Marginal utility I suppose but I largely agree

If I could ever get my wife to go for it and the time factor worked
In my favor is probably be happy doing part time poker while working part time real world. There'd be little pressure to produce on the felt and t wouldn't get to
Be a burn out situation quite so easily. Maybe someday down the road for me. I kinda think that if I can spend the next few years just destroying games in my limited time l could potentially make a case for this. It would require run good and absolute demolition of $2/5 though and as of yet I am statistically untested. It's a pipe dream to shoot for though.

Doing a 50-50 package for sure isnt such a dumb thing. I didt that for almost two years myself, worked 50 percent in a real job wich basically covered up my important expences every month like rent, phone and wifi at home- and then i played poker as a part time income.

Took away alot of the pressure when i knew that important expences like rent for my apartment was taken care of regardless of my pokerresults.

For me loss of benefits would be the main issue. I get double matching on my 401k which is absurd.

What do you do? Is there a cap? Regardless, it's still absurd.

I was happy when I got matching up to 3% and half matching from 3-6% (so 4.5% max from employer), now I feel like a chump

200% match for 4.5% income. It's not profession specific. My institution takes care of its people. Pretty wild. It's basically 1:1 match up to 9%. Nobody does that.

As someone who's currently doing this...OMG, greatest ever.

Late to the party re: spike / wife, but my two cents...

With regards to explaining poker to the wife, don't bother with math or variance or how it is similar to stocks or expected income or any of that stuff. It's simply a hobby, like golf or whatever, and you enjoy doing it just like she enjoys shopping or getting her hair done or lunching with friends or whatever it is women do. Settle on what a reasonable amount of time you should spend on this hobby (like all other hobbies you do) that's fair for both of you and her (once a week or whatever, perhaps with a nightly curfew like I have). Obviously schedule poker behind all other family activities (since poker is flexible that way), preferably at times where she is busy doing her own thing. And of course make sure you schedule time for just you and her.

My wife and I had this poker discussion before getting married. She was actually quite worried about this "red flag" activity of mine. Going on 6 years later, all she really cares about my poker sessions is whether I enjoyed myself. Obviously it helps that I haven't lost any money (and have actually made some), and we're well off anyways, but none of that would matter (winning or losing) if she felt neglected or that I was spending too much of my time doing something (anything) else (especially if put in front of family priorities).

Gonceaweek,homeby10:00pmG

Same I am doing right now.. Over one year doing it.. currently my hourly winning at poker are bigger than my net hourly pay at work. I would consider turning into full time pp if and only if my hourly winning reaches the gross hourly pay over an huge sample.. does it make sense to you? Same strategy?

Same. I'd have to be able to show significant financial gain on top of "it'll make me happy." I likely wouldn't be able to accomplish that without beating up on 5/T which probably isn't possible since it's the biggest regularly running game around. That's so far into the future though right now I just need to worry about building the roll.

Beating 10NL for 9.5bb/100 is a nice sign though. Woo.

Spike: As a player in the same local pool, I suggest that you stick to the well known 20BI at the current stakes to start playing live again

I'd relate poker to another hobby / pursuit when discussing it with her. I play hockey. It's $100-300/season, plus occasional equipment costs (up to $300+ for new skates), gas, beer, etc. For an hour game you're out of the house at least 3 hours between driving and dressing and whatnot. More if you hang out with the your team and drink after.

If you played another sport you'd probably spend a little less, but I'd expect similar time commitments. Either way, the money spend on those activities is 100% gone, while the money you pull out to play poker is probably not.

Cripes, what does that work out to per game? I spend easily $100 on hockey fees / etc. per month.

Gyourungoodathockeyexpenses,imoG

It's usually about $15/game I think. There's enough competition between the rinks here that the costs aren't too crazy.

I play 3 different leagues on 4 nights so it's really hard to keep track. I peel cash off my poker roll for basically all of those expenses too.

Lol daytwa, hockey rinks everywhere, not like Canada where it's all curling

That's pretty decent, I'm probably closer to $25/game. Although it's working out a lot more than $300 / year for you unless your season is only a month long.

Gsucksplayingoncurlingrinks,toomanydelayofgamepena ltiesforshootingthepuckovertheboardsG

Didn't know they had wheel chair hockey.

One league runs three 4-month seasons in a year with 2 games/wk, the other two run two 4-month seasons with 1 game/wk, and then two shorter 2-month seasons over the summer. I probably spend a good $2k/yr in league fees now.

That's like 1000bb.

Yup: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sledge_hockey

Only 2 good PLO hands.

Can you tell me what is correct then and what is convoluted?

The whole thing:

For starter, it is a run-on sentence.

Higher winrate does not mean fewer swings.

Player A has several 1000bb+ wins and 500bb+ losses.

Player B has mostly 100 - 200bb wins and 100 - 200bb losses.

Player A could crush player B in WR.

Which is it? High WR or low WR has less swings?

VL- what Dick Parker is saying is that winrate is the slope of your graph. "Swings are the squiggly part. It doesn't matter how you get to the end. The start and end points are the only things that determine winrate.

I think what you're getting at is that a big winner is less likely to have prolonged downswings which is true but the swings. A crushing player is generally trending up much faster so they're downswings don't look so scary in context of the overall slope.

In long term who has worse swings, 10bb winrates or 4bb? Long term being 1k hours or more

Yep, it's gonna be pretty damn hard to have crushing WR if you spend so much time recovering from big losses.