Re: Play poker for a living? Doubt it. A great hobby to have though.
 

I got fired for my job 2 weeks ago and I started playing for a living. Since then i've won 30 K in donkaments after playing over 250 tournaments. Your problem is you're playing limit and it will take forever/boring to make a lot of money. The variance of mtt's is a beast but just do whatever suits your playing style best.

Re: Play poker for a living? Doubt it. A great hobby to have though.
 

wow, OP turned out to be a gigantic douchetard.

Re: Play poker for a living? Doubt it. A great hobby to have though.
 

[ QUOTE ]
Can someone link the thread to the mod who went to vegas to play stud for a living? that was a great read...

[/ QUOTE ]

Three Years in Las Vegas

Re: Play poker for a living? Doubt it. A great hobby to have though.
 

[ QUOTE ]
wow, OP turned out to be a gigantic douchetard.

[/ QUOTE ]

surprise surprise

Re: Play poker for a living? Doubt it. A great hobby to have though.
 

[ QUOTE ]


What an arrogant reply. Big fakin deal. Help those who are trying to do the same then. I play Div 1 tennis with a fakin scholarship and I probably beat the shet out of you at tennis because I have been playing it for like 15 years and I dont act that arrogant when someone asks me for help on tennis. Poker players are so naive, amazing.

[/ QUOTE ]

Your original post is a narrative. It says you can't make it as a pro and now treat poker is a hobby. When did you ask anyone for help?

Re: Play poker for a living? Doubt it. A great hobby to have though.
 

[ QUOTE ]

The best online player lost 2/3 of his winnings and you come up with some bullshet that some have and some dont. Are you on crack dude?

[/ QUOTE ]

Who declared him the best online player? Your subsequent posts are almost as ridiculous as your original one.

Re: Play poker for a living? Doubt it. A great hobby to have though.
 

[ QUOTE ]
Look at sbrugby, the best online player today, won 3 million this year and lost 2 million in less than 2 months

[/ QUOTE ]

You're right... being up 1 million this year is awful, and clear evidence that the game isn't beatable. [img]/images/graemlins/confused.gif[/img]

Re: Play poker for a living? Doubt it. A great hobby to have though.
 

Thread saved from complete trainwreck by Dynasty linking his Three Years in Vegas post.
Forgot how good of a read that was.

Re: Play poker for a living? Doubt it. A great hobby to have though.
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
do any of you that are berating him win past 50 nl for more than 1-2 bb / 100 ?

[/ QUOTE ]

Yes.

[/ QUOTE ]
What an arrogant reply. Big fakin deal. Help those who are trying to do the same then. I play Div 1 tennis with a fakin scholarship and I probably beat the shet out of you at tennis because I have been playing it for like 15 years and I dont act that arrogant when someone asks me for help on tennis. Poker players are so naive, amazing.

[/ QUOTE ]
So, if I read 15 books on tennis, hire a great coach, will I get a div I scholorship in six months?? Then I will be able to beat you right?

Re: Play poker for a living? Doubt it. A great hobby to have though.
 

The biggest problem with OP was this statement:
"I am calling it quits with this project as I am tired of this fluctuations and not seeing any results. I mean players perhaps make less mistakes at those levels but c´mom, how hard could it be to play break-even poker?. "
Your not calling it quits...YOUR PROJECT FAILED.
And to answer your question....obviously hard.

Re: Play poker for a living? Doubt it. A great hobby to have though.
 

[x] OP levels entire forum

Re: Play poker for a living? Doubt it. A great hobby to have though.
 

[ QUOTE ]
What an arrogant reply. Big fakin deal. Help those who are trying to do the same then. I play Div 1 tennis with a fakin scholarship and I probably beat the shet out of you at tennis because I have been playing it for like 15 years and I dont act that arrogant when someone asks me for help on tennis. Poker players are so naive, amazing.

[/ QUOTE ]


why would we want to arbitrarily teach one person to take other peoples money? you're no more deserving than every other breakeven/losing player in the world.

if you're so altruistic that you'd be willing to teach anyone who wanted help, it's no wonder you failed at poker.

the only people who will give you their time freely are people whose time is worth nothing.

Re: Play poker for a living? Doubt it. A great hobby to have though.
 

excellent and yet surreal.......

Re: Play poker for a living? Doubt it. A great hobby to have though.
 

Why do you keep bringing up other players and their success? You still suck at poker.

Re: Play poker for a living? Doubt it. A great hobby to have though.
 

[ QUOTE ]
The best online player lost 2/3 of his winnings and you come up with some bullshet that some have and some dont. Are you on crack dude?

[/ QUOTE ]
No, but after this thread I could sure use some.

Re: Play poker for a living? Doubt it. A great hobby to have though.
 

OP,

Dont worry about the haters:

1. go back to the "Beginners Questions Forum"! Spend some time there.
2. Then you can advance to the uNL Micro forum. Before you know it you will be at SSNL.
3. Then the MSNL....etc.....

If your comparing yourself to leatherass, you should be able to reach all three of these goals in 2k - 3k hands of solid poker....then profit!

Re: Play poker for a living? Doubt it. A great hobby to have though.
 

[ QUOTE ]
wow, OP turned out to be a gigantic douchetard.

[/ QUOTE ]

oh yes...

Re: Play poker for a living? Doubt it. A great hobby to have though.
 

OP, I suggest you change your username to Loserfer.

Re: Play poker for a living? Doubt it. A great hobby to have though.
 

[ QUOTE ]
OP, I suggest you change your username to Loserfer.

[/ QUOTE ]

perfection

Re: Play poker for a living? Doubt it. A great hobby to have though.
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Look at sbrugby, the best online player today, won 3 million this year and lost 2 million in less than 2 months

[/ QUOTE ]

You're right... being up 1 million this year is awful, and clear evidence that the game isn't beatable. [img]/images/graemlins/confused.gif[/img]

[/ QUOTE ]

There is a difference between beating the game and making a living despite variance. I am pretty sure I can make my $600 back since I got $500 back already. My concern is coming out ahead enough in order to pay bills. I think there is a difference. If at the end of the month I come out $500 ahead, yes, I have beaten the game for the month, but can I pay my bills and not live like shet?

Re: Play poker for a living? Doubt it. A great hobby to have though.
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
do any of you that are berating him win past 50 nl for more than 1-2 bb / 100 ?

[/ QUOTE ]

Yes.

[/ QUOTE ]
What an arrogant reply. Big fakin deal. Help those who are trying to do the same then. I play Div 1 tennis with a fakin scholarship and I probably beat the shet out of you at tennis because I have been playing it for like 15 years and I dont act that arrogant when someone asks me for help on tennis. Poker players are so naive, amazing.

[/ QUOTE ]
So, if I read 15 books on tennis, hire a great coach, will I get a div I scholorship in six months?? Then I will be able to beat you right?

[/ QUOTE ]

I understand. However poker is not a sport where learning technique and gaining a feel for the game takes a lot of experimentation and hitting thousands and thousands of balls everyday, which is hard to do (hitting so many balls) unless you are in a faking academy that has hundreds of balls just for you. Putting that aside, you can become a decent strategist in tennis within a year if you study the best books within a year.

However in poker you dont have physical skills, you only master mental skills. In one year, after studying and seeing thousands of situations in online poker you should be able to beat 2/4 Full Ring Limit. Perhaps I am wrong, thats just my point of view.

Re: Play poker for a living? Doubt it. A great hobby to have though.
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
This post made my head hurt.

Ten hours a day playing online poker (or any poker for that matter)? Day in and day out? I'd kill myself (and others) if I had to do that.

If you can't beat NL50, you aren't very good. It's just that simple. That's not to say you can't improve, but you're naive to think you should be able to make thousands a month if you can't profitably play at this level.

And, as others have said, if you think LHE has less variance than NLHE, you're wrong in the head, brother. I can't even play LHE anymore because of the swings. It's a great game, but it's too nerve-wracking on me after the relative control I've found playing NLH.

I do tend to agree with your final conclusion, though. For the average (or even somewhat above-average) player, there are lots of easier and less stressful ways to make a good living than playing cards. There is nothing wrong with being a hobbyist -- playing the game for a living is definitely only for the few (and the masochistic if you ask me). I made peace a while ago that I can't do it, just like lots of folks couldn't do what I do for a living. Playing poker for a living requires a very specific skill-set, just like any other job. I probably can't do theirs, they probably couldn't do mine. That's what makes the world work.

[/ QUOTE ]

You made peace a while ago that you cant do it? Didnt quite understand your post? Did you quit playing for a living or not?

[/ QUOTE ]

I don't play for a living. I don't doubt that I have the skill to do it (I certainly am not good enough to play nosebleed stakes, but I could (and have) definitely beat midstakes NLH games online and live).

What I lack is what most people lack to be able to play for a living. I lack the will to grind hours a day, I lack the kind of emotional distance necessary to plow through the prolonged and brutal downswings that are inevitable with variance, and I cannot completely divorce myself from the value of money. In short, I don't have the temperament to gamble for a living. It takes a special kind of person.

Remember, there are (at least) two components to being able to play professionally -- one part is skill (which many on the 2+2 forums have), but the other is discipline and emotional toughness under financial extremity. Don't have that. And if you're freaking out over $600, you probably don't either. It's no knock on you -- not everyone is sick.

[/ QUOTE ]

So, again, can someone tell me what kind of person do I need to be in order to be a succesful gambler? I went up $900 and then down to $120 then up to $2000, yes its tough emotionally and financially. I just want to know if making a living at this involves not counting on money for the next month? Being broke most of the time? Is this what this is about? Since there is no guarantee of a monthly income (or at least the necessary to pay bills) how do you guys do it?

Re: Play poker for a living? Doubt it. A great hobby to have though.
 

[ QUOTE ]
You just have to be a consistent winner, but even then the swings are ridiculous. You can tell from your comments you are very inexperienced at the game. Your jumping from bonuses, to NL, to limit. You dont seem to grasp that poker is ALL about wins and losses. Nobody wins every day...its just that the days we win add up to more than the days we lose. 600 bucks? thats nothing, but you cant go from NL to 2/4 limit and expect to win right away. Even experienced players are rusty when they come back....
Play for fun...life is stressful enough...if losing 600 bucks in two days hurts, forget about playing for a living....you could have losing weeks or months. But, the idea is the wins and losses should balance out if your good nad youl just break even. If you're a great player, you'll come out ahead. If poker was beatable by anybody and everybody, nobody could win.
BTW, I dont play for a living, but i do play as my part time job...been doing it for 11 months, and Ive had 3 of those months Ive finished down!!! Thats just how it goes!

[/ QUOTE ]

Sounds like a lot of people are not doing this for a living. I wonder why that is if a lot of the 2+2 are so skilled. Guess I am not the only "loser" here. No offense to you dude, at least you are being honest and not bullsheting me like most people in this thread.

Re: Play poker for a living? Doubt it. A great hobby to have though.
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Op can you clarify this for me:

"After lots 6 months I built my br to about playing NL25 and NL50 to around $1,200 but started having variance at NL50 and NL100 so I was unable to achieve any significant profits and my bankroll got stuck"

ARe you saying it took you 6 months playing 6/hrs a day to build a roll for 50nl, playing 25nl?

[/ QUOTE ]

These are the kind of arrogant claims that I cant stand about the guys on 2+2. As far as I know it took Chris Ferguson (with 5 fakin bracelets) more than that to get to $1500 so I fak off. http://www.fulltiltpoker.com/chris-ferguson-challenge

[/ QUOTE ]

He had A LOT less to work with. You're comparing apples and penguins. This is another sign of your less-than-basic understanding of the game.

[/ QUOTE ]

Not really. Look closely and see that it took him a lot of time to get from ~$100 to $2,000. This is another sign of you less-than-basic observation skills.

Re: Play poker for a living? Doubt it. A great hobby to have though.
 

[ QUOTE ]
However in poker you dont have physical skills, you only master mental skills. In one year, after studying and seeing thousands of situations in online poker you should be able to beat 2/4 Full Ring Limit. Perhaps I am wrong, thats just my point of view.

[/ QUOTE ]


Almost everyone you see at a 2/4 full ring has played thousands of hands. Plenty of people who read the books suck ass; some people are just slow learners.

The problem you are facing is that the cost of rake is too overwhelming for a mediocre player like yourself to overcome.


Either you should get a prop account on a lesser known site, or if you're as cocky as i hope you may be, jump to 15/30+ where the cost of rake is proportionately a lot less.

Re: Play poker for a living? Doubt it. A great hobby to have though.
 

...at those stakes it's always hard to beat the rake, let alone deal with variance....

Re: Play poker for a living? Doubt it. A great hobby to have though.
 

It's not for everybody. Very few people can make a living at it. So YOU AND I CAN'T do it and have to work. Life goes on.

But why so negative and nasty to the ones that can or are still trying? Are you bitter because they can and you can't? And for the ones trying that won't be able to do it, let them figure it out on their own.

I think you are upset about something else and are taking it out on poker. I had the same dreams of being the next sbrugby but figured out on my own that $500 extra each month on top of my paycheck is still satisfying and more realistic.

Re: Play poker for a living? Doubt it. A great hobby to have though.
 

wtf I left the house and started living off poker 6 months ago playing 50nl and a bankroll of 800$, havent looked back since.

Re: Play poker for a living? Doubt it. A great hobby to have though.
 

[ QUOTE ]
wtf I left the house and started living off poker 6 months ago playing 50nl and a bankroll of 800$, havent looked back since.

[/ QUOTE ]

LOL...How much is your mortgage?

Re: Play poker for a living? Doubt it. A great hobby to have though.
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
However in poker you dont have physical skills, you only master mental skills. In one year, after studying and seeing thousands of situations in online poker you should be able to beat 2/4 Full Ring Limit. Perhaps I am wrong, thats just my point of view.

[/ QUOTE ]


Almost everyone you see at a 2/4 full ring has played thousands of hands. Plenty of people who read the books suck ass; some people are just slow learners.

The problem you are facing is that the cost of rake is too overwhelming for a mediocre player like yourself to overcome.


Either you should get a prop account on a lesser known site, or if you're as cocky as i hope you may be, jump to 15/30+ where the cost of rake is proportionately a lot less.

[/ QUOTE ]

definitely go to 15/30

Re: Play poker for a living? Doubt it. A great hobby to have though.
 

You need to be doing this part time and working for a living. (I admit confusion here. How can you be on a division 1 tennis scholarship and still need to make a living?)
You cannot be afraid to lose.
You must be confident in your own strategies.
You've got to be quick at figuring odds and quicker at recognizing patterns.
You must love strategy games as has been pointed out by Dynasty.
Finally, you must leave all your winnings in your bankroll until you can play at the level that feels right to you. Bankroll and living money must always be separate.
Get rigorous physical exercise. In other words, play tennis too. Precisely because poker is a cerebral game you can't be at the top unless you maintain a healthy lifestyle.
Finally you must absolutely be honest with yourself. "To thine own self be true," said the bard. You should not be asking US what kind of person you need to become. You should be asking yourself, "Who am I?" What do I do well. What do I enjoy. Where are my passions? You can't just decide to play poker for a living. It doesn't work that way. You need to be passionate about the game. I hear that in Dynasty's story about Vegas (which I really enjoyed) and I hear it from my son who is a pro. Without that passion poker can at best be just another pass time or hobby for you. Honestly? The same is true of any profession. You must be passionate about your lifestyle in all its components.
I'm a lousy poker player but it's a great deal of fun. So I play. I'm trying to learn but I never played the game at all until after my son graduated from college. I understand why he likes it-actually is passionate about it-and I could never, ever make a living at it the way he does. I understand that because I know myself. So-get thee to a mirror and ask yourself those questions. Remember to be honest. The only person listening to your answers is you.

Re: Play poker for a living? Doubt it. A great hobby to have though.
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Op can you clarify this for me:

"After lots 6 months I built my br to about playing NL25 and NL50 to around $1,200 but started having variance at NL50 and NL100 so I was unable to achieve any significant profits and my bankroll got stuck"

ARe you saying it took you 6 months playing 6/hrs a day to build a roll for 50nl, playing 25nl?

[/ QUOTE ]

These are the kind of arrogant claims that I cant stand about the guys on 2+2. As far as I know it took Chris Ferguson (with 5 fakin bracelets) more than that to get to $1500 so I fak off. http://www.fulltiltpoker.com/chris-ferguson-challenge

[/ QUOTE ]

He had A LOT less to work with. You're comparing apples and penguins. This is another sign of your less-than-basic understanding of the game.

[/ QUOTE ]

Not really. Look closely and see that it took him a lot of time to get from ~$100 to $2,000. This is another sign of you less-than-basic observation skills.

[/ QUOTE ]

Wow, you really are an idiot. You're comparing Chris using only 2 - 10% of his roll at a time to get to $2000 (that's with $2 - $10 on a $100 bankroll) to your six-month climb from $25NL to $50NL. If you have mental handicaps, you should really inform us immediately so that we know who we're dealing with. This has a lot less to do with observational skills than common sense. You're seriously retarded, and if one person in this world loved you they'd hire a caretaker to prevent you from walking into walls or pissing money away on experiments.

Re: Play poker for a living? Doubt it. A great hobby to have though.
 

[ QUOTE ]
Correct me if I am wrong, but Leatherass (stoxpoker blogger) built his bankroll and makes most of his profits doing just that.

[/ QUOTE ]

You are not Leatherass.

[ QUOTE ]
What an arrogant reply. Big fakin deal. Help those who are trying to do the same then. I play Div 1 tennis with a fakin scholarship and I probably beat the shet out of you at tennis because I have been playing it for like 15 years and I dont act that arrogant when someone asks me for help on tennis.

[/ QUOTE ]

I sincerely hope this was intentional irony.

Re: Play poker for a living? Doubt it. A great hobby to have though.
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Op can you clarify this for me:

"After lots 6 months I built my br to about playing NL25 and NL50 to around $1,200 but started having variance at NL50 and NL100 so I was unable to achieve any significant profits and my bankroll got stuck"

ARe you saying it took you 6 months playing 6/hrs a day to build a roll for 50nl, playing 25nl?

[/ QUOTE ]

These are the kind of arrogant claims that I cant stand about the guys on 2+2. As far as I know it took Chris Ferguson (with 5 fakin bracelets) more than that to get to $1500 so I fak off. http://www.fulltiltpoker.com/chris-ferguson-challenge

[/ QUOTE ]

He had A LOT less to work with. You're comparing apples and penguins. This is another sign of your less-than-basic understanding of the game.

[/ QUOTE ]

Not really. Look closely and see that it took him a lot of time to get from ~$100 to $2,000. This is another sign of you less-than-basic observation skills.

[/ QUOTE ]

Wow, you really are an idiot. You're comparing Chris using only 2 - 10% of his roll at a time to get to $2000 (that's with $2 - $10 on a $100 bankroll) to your six-month climb from $25NL to $50NL. If you have mental handicaps, you should really inform us immediately so that we know who we're dealing with. This has a lot less to do with observational skills than common sense. You're seriously retarded, and if one person in this world loved you they'd hire a caretaker to prevent you from walking into walls or pissing money away on experiments.

[/ QUOTE ]

You stupid fak, it didnt take me six months to go from NL25 to NL50, it took me six months to go from NL5 to NL50-NL100. Stop embarassing yourself and go take ritalin so you can read better (although I think you are hopeless)

Re: Play poker for a living? Doubt it. A great hobby to have though.
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Correct me if I am wrong, but Leatherass (stoxpoker blogger) built his bankroll and makes most of his profits doing just that.

[/ QUOTE ]

You are not Leatherass.

[ QUOTE ]
What an arrogant reply. Big fakin deal. Help those who are trying to do the same then. I play Div 1 tennis with a fakin scholarship and I probably beat the shet out of you at tennis because I have been playing it for like 15 years and I dont act that arrogant when someone asks me for help on tennis.

[/ QUOTE ]

I sincerely hope this was intentional irony.

[/ QUOTE ]

No. I was being an intentional arrogant matherfaker. You like it, dont you?

Re: Play poker for a living? Doubt it. A great hobby to have though.
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Op can you clarify this for me:

"After lots 6 months I built my br to about playing NL25 and NL50 to around $1,200 but started having variance at NL50 and NL100 so I was unable to achieve any significant profits and my bankroll got stuck"

ARe you saying it took you 6 months playing 6/hrs a day to build a roll for 50nl, playing 25nl?

[/ QUOTE ]

These are the kind of arrogant claims that I cant stand about the guys on 2+2. As far as I know it took Chris Ferguson (with 5 fakin bracelets) more than that to get to $1500 so I fak off. http://www.fulltiltpoker.com/chris-ferguson-challenge

[/ QUOTE ]

He had A LOT less to work with. You're comparing apples and penguins. This is another sign of your less-than-basic understanding of the game.

[/ QUOTE ]

Not really. Look closely and see that it took him a lot of time to get from ~$100 to $2,000. This is another sign of you less-than-basic observation skills.

[/ QUOTE ]

Wow, you really are an idiot. You're comparing Chris using only 2 - 10% of his roll at a time to get to $2000 (that's with $2 - $10 on a $100 bankroll) to your six-month climb from $25NL to $50NL. If you have mental handicaps, you should really inform us immediately so that we know who we're dealing with. This has a lot less to do with observational skills than common sense. You're seriously retarded, and if one person in this world loved you they'd hire a caretaker to prevent you from walking into walls or pissing money away on experiments.

[/ QUOTE ]

You stupid fak, it didnt take me six months to go from NL25 to NL50, it took me six months to go from NL5 to NL50-NL100. Stop embarassing yourself and go take ritalin so you can read better (although I think you are hopeless)

[/ QUOTE ]

My points still stand, and you're still a retard. Sucks.

Re: Play poker for a living? Doubt it. A great hobby to have though.
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Op can you clarify this for me:

"After lots 6 months I built my br to about playing NL25 and NL50 to around $1,200 but started having variance at NL50 and NL100 so I was unable to achieve any significant profits and my bankroll got stuck"

ARe you saying it took you 6 months playing 6/hrs a day to build a roll for 50nl, playing 25nl?

[/ QUOTE ]

These are the kind of arrogant claims that I cant stand about the guys on 2+2. As far as I know it took Chris Ferguson (with 5 fakin bracelets) more than that to get to $1500 so I fak off. http://www.fulltiltpoker.com/chris-ferguson-challenge

[/ QUOTE ]

He had A LOT less to work with. You're comparing apples and penguins. This is another sign of your less-than-basic understanding of the game.

[/ QUOTE ]

Not really. Look closely and see that it took him a lot of time to get from ~$100 to $2,000. This is another sign of you less-than-basic observation skills.

[/ QUOTE ]

Wow, you really are an idiot. You're comparing Chris using only 2 - 10% of his roll at a time to get to $2000 (that's with $2 - $10 on a $100 bankroll) to your six-month climb from $25NL to $50NL. If you have mental handicaps, you should really inform us immediately so that we know who we're dealing with. This has a lot less to do with observational skills than common sense. You're seriously retarded, and if one person in this world loved you they'd hire a caretaker to prevent you from walking into walls or pissing money away on experiments.

[/ QUOTE ]

You stupid fak, it didnt take me six months to go from NL25 to NL50, it took me six months to go from NL5 to NL50-NL100. Stop embarassing yourself and go take ritalin so you can read better (although I think you are hopeless)

[/ QUOTE ]

My points still stand, and you're still a retard. Sucks.

[/ QUOTE ]

Nothing like stubornness and stupidity combined in one person. If you are an American, the UIGEA might have had some sort of enhancing effect on your disability. I feel sorry really. My point still stands, you are hopeless.