I wasn't the one who inappropriately used the very precise mathematical term of expected value to incorrectly describe an insurance policy. FWIW I briefly worked at Farmers Insurance and no tin foil hat is required to understand how serious insurers take people who try to game them and actually turn the math of an insurance policy in their favor by in some way breaching the terms of the contract.


I won't derail further after this post but you might want to reread what I said originally because your list of hopes are well attended to by the relentless clanking away of compound returns' powerful wheels for years on end. In fact it may be your addiction to paying those premiums that allow those fears to flourish. Also if you want to talk about insurance as a financial strategy to mitigate your RoR then you need to be able to quantify with at least some shred of accuracy what the probabilities of those rare but severe events are. Actuaries do those things for huge populations but its not at all clear that it is sound to interpolate that to your own specific case. So you do what the insurance industry pays billions yearly in advertising to get you to do, namely you let fear induce you to overstate the probability of extremely unlikely events.

That's not to say there are no legitimate insurance policies or uses for them, which was not my point. It is to say that people who make a lot of money probably don't need it.

Compound returns are irrelevant to a 30 year old with a $200,000 house and a $150,000 mortgage. You can't replace that if it burns down. Like it or not my wife and kids would be poor if I died tomorrow. That's not a failing of savings or returns, it's the math of being young and having had a short career. I don't disagree the average person often insures a car for collision when they shouldn't or something like that, they over insure moderate to high frequency but low severity risks.

That's true and false. They should accept higher deductibles and not insure smaller risks. For them to insure a $2000 set of earrings is stupid, for instance. Their liability risk is higher, though, because they have more to lose. Richer people also tend to have more expensive things, too, which means some of them are proportionately just as succeptible to loss from something like your house burning down or losing your giant engagement ring.

should i open a Roth IRA?

Definitely not true if you are a pro and have no other source of income. If you play on the side there is some grey area, but if you are a pro and not paying taxes in Canada you are evading your taxes.

Okay. Why has this topic changed to something completely off what im asking? From what it seems like, there are very few live pros who don't regret playing professionally. I'm curious to hear from online pros as well.

That would suck if most of the live poker pros who chimed in here did regret their decision to play professionally. It'd be better if they made easy money and had no regrets. The opposite is just depressing.

It didn't change from what you were asking. The conversation just delved deeper than most pea brains are willing to tolerate.

Perhaps, but it seemed like just a bunch of 22-year-olds that have no clue about retirement planning arguing with each other. Meh...

Anyway, I have known a some pros that hated their lives. Pretty much like any job you suck at, you'll hate it. When it comes to cards for a living, it's not always the playing part.

If this is true, Like it or not my wife and kids would be poor if I died tomorrow. I feel terrible for your family.

Makes no difference in my life what happens to your family if something happens to you, but someone in your life will have to take care of them at that point. You don't seem to care much about that by your post here.

You are also saying you don't have a spare $50.00 a month to take out some life insurance to be sure that doesn't happen, and be confident your wife and kids aren't destitute if something happens.

That is an unfortunate decision making process, especially since you seem to understand the ramifications.

The level of regret and angst over making the decision is probably correlated to how much debt they are in.

And, of course, the majority of pros are in debt. You'll never hear this on ESPN or WPT, however.

Thanks for the advice and I agree. One of the biggest things delaying any kind of retraining aside from lack of time and financial freedom is I'm not sure what direction to go or what type of career I would want. That uncertainty creates major malaise that can be pretty crippling almost to the point I wish the freedom to chose wasn't there and I was forced into a career. Anything more then a couple years in poker can really set you back in any other career path when you switch back IMO. Poker just isn't enhancing to any other career in anyway. You see people post on two plus two about how succeeding at poker shows you have good decision making skills and are pretty intelligent, sure those skills are great to help you once you get placed in a career you want, but it's not going to help you get there.

Unlike many grinders who are stuck in poker, I actually still enjoy playing and enjoy being at the poker room, I don't find the place or poker there disgusting or depressing like some have mentioned. Of course during downswings I don't enjoy going very much, but I'd imagine that is somewhat normal. Poker can be mind consuming too, when on bad downswings it can't help back have a negative subconscious overtone on other things in life. Then on the opposite spectrum, when running like god I can't wait to get back to play. Would prefer "work" to be a little less mind consuming.

The most common cheaters of all are of the people who get cash income, whether it's a barber/hairdresser geting a tip, or a poker player winning a pot, who don't report all of their income on their tax returns.

Perhaps, but a lot of Wal-Mart store managers started out at low level jobs with that company. There is always opportunity out there if you want to look for it and work for it, whether it is with your current employer or somewhere else.

the vast majority of americans are in debt as well. not only in poker

A few thoughs after catching up on this thread (pages 14-20).

1. Aruging about whether lawyers or poker players contribute more to society is pointless. You could make the same arguments about singers, dancers, actors, athletes, college professors, and anyone else who doesn't "make things."

A lot of entrepreneurs don't "make things", whether it's a kid with three paper routes, someone with a landscaping business, or a self-employed poker player.

2. I reject the idea that "the game has passed you by" after a certain age. Mike Sexton is still getting WPT cashes (not bad for a part-time player in his 60s). Doyle Bruson won a WSOP bracelet at age 76.

I didn't even start playing poker until my late 40s. I'm 57 now, I realize that I'm too tight for today's games, and I'm studying Johnathan Little's books to help me fix that. It's actually a lot of fun when I raise UTG with 33 or 65s and everyone folds because they expect an old guy to be playing something like TT+, AK.

3. I agree with the post that says it's all about work ethic. I put in at least 45 hours every week between working and studying, and I'm clearing other things out of my life so I can work even more. If you have a great work ethic, you can put in the volume to make some serious money. And if you're always studying, the game won't pass you by. Older players who have made, or are making, the necessary adjustments to remain competitive at the highest levels include Daniel Negreanu, Mike Sexton, and Phil Hellmuth.

4. A poker player, just like anyone else, should cover all his bases. We all need to think about insurance and retirement, pay our taxes, and take care of our families. (I think I said earlier in this thread that my wife has most of those bases covered. That's true, but in addition I can start collecting my miltary retirement pay at age 60.)

I will probably never be a poker millionaire, but I'll never be a broke player, because I'm not interested in backing, selling pieces, or in any other way playing tournaments that I can't afford.

When I was starting out, I actually turned down an unsolicited offer from someone who wanted to back me to move up from $5 to $10 SNGs. I had said in a post that I practiced good bankroll management and didn't move up until I had enough buy-ins for the next level. I guess that's a wierd concept for some people.

Tax evaders, yes.

But his point was that poker sucks because cheating (at cards) is rampant. However, I'd imagine cheating at poker is miniscule compared to insider trading, etc. where all the real money is located. Plus, I can only ever recall be cheated once by someone that actually could play well without cheating. Most cheats don't actually gain any edge by cheating because their basic fundamentals are off to begin with.

Dude, I meant that tongue-in-cheek.

May I ask what your experience is in the corporate world? Because what you have posted is completely inaccurate.

Ok, I wasn't sure. There are a lot of Wal-Mart haters out there.

I hear you. But "work" at its best is mind-consuming. A working dog is a happy dog. But look 5 years down the line: suppose you've played poker for that time, and kept your family fed, clothed and under roof. It will be so much harder to get into the real working world, but you will still have decades ahead of you to have to continue to keep them fed, clothed and under roof. Every day that goes by makes it more difficult. I wish you the best. I had the luck of knowing what I wanted to do when I was young . . . and then moving toward that career throughout my youth and adult life. Lucky me. Now poker is just plain fun for me. Winning is more fun of course.

I'm just lolling at everyone who claimed that, assuming equal income, poker>real job, because of "freedom". Some guys even claimed that smaller income from poker> real job.

Jesus christ, what kind of person do you need to be to prefer grinding out hours of your life in a casino, surrounded by old degens to actually doing productive work in a normal environment.

Good question, despite no question mark. A special one?

C'mon. Spare me with this response. It's reached a point where it's completely unrelated to OP's question.

Hate to have to fill you in on this, but people who want to talk about subjects other than what you want to talk about aren't automatically "pea brains". I liked this thread better when it was more closely related to actual poker issues instead of pretend accountants going back and forth about pension plans, and I'm quite far from a "pea brain".

The better question is, if someone has hitched their wagon to the poker-as-a-career star anytime in the last ten years, what are they going to do 10, 15, 20 years from now when the boom is totally over? Casinos will have nowhere near as much poker action as there once was, underground clubs will pop up ay about 1/10th the rate, and home games, which are impossible to begin with now to get off, will be even closer to extinct. If someone is in their 20's or 30's now, grinding out just to eke by at 1/2 or 2/5, what do they plan on doing in 2020? Where are their winnings coming from?

It would be save to say that those who played online professionally didn't regret it as much as those who played live right?

I see so many people here mention how it would suck playing in casino as your job in poker room full of old degenerates. Theres only 1 person that said they actually like it.

So far, there was one player who said he played online but had some sick hourly rate when he played so obviously he didn't regret it. I mean, if i made that much money like him, no way i would regret it.

Also, it seems like the amt of money live pros make is much less than online pros. If thats the case, why do ppl even play live poker for a living? Assuming someone makes the same amt of money playing live and online, isn't online the way to go?