Nobody plays gto. Second it isn't unbeatable, it is unexploitable. You can earn more by playing exploitable against bad opponents. If you regularly find the need to try to play gto you probably need to work on your game selection.

Where is Dwan nowadays?

I honestly think the games being dry and dead is exaggerated as **** and wouldn't be surprised it's shared around by losing players that are envious of winners and are pissed off that they suck. There would be thousands of people that made 100k a year post rakeback. Some Finnish 18 year old kid went from 2nl to shot taking 500z in 9 months and his past results are very impressive and people talk as if this stuff is out of the question and you have to sacrifice your life locked in your room running simulations for 5 years before you can compete with the solid 2nl players. It's not an illusion it's just not going to be handed to you on a plate.

man so much crap about how hard is to beat the micros... it is really incredible.

Let me fix that for ya buddy.

Yeah games are tough these days. I expect in 3 months they'll be teaching Russians at the age of six GTO strategies in primary school. I might go buy a noose tomorrow and end it.

You guys need to get out of the rut and embrace the competitive nature that poker has to offer.

I have few questions on this. I been playing online poker for quite a bit. I recalled before BF, games were pretty soft though not as good as when it was back before 2006. At that time i did play but played very recreationally.


I recalled winrates for cash games were very high. I believe someone who was pretty decent at 200nl could win 6 figures assuming they multitabled.


1. How much money is a solid 100nl/200nl/400nl/600nl making a year now?
The same with 1000nl and say 2000nl? Obviously those who play 25/50/nl and up, im sure they make a lot those that are very good players but of course you have those that lose a lot. But since very few players make it up to that level, im curious about the limits below that.


2. I recalled Haralobos in the podcast mentioned how he used to play 25/50nl and those big games online and mentioned in podcast that he probably can't even beat the small stakes nowadays because everyone is so good. So obviously someone like him would have lot of issues probably beating as low as 50nl 6 max? Or would that be a bit of exaggeration? The thing is he never was really a poker player and more of a sports bettor.


3. And there aren't really that many SNE as i thought there were. If thats the case, and then when you look at sharkscope and look at sngs and there isn't that many big winners, does that mean most players aren't winning that much?


4. So a solid 200nl player probably makes around 40k a year? Or would that be a crusher at 200nl? What about 400nl/600? What about the 5/10nl regs? If you took the top 30 winners in that game... first off i assume there has to be at least 30 winners at least right... then how much are they making? Im assuming like 60k-70k a year? The other thing that has me confused is b/c keep talking about how the rake is so high. Now i play mtt and mtt sngs so i never really looked at the rake. But when i look at cash games which i dont play, how is the rake really a big deal when you are playing $200-$800 pots at 400nl and they rake only $5? I mean if you look at casinos in the usa, the rake is only high if you play 1/2nl and they might have a total of $7 for rake and drop. But many other games rake is $5 max only or if its timed, well rake isn't that much when you play huge pots. So is there a reason why people keep talking about how high the rake is? I see $2000 pots online and have tough time thinking why people are complaining about a $5 rake.


5. I had thought well couldn't there be a lot of winners online who play heads up against bad players. Then again, almost no one plays heads up because everyone is scared of each other if other player has a clue. So how much money are heads up players even making then that are solid and play 5/10nl if they can't get any volume. What about 1/2nl and 2/4nl?


6. I also recalled back then tons of players would 24 table 1/2nl full ring and some 2/4nl full ring and play pretty tight and breakeven but make money from the fpp/rakebacks. Basically its not possible to make money playing nl cash full ring now assuming you don't play 6 max? I still recalled those things where most tables were 9 max and winrates were really high. But now, winrates are really low for 9 max tables? So whats even a good winrate at 200nl or 400nl full ring? $8 a table at 200nl and $16 at 400nl? What about 6 max?

Do you have the link to this podcast? I skimmed the thread but don't see where it's attached. TY.

Poker isn't a career in 2016. I think the vast majority of poker pros who only play poker will eventually lose all their money to tilt/age/depression, whatever.

I do not think there are any human minds that can play poker for 20+ years day in and day out... everyone who tries will eventually break.

Life is short, going out and getting a career is something to be savored not dreaded.

Stu Unger, Tom Dwan, Gus Hansen are all examples of brilliant players who let the game of poker destroy their spirit and their wealth.

This is a terribly incorrect post.

Yeah I agree life is too short to go and get a career that you don't like because you're parents said so.

100k pre rakeback at 200nl

Yeah I agree life is too short to get a career that you don't like because you're parents said so.

Who is haralabos and why should I care that he cannot beat small stakes?

Why would somebody start playing poker and not take it seriously?

Personally, I enjoy the challenge. It's not about the money, but I find moving up or finishing a great session immensely satisfying. Gaming does not offer the same intellectual challenge, also your results don't really matter. I think we can all agree that losing a couple of buy-ins (no matter the actual $ value) sucks, and if you are down early, climbing out of the hole and posting a solid win feels amazing. No video game has ever given me this satisfaction.

Playing poker just for fun isn't a real thing to me, because if I were playing and I knew I was sure to finish a loser, that would not be (at all) fun to me.

When you argue, that you rather should do something valuable with your time, then wtf are you gonna do all day. I go to law school and it eats a big chunk of my day. After 6 hours or so I enjoy playing poker more than watching tv or w/e. I think I play about two to three hours every day. Obviously there always is something more + live EV you could be doing. But assuming that I would study a lot harder, if I weren't playing poker is ridiculous. I'd sure as hell find some other way to burn the time.

Luckily in a hundred years we will all be dead, and it won't matter whether we played poker or w/e.

I don't think any rational human being will pursue online poker in 2016 as a beginner.

I started playing 2nl recently and like most people I wanted to one day compete at mid-high stakes. I was really new to the poker world so I didn't have any idea about the intense battles Isildur1 and others had. One day I stumbled across a youtube video of Isildur1 and Durr battling. It was insane to watch and I immediately opened up pokerstars hoping to find similar action to watch.

Guess what I found? Nothing! All the high stakes tables had 1 player on them. The biggest game I could find running was 100/200 I think and it was only 3 handed. I checked all game types, not just NLH and 5/10 up is basically a ghost town. Most people seem to know who they have an edge against and they have super nitty game selection.Why would anyone pursue poker seriously when high stakes online poker seems to be dead. Just a few bum hunting nits.

This is just my perspective as an outsider from first glance. I'm by no means an authority on the state of poker. A lot of people have been rightfully disillusioned away from spending the time it would require to succeed at those levels.

not actually going to read this thread but out of curiosity how many times has the phrase "contribute nothing to society" plopped out of someone's mouth-breathing face?

I dunno, zero?

actually, i just searched it. it happened once.
that's a pleasant surprise.

If you want to contribue to society, give away a % of your winnings in donations. You would be better off than 90% of people who work a "real job".

yeah maybe in Godless europe. here in America, a land of good, decent people the majority of people donate part of their income to charity. Much of it to Churches ( have you heard of that? Church? it's where good people go to worship and give thanks to God. do you have that in Germany?)

shots fired

From WIKI [link at bottom of this post] QUOTE: Taxpayers, whether Roman Catholic, Protestant or members of other tax-collecting communities, pay an amount equal to between 8% [in Bavaria and Baden-Württemberg] and 9% [in the rest of the country] of their income tax to the church or other community to which they belong. For example, a single person earning 50,000 euros may pay an average income-tax of 20%, thus 10,000 euros. The church tax is then an additional 8% (or 9%) of that 10,000 euros (800 or 900 euros) for a total of 10,800 or 10,900 euros in taxes.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Church_tax#Germany

LOL please don't be a troll.

Here in Europe most people stop believing in fairy tales after the age of seven.

i know this thread is going to be locked soon as people go on about religion etc, but i thought id share this gem as it popped in my head from memory, worth a good a laugh

http://www.ctvnews.ca/canada/priest-...sino-1.1647927

Where are Dwan and Hansen today?