is there such a thing as an online tournament poker pro ?

[Soulman]

baltostar,

if you really want to know how much he earns, get the following figures:

* Cashes from all online sites
* Cashes from all live
* Divide total by 1800 (45 weeks of 40 hours each)

Presto!

[CybrPunk]

Ok so the life of a tournament pro isn't for you. That's a personal choice. Bax made his. Rizen made his as well. Who do you think you are to criticize the choices other people make and how they earn a living? What gives you the right to question them?

Some people are happy earning 40k a year + benefits and still have to work 50+ hour weeks. What do you say to those people? Should the blue collar workers of America all flock to Wall St. so they can earn 300k+ as options traders too? I didn't realize becoming a successful options trader was so easy. Apparently we should clue the whole world in on this one... everyone can give up their 9 to 5, move to Wall Street, trade options and become filthy stinking rich!


Are you earning six+ figures a year? Are you happy with your life?

I'm sure if you asked those questions to Bax and Rizen they'd answer yes... and yes.

Who cares about the rest really? If they're happy and able to provide for their families and their futures that's all that matters. All the rest of your whining and complaining is ridiculous. Do you even have a purpose in posting this thread other than to demonstrate the fact that you're literate and successfully read a (horribly written) article from P5s and reposted the meat of it on another forum as if it were your own idea?

[ahnuld]

I agree with Junglen becuase my results in 200$ tourneys have been crap for the last 6 months. Vraince is huge, yup, its the variance [img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img]

[BigAlK]

[ QUOTE ]
A nice living yes, but actually below the avg accountant, attorney, high-producing sales/marketing guy (think real estate). Definitely well below the avg doctor. Even a senior level nurse can make up towards $100/hr.

[/ QUOTE ]

I'll concede that a person capable of making 6 figures playing poker tournaments probably has the brains and drive to make the same in some other profession. However there are trade offs.

<ul type="square">[*]a largely anti-social profession vs dealing with company politics/kissing ass to move up/etc.[*]high variance/uncertainty vs flexibility (working hours, where you live, time off, etc)[*]hit top earnings potential fairly quickly (as a poker player, assuming the proper talent/drive/etc) vs 5-10+ years to reach potential in most other fields[/list]
I'm sure everyone can think of a lot more. The decision (either way) isn't as clearcut as the picture you're painting.

I think you also vastly overestimate the potential earnings in other professions and probably underestimate the earnings of top tier MTTers. I can't prove the later, but this link indicates that $100 per hour income (roughly 200k per year) isn't as common as you think. Note the following:

[ QUOTE ]
17.23% of all households had annual incomes exceeding $100,000,[6] while another 12.7% fell below the federal poverty threshold[7] while the bottom 20% earned less than $19,178.[8] While the aggregate income distribution tends to tilt towards the top with the top 6.37% earning roughly one third of all income, those with upper-middle incomes also controlled a large, though declining, share of the total earned income.[9][2] Households in the top quintile, 77% of which had two income earners, had incomes exceeding $91,705.

[/ QUOTE ]

Note that only 17.23% of households had incomes exceeding 100k (roughly $50 per hour) and that most of these were 2 income families. In another post I got the impression that you might live in the Silicon Valley where incomes and living expenses are both much higher than the rest of the country.

In fly over country where a large percentage of the population lives an income of 100k per year (let alone 300k) is considered very good. I can see how someone might choose a profession that allows him to live where he wants, make a decent income (albeit one totally dependent on his skill and drive while highly influenced by variance - not unlike a real estate salesman) and flexibility in hours instead of a regular paycheck.

[Sherman]

[ QUOTE ]

And Bax is the best in the business. Imagine if the best attorney in the business could only make $100/hr.


[/ QUOTE ]

I heard the best janitor in the business makes $350.00/hour. Or around $500K a year.

The point is, just b/c the best person in the business isn't a multi-millionaire doesn't mean that people can't be professionals in the said business.

[dcviperboy]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Guys,

I just closed all of my accounts, and will be applying for a software job tomorrow morning.

Trip report to come!

[/ QUOTE ]

UPDATE :

I woke up today at noon, lol [censored] the real world.

[/ QUOTE ]

&lt;-- jelous...have been at work for 4 hrs [img]/images/graemlins/frown.gif[/img]

[THAY3R]

Balto,

If you only played Sundays a good player could make over 200k a year.

Please tell me what's so awful about that?

[baltostar]

I never judged anyone. I never said people should or shouldn't take a stab at playing poker tournies for a living.

The thread title sums up the motivation for my line of inquiry.

For something to be a profession, smart, talented, hard-working people who apply themselves have to have a reasonable chance of making a good living at it.

I seriously question whether that's the case for online poker tourneys.

First, you've got to put significant amounts of your own money at risk. It's not an investment. It's a job. Significant amounts of time are required. To make a profit at all, you must be one of the very best.

It's kindof like wanting to play in the NBA. That kind of life/career risk. Only the very best make a living at it.

For that kind of risk I think you need a serious payoff if you do succeed. I seriously wonder whether the majority of profitable players are getting anywhere near a payoff that justifies their time/stress/risk. I think you can analyze by working backwards from the top on down.

And, yes, a large part of the motivation of many to pursue poker tournies is the prevailing mantra that getting expert at tournies equates to enormous amounts of money. And the associated lifestyle paraded about reflects that.

I just find it interesting that this may not be the case at all.

[Sherman]

[ QUOTE ]
I never judged anyone. I never said people should or shouldn't take a stab at playing poker tournies for a living.

The thread title sums up the motivation for my line of inquiry.

For something to be a profession, smart, talented, hard-working people who apply themselves have to have a reasonable chance of making a good living at it.

I seriously question whether that's the case for online poker tourneys.

First, you've got to put significant amounts of your own money at risk. It's not an investment. It's a job. Significant amounts of time are required. To make a profit at all, you must be one of the very best.

It's kindof like wanting to play in the NBA. That kind of life/career risk. Only the very best make a living at it.

For that kind of risk I think you need a serious payoff if you do succeed. I seriously wonder whether the majority of profitable players are getting anywhere near a payoff that justifies their time/stress/risk. I think you can analyze by working backwards from the top on down.

And, yes, a large part of the motivation of many to pursue poker tournies is the prevailing mantra that getting expert at tournies equates to enormous amounts of money. And the associated lifestyle paraded about reflects that.

I just find it interesting that this may not be the case at all.

[/ QUOTE ]

I think you over-estimate how good one has to be to make money playing tournament poker.

Some people don't make a lavish living playing tournament poker. But they are good enough to get by. They play because they enjoy and don't like doing anything else. Gosh, it kind of sounds just like any other job.

[Soulman]

[ QUOTE ]
I never judged anyone. I never said people should or shouldn't take a stab at playing poker tournies for a living.

[/ QUOTE ]
Yeah I think some people have overreacted here, I didn't think this was your motivation at all.


[ QUOTE ]
For something to be a profession, smart, talented, hard-working people who apply themselves have to have a reasonable chance of making a good living at it.

[/ QUOTE ]
If you take Bax as an example, he probably made around $200k from online only last year, and that's a pretty damn conservative number (with 130k coming from Stars alone). That's not a good living? Sounds pretty sweet to me...


[ QUOTE ]
First, you've got to put significant amounts of your own money at risk. It's not an investment. It's a job. Significant amounts of time are required. To make a profit at all, you must be one of the very best.

[/ QUOTE ]
You're clearly in the wrong here. There are tons of posters right here who's not one of the very best, yet make good money. I made 30k last year from MTTs, and I was way worse then than I am now. There are lots of examples like that.

Putting your money on the line doesn't make it a profession? Why?

I can't see how you can say it requires a significant amount of time - well duh, if it's to be your livelihood, that's not too weird is it...


[ QUOTE ]
It's kindof like wanting to play in the NBA. That kind of life/career risk. Only the very best make a living at it. For that kind of risk I think you need a serious payoff if you do succeed.

[/ QUOTE ]
Personally, I agree with this. It's quite possible I could make a living from playing MTTs, but I have no interest in doing so due to a variety of factors. However, comparing it to the chance of playing in the NBA seems rather out there.


[ QUOTE ]
I seriously wonder whether the majority of profitable players are getting anywhere near a payoff that justifies their time/stress/risk. I think you can analyze by working backwards from the top on down.

[/ QUOTE ]
If by profitable you mean pros only, then I'll say that it will depend on the individual in question. Someone like Mike Matusow doesn't seem like he should be playing poker when it mind [censored] him so hard. Rizen, on the other hand, seems extremely well-balanced and laid back.

If you're talking about non-professionals, that's another matter entirely of course, but I assume you aren't.


[ QUOTE ]
And, yes, a large part of the motivation of many to pursue poker tournies is the prevailing mantra that getting expert at tournies equates to enormous amounts of money. And the associated lifestyle paraded about reflects that.

[/ QUOTE ]
It is probably overrated to a certain degree. I don't think anyone will argue that you can make a lot more playing nosebleed cash games - there's a lot of reasons someone might choose to do MTTs only though.

I do think most professionals play cash as well though (although you probably have quite a few small-time grinders nowadays).