|
|
#1
08-08-2006, 03:23 PM
|
|||
|
|||
How many of the amateurs at the WSOP are wealthy?
I see several obviously wealthy amateurs in the final 3 tables. In the old days, I understand that most of the amateur player had a lot of money to throw around on this sort of thing. I played in a $1K entry $1M guarenteed where the final table was played live, and there were some fairly wealthy businessmen among the finalists. I wonder if, even with satellites, a lot of the amateur players are people who have money to blow on fnatasy camp.
|
|
#2
08-08-2006, 03:38 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: How many of the amateurs at the WSOP are wealthy?
there are certainly a % of wealthy guys who buy directly for the fun of it.
another success factor: the guys who care the least about the money can play a bit more liberally, take more chances, etc. I know for a fact that Einhorn has targeted the people who he reads as being skittish about losing chips and just want to hang on for dear life to the next pay slot. he's playing for charity, but playing to win...and if he donates $6m instead of $4m oh well
|
|
#3
08-08-2006, 03:42 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: How many of the amateurs at the WSOP are wealthy?
i think the WSOP has probably 3 components
1. professional players 2. satellite qualifiers 3. wealthy guys playing for the hell of it. i think the most dead money is likely in the 3rd group. maybe this is like 15 percent of the field (i guess you can lump in semi wealthy guys just playing for the hell of it.
|
|
#4
08-08-2006, 04:04 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: How many of the amateurs at the WSOP are wealthy?
[ QUOTE ]
i think the WSOP has probably 3 components 1. professional players 2. satellite qualifiers 3. wealthy guys playing for the hell of it. i think the most dead money is likely in the 3rd group. maybe this is like 15 percent of the field (i guess you can lump in semi wealthy guys just playing for the hell of it. [/ QUOTE ] I think some of 2. are also 1. or 3.
|
|
#5
08-08-2006, 07:31 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: How many of the amateurs at the WSOP are wealthy?
If you can afford to go play a card game and gamble at these stakes for any period of time, you're "wealthy" compared to most people in the world.
|
|
#6
08-08-2006, 07:39 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: How many of the amateurs at the WSOP are wealthy?
[ QUOTE ]
i think the WSOP has probably 3 components 1. professional players 2. satellite qualifiers 3. wealthy guys playing for the hell of it. i think the most dead money is likely in the 3rd group. maybe this is like 15 percent of the field (i guess you can lump in semi wealthy guys just playing for the hell of it. [/ QUOTE ] I don't think group 3 accounts for more than 5 percent of the field. The group was probably a much larger % before the flood of internet qualifiers.
|
|
#7
08-08-2006, 07:47 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: How many of the amateurs at the WSOP are wealthy?
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] i think the WSOP has probably 3 components 1. professional players 2. satellite qualifiers 3. wealthy guys playing for the hell of it. i think the most dead money is likely in the 3rd group. maybe this is like 15 percent of the field (i guess you can lump in semi wealthy guys just playing for the hell of it. [/ QUOTE ] I don't think group 3 accounts for more than 5 percent of the field. The group was probably a much larger % before the flood of internet qualifiers. [/ QUOTE ] My boss has a rich buddy who went out and entered for the hell of it. He made it through 1A with a decent stack and ended up just making the money. He is a gambler and says he would have had to make it to the top 50 to break even for the losses he suffered waiting for day 2! -AS
|
|
#8
08-09-2006, 01:58 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: How many of the amateurs at the WSOP are wealthy?
[ QUOTE ]
i think the WSOP has probably 3 components 1. professional players 2. satellite qualifiers 3. wealthy guys playing for the hell of it. i think the most dead money is likely in the 3rd group. maybe this is like 15 percent of the field (i guess you can lump in semi wealthy guys just playing for the hell of it. [/ QUOTE ] There's probably another big group as well... People like me who: 1) Play "semi-professionally" (i.e., have a full-time career outside poker, but play a couple hundred hours a year with a positive expectation, including many of the big tournaments); and 2) Are not "rich," but certainly have a bankroll that is big enough to comfortably afford to play lot of events each year, including the big ones. It's probably safe to say that in many cases number 2 (having a decent sized bankroll) is function of number 1 (being successful as a semi-pro). I know a lot of people in this category, and would bet that there are at least a couple hundred of them in the ME... -Aces
|
|
#9
08-09-2006, 03:08 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: How many of the amateurs at the WSOP are wealthy?
This sounds right.
Also, with the wealthy and the healthy threads, I hope someone has one asking how many amateurs at the WSOP are wise.
|
|
#10
08-09-2006, 04:09 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: How many of the amateurs at the WSOP are wealthy?
Wealthy people like to gamble as much as anyone else, and they have more means. They are probably better players because they don't value the stakes and will never play scared money. I find this post offensive, (even though I am not wealthy). Many wealthy people (especially the types who would want to play seriously) have gained their wealth through merit because of some unusual characteristic, whereas in your case it's most likely variance.
|
 |
|
|
Linear Mode
