[paulcouto]

[ QUOTE ]
It shouldn't amaze me how little "pros" understand about being a pro, or how easily people are deluded by small sample sizes into thinking they can be a pro. Or by large sample sizes, for that matter. If millions of people have taken up poker in the past years, thousands have had luck in the top 1 percentile, and it's impossible to convince them they've just been lucky for years.

There is, essentially, no point in thinking in terms of running bad or running good. There's only play.

I've had no job except poker since 1987, and have never gone broke. I've stepped down a few times. And stepping down is a rite of passage for a pro. In fact, you aren't even a real pro, to me, until you've done that and bounced back up. Because if you can't, emotionally, handle stepping down, then you're just a goof who gambles for fun, and if you can't step down and rebuild and bounce back, then you don't have the skills. Also, at least half of what you'll ever learn about the game will come while "running bad."

Almost everyone who fails at playing poker for a living fails because they aren't good enough. Almost every single one of them. Yet, almost every single one of them gives something else as an excuse for failure. Outside expenses; pit games; burnout. The latter is the real BS. Burnout in this business = tired of playing and not winning.

[/ QUOTE ]

bad streaks dont exist, only bad play, yet someone can be lucky for years............ok