much less important, and skill wins over time.

2. A simple experiment demonstrated that skill wins over no skill over both small and large samples. Two groups of college students were told to play poker. One group was taught the rules. The other group was taught the rules and some basic strategy. The group that was taught strategy (skill) was better at the beginning of the trial, and throughout the trial.

3. Some of the top pros spend as much as 50% of their time studying. Why would they bother to do that if skill doesn't matter? Why would very smart, highly educated people like Dr. Chris Ferguson (computer science) or Dr. Michael Binger (theoretical physics) quit their jobs to play poker, if they didn't think that they could apply their intelligence and knowledge to be successful at the game? I would love to watch you try to convince one of those two players that skill doesn't make a difference.

1. and 2.:

this example is a complete JOKE! honestly you are not even quallifyed to get a reply from me but im bored so you are lucky (or not)

Basic poker startegie knowledge is in EVERY single player who deposites on a poker site these days (like i said before, but you obv didnt read because your clearly have problems with attention.). the LEGEND of fish was true maybe ten years ago.

What makes a player play bad these days is ether he plays scared money or micros. other than that every avarage jo with 1+ year of experience and a basic intelligence can win against every one, yes EVERY ONE.

3.
C F is a example of some one who may be smart but that doesnt mean poker is a smart game wich it is not. for example simply because a smart person becomes a succesfull sandwich maker doesnt mean it is a deeply well thought, strategic thing to make a good sandwich.
He also made his first 100K in the early 90s playing tournaments in time when they where filled with true fish and poker was a game of GAMBLERS (who now claim to be pros).After you reach a certain limit of money you obv will play the expensive (and smaller) tournamnets to keep winning bigger amounts, wich was exactly what he did and why he quit his job.

So i hope i dont have to explain to you that to get on a final table in 50-100 man fields you just have to have a double up 2 times, than cruising protecting your stack until the later stages than -open wide, calling tight-.
nothing special really.

First you have to win big, than you can be a "pro". thats what every single pro will tell you. without a starting bankroll you cant do NOTHING in poker.
You will get unlucky and unlucky all the time. without the BIG money to back that up you simply will not be succesfull at it.

I really like poker and i am playing for many years even tho im still young.
But i cant stand that so many people who won at it, claim it is a game of skill wich It clearly is not.And so many idiots following them and their ******** advices.
that said, if you make a HUGE example of plays in any game of chance with the money to back up the buy ins you will eventually end up winning money
with a 5% profit (or more if you are lucky obv).
IN ANY GAME.

I can understand that you wont believe me, or any normal thinking person, or successful intelligent person because you are probablly addicted to poker. Wich isnt hard at all these days with all the wonderfull fairytales of it and great successful rolemodels who represent it.
And your wonderfull tournament win, once.

I know it is hard to be honest to yourself, it takes to be a strong, wise and very intelligent person to achive that.

Keep believing in "statistically significant numbers". I doubt any significant experiments by significant scientist have been done ever.

level

cant let go of that one;

if i would ask c.f. on his opinion he wil most likely say im wrong and i takes skill to win etc., etc..
but thats nothing else what i would expect from some one holding shares of a company making a regular $10.000.000.000. a year from a poker site where 99% of players are easy contrlable in their opinion, believing exactly that.

go back to NVG pls

ironic that your username is keep your dreams

I do agree with Poker Clif +1, on the other hand, (no pun intended) Keep Your Dreams is right on a smaller scale I don't think we are all looking at the "Bigger Picture" here with what he is saying.

Is poker "Good" for you? Well, that really depends on the person like he states. You can either make a lot, lose a lot, or break even. With that statistic your looking at 2 to 1 odds against you of either breaking even or losing money.

Is there luck involved? Absolutely, everyone knows that when it comes down to a showdown it's all about the "luck" of the draw and the luck of the cards. If you didn't get the good hand and played correctly with what was shown on the bored, then you were unlucky. For example:

You($210): Ac Kh (46.35%)
Opponent($52): 3s 3c (53.10%)
Check

Flop: 3d As Kd

Opponent($47): $5 (83.23%)
You($200): Raise $10 (16.77%)
Opponent($42): Call
Pot: $20

Turn: Kc

You($190): $10 (97.73%)
Opponent($32): Call (2.27%)
Pot: $40

River: 3

Opponent($0): All-In ($32) (100%)
You($190): Call (0%)
Pot: $104

You just lost $52, Full House vs. 4 Of A Kind 3's, on the river with just over a 2% chance even. At this point you would probably be steaming mad, and just leave the table possibly even quit the game for the day. How unlucky? So, it's not ALWAYS about skill. Anyone could have played that hand 100% perfectly and still lose a big amount of money just because off thinking mathematically. Taking that into consideration, you also have to look at the fact that their are Donks, Bots, Possible Cheaters, etc. Which decrease your chances of winning even more.

One small quibble with your post. No, a good player wouldn't leave the table, because a good player usually can avoid tilt. I don't play high volume, and I was ahead with a full house, and lost to quads, twice in one week.

I didn't throw anything or yell at anyone, and I didn't stop or slow down my play in any way, either time.

I will confess that I do get mad from time to time, but that's almost always because I did something stupid (like misreading the board and not realizing that my opponent rivered a straight if he was holding 56 when a 3 hit the river).

Actually, making a living as a sandwich-maker is like poker. It is a skill game with an element of luck, and like poker, those in the restaurant business who don't make good decisions don't last very long.

Most poker players lose money. And most restaurants (about 2/3 in my state, if I remember correctly) don't survive very long. Making it in the restaurant business is tough, and just like poker, you have to make good decisions. Some of the skill or knowledge-based decisions that you (or the management that you hire) have to make include:

Where is the best location for my business?

How should I market it?

Do I play smallball (specialize in a certain kind of sandwich) or longball (make a large variety of sandwiches to apply to a broader clientele?)

What am I good at, and in what areas do I need to hire help, such as marketing, accounting, taxes, etc?)

Am I willing to grind (work 60+ hours a week, as most small business owners do when getting started)?

Will I be easygoing and informal with my employees, or will it be no-nonsense with strict employee rules?

How much management do I need? Or will I manage everything (if I'm willing to do the grinding to put in that many hours)? What about one manager on each shift? Someone in charge of purchasing?

What equipment do I need to buy?

What kind of theme (decoration, etc.) do I need, or does that even matter?

What I'm saying is that succeeding in almost anything in life takes a combination of skill or talent, and hard work.

Some would argue that in some areas, such as sports, you can succeed solely because of your talents and ability, but that's rarely true. Take Bill Rogers, who won the Boston Marathon three times. Did he have some talent or natural ability? Undoubtedly. He weighed 125 pounds, and marathon runners that are small have a huge advantage.

But that fact that his training was based on running twice a day, for a total of 140 miles a week (yes, that's the correct number) probably had a just a little to do with his success.

That kind of reminds me of someone. When interviewed about his deep run at the 2001 WSOP ME, Phil Ivey stressed over and over that it wasn't just about talent, or luck--he worked really hard at his game.

One of the best articles I ever read. A++.

Great article something young players can show their parents when they're getting ranted on,

... you created a very good sandwichpost. Well played.

ok so for the noob question... where can i find this article?

You've been here almost two years and never noticed the 2+2 Magazine link, at the top of the left side links?

great article, poker is a sport not a gambling !!

The older and wiser I become, the more I realize poker is absolutely worthless.

True wealth is built over time, and poker is nothing more than prying on people's hopes of getting rich quick.

And I was a winning player, I just came to realize the amount of time/effort is much more profitable to spend elsewhere. Less than 10% of poker players are winners, and significantly less can make even an average income. Most people think they are special, but the truth is that most people are in the 90% of non-winners.

True wealth is built over time by saving/investing. Poker is nothing more than pyramid scheme for the most part, only a few will be successful yet everyone wants to believe they are the one.

Sometimes with other people never meets the mind of "poker."

one of the best posts itt so far