I find interesting that no one (yet) in OP or in the comments has talked about my main complaint about playing Poker as a living: it's a zero sum game where you basically only take money from other people. It's not productive. For me, that in itself is as depressing as the grind. But it appears most players don't really care about this, maybe because life oftentimes is not fair and thus being productive is not seen as important as it ought to be? Idk but I find it an important question, culturally.
Quitting the full-time poker scene
21–30 of 197 posts
Re: Quitting the full-time poker scene
#22As a part time live tournament grinder who has a full time job it's always sobering to hear from full time grinders who end up quitting due to how tough the grind is. A couple of observations to add:
1) There is absolutely a huge edge to be had playing live tournaments, even for buy ins in the $1k - $5k range. If you are playing outside of Vegas it is very common to end up at a table where at least half the table are "recreational" (i.e. players who are bad and are likely to make large mistakes).
2) The downside to playing live tournaments is that it is difficult to get reasonable volume in and the variance can be brutal. It is not that unlikely to go on a 20+ buy in downswing even with a decent edge.
3) Having an income source not tied to poker is huge and allows you to not have to be conservative with bankroll management. If you're pulling in mid 6 figures from a day job you don't have to worry about selling action or going down in stakes when you go on a downswing because you can always supplement the bankroll with your income. This, obviously, can be taken too far, but you don't have to be as worried about the variance from shot taking a higher buy in tournament where you know you have an edge like the $10k WSOP Main Event which is by far the softest $10k that exists.
As the saying goes, being a professional gambler is the hardest way to make an easy living.
Re: Quitting the full-time poker scene
#23I've played my share on-line.
Honestly, I can't see it as a job. The skill at the high levels is insane, the variance is insane.
There is a reason people have said "No professional will win the WSOP again." Even if you are 5-10% better than everyone else... There is many, many, many trials to survive, and you only have to lose once when you are right.
There's a reason Phil Hellmuth folded KK early in the WSOP. And when you understand why... It speaks volumes of his thoughts about himself. Right or wrong.
The fish are out there. It just ain't worth frying them. Go have fun playing. It is a fun game. But a living... for just a few.
Re: Quitting the full-time poker scene
#24I find interesting that no one (yet) in OP or in the comments has talked about my main complaint about playing Poker as a living: it's a zero sum game where you basically only take money from other people. It's not productive. For me, that in itself is as depressing as the grind. But it appears most players don't really care about this, maybe because life oftentimes is not fair and thus being productive is not seen a…
The poker player is providing entertainment for others.
It's really not much different than working on a company backed by a rich investor where the CEO skillfully plays their cards to maneuver more money out of the rich fish while the other players also try to get what they can out of them.
Re: Quitting the full-time poker scene
#25I used to play a ton online before Black Friday shut it down, and I wasn’t really profitable, but learning the game…it was one of the most fun and frustrating things I have ever experienced. And it basically disappeared overnight…
Re: Quitting the full-time poker scene
#26I find interesting that no one (yet) in OP or in the comments has talked about my main complaint about playing Poker as a living: it's a zero sum game where you basically only take money from other people. It's not productive. For me, that in itself is as depressing as the grind. But it appears most players don't really care about this, maybe because life oftentimes is not fair and thus being productive is not seen a…
Is this not also true for many sporting or competitive pursuits that are also effectively zero sum? For sports I suppose one could argue there are benefits to exercise and for other competitive games with professionals like chess there are mental benefits from getting good at them.
However, neither seem particularly "productive" outside of all the money that is funneled into events for marketing purposes. There is, of course, perhaps some inherent aesthetic and community building around a common interest that is valuable, but I'd argue that the same is true for poker - I personally find the game of no limit hold'em interesting from a theoretical perspective and have met a lot of people that I would not have otherwise through playing it.
Poker doesn't seem that much different to other abstracted competitive pursuits to me besides that it has a larger luck factor to it.
Re: Quitting the full-time poker scene
#27I played back during the glory days of 2000-2004 and through the net-teller shutdown for America. Back then the money was absolutely absurd, because the game was very new online and very few people understood basics. This combined with the massive amount of marketing that was going on for television, tons of people were addicted to the thrill of the game. Every single year the game became more difficult as more peopl…
[flagged]
Re: Quitting the full-time poker scene
#28I played back during the glory days of 2000-2004 and through the net-teller shutdown for America. Back then the money was absolutely absurd, because the game was very new online and very few people understood basics. This combined with the massive amount of marketing that was going on for television, tons of people were addicted to the thrill of the game. Every single year the game became more difficult as more peopl…
How much did you make exactly? That's an extremely disciplined approach. I'd assume you could do pretty well at other stuff if you took it as serious as you did your online poker
Friend of mine did this in the heyday. He’d have, like a dozen games going. Hunting and playing “soft players” (as the GP calls them).
I don’t know how long he played, he certainly didn’t mention a grind as described here.
But, he netted enough to buy his then new $30k Lexus.
A lucrative hobby if nothing else.
Re: Quitting the full-time poker scene
#29I loved poker but it was too all-encompassing for me. I fairly quickly noticed there was just nothing much else going anywhere in my life. I was still getting better at poker, but not at the same rate as when I started, and I wasn't learning or making or consuming anything else.
I really did love it. But I really couldn't imagine not learning anything else.
I think video game streaming is the same. Not much room left for yourself.
Re: Quitting the full-time poker scene
#30I played back during the glory days of 2000-2004 and through the net-teller shutdown for America. Back then the money was absolutely absurd, because the game was very new online and very few people understood basics. This combined with the massive amount of marketing that was going on for television, tons of people were addicted to the thrill of the game. Every single year the game became more difficult as more peopl…
[flagged]
this will likely be downvoted … just shit posting as I know what the term means and was quite involved with this as a lucrative hobby ~03-07 and never knew a single player to describe marking a soft player this way… and datamining was the biggest buzzword before cloud