Live data from Hacker News

Quitting the full-time poker scene

team-bhp.com

71–80 of 197 posts

Re: Quitting the full-time poker scene

#71
post #26
post #21

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 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, o…

Something like football or chess or Formula 1 is valuable in itself; there's a beauty and elegance in seeing the hard thing done well.

In poker even the thing you're celebrating is zero-sum. Could person A fool person B or could person B read them; that's not people collaborating to create something in the way that two tennis players beating out a long rally are, that's just A vs B. And so much of the game is simply random luck - does the right card fall or not - and that's what people want to see; you might say there's skill in the game and that might be true, but people don't watch poker for the chess moments where someone makes a brilliant move, they watch it for the moments when the right number comes out of the random box. The larger luck factor matters.

Re: Quitting the full-time poker scene

#72
I've played a few hands of casino poker, just for fun (although I once won several thousand dollars when I was bored at the end of the night and went all-in with 4-7 offsuit and then flopped a full house). After maybe 10 hours spent in casinos I cannot even fathom spending my whole career in stinky windowless rooms late at night with that bunch of degenerates. Absolutely sickening thought

Re: Quitting the full-time poker scene

#73
post #43
post #15

I 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…

Live poker is still quite soft. While you do have to be better compared to years past, it's also far easier to get better because you can study solvers. I used to be a "good but not great" online player, but the extent to which you could truly understand hands was limited due to the limitations of the software at the time (mostly equity calculators that could not truly calculate EV). That changed with the release of…

Yes, live poker is still pretty soft, and since the players are worse, your winrate and edge should be better. But then again, I'm not sure you can get enough hands/hour to be as profitable as an online player--everything is just so much slower. You could have a year long downswing live where, if that happened online you are probably just a losing player. So you need to spend all your time at the casinos. You can't make a living grinding home games even if your edge there is astronomical.

Just my viewpoint as a solidly recreational player. Although I'm a decently profitable cash player (I donk my cash winnings away by losing tournaments), I'm not good enough to go pro online and I'm not patient enough or willing to spend my life in the casino to go pro live.

Re: Quitting the full-time poker scene

#74
post #21

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 a…

You can say this for a lot of careers though.

And perhaps the OP would.

Re: Quitting the full-time poker scene

#78
post #32
post #18

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Most interviewers looked at the 5 year gap in his resume to play poker and passed. Found a corporation--it's not that hard. Viola! No gaps in your resume anymore.

That works for an automatic screen, but not any real interview process.

It's probably much more a plus in an interview scenario because its interesting. The biggest danger is at the screening stage.
Post reply on HN