Going pro

[MacGuyV]

The stars game was fine till all you party tags migrated over. [img]/images/graemlins/mad.gif[/img]

[TheWunderkind]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Its not just about maximising income, the alternative is a day job and that sucks for some of us (I left a lot more than $50,0000 and wouldn't go back and I'm not even any good).

[/ QUOTE ]

I understand that there are some downsides to day jobs and one of the most appealing aspects of online poker is the freedom that comes with being able to play whenever you feel like it. That said, that freedom is going to be increasingly diminished to the extent that it becomes harder and harder to find a nicely profitable game at any time in the day. Second, if the games become sufficiently tough that it becomes difficult to maintain a winrate above a few tenths of a BB/100, then the danger of going broke is going to be severe. Imagine a 1000+ BB downswing that takes place over several months of play. That means losing 1000 BB in cash + whatever your living expsenses for that time period are.

Are the games *that* bad yet? No, I don't think so, but the poker ecosystem is in a very fragile state. The number of weak fish that support the winning players is much lower than it has been in the past. With tougher games all over the place, the fish are going broke at a faster rate and are not being replenished. There's a real danger that games will slowly become worse and that eventually the players who are mediocre winners and/or run bad over a long stretch will go effectively bankrupt.

Is this preordained to happen? No, and there's a lot of people who have a major incentive to keep a poker economy going. But it does mean that deciding at this point in time to go pro -- instead of say, working a day job for the time being while playing on the side and feeling out how the poker ecosystem evolves over the next few months -- is probably a poor decision.

I hope it works out for people who are relying on poker as their sole source of income, but I fear that it will not end well for everybody in this situation.

[/ QUOTE ]

I find your posts about the poker ecosystem quite interesting sweetjazz but dont you think if the games will gettin tougher that a lot of wannabe semipros will leave becauze they dont think its worth anymore to play and that leaves enough fish for us?I read some post in a german forum that they think in the future they dont think it is worth anymore to put time and work in poker when they dont can expect a great winrate and some already stopped playing because of that so my assumption is that the games get obv tougher that a lot of tags will leave poker because they think it isnt worth for them anymore because i cant imagine that the poker ecosystem is that fragile...sure the games got tougher but do you really think its possible that the poker ecosystem breaks down or that the games get so tough that you almost can grind out 0.5BB at your A++ game? I cant imagine that but i dont know of course

[bbbushu]

heisenb3rg,

im rooting for ya

[duckman]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Its not just about maximising income, the alternative is a day job and that sucks for some of us (I left a lot more than $50,0000 and wouldn't go back and I'm not even any good).

[/ QUOTE ]

I understand that there are some downsides to day jobs and one of the most appealing aspects of online poker is the freedom that comes with being able to play whenever you feel like it. That said, that freedom is going to be increasingly diminished to the extent that it becomes harder and harder to find a nicely profitable game at any time in the day. Second, if the games become sufficiently tough that it becomes difficult to maintain a winrate above a few tenths of a BB/100, then the danger of going broke is going to be severe. Imagine a 1000+ BB downswing that takes place over several months of play. That means losing 1000 BB in cash + whatever your living expsenses for that time period are.

Are the games *that* bad yet? No, I don't think so, but the poker ecosystem is in a very fragile state. The number of weak fish that support the winning players is much lower than it has been in the past. With tougher games all over the place, the fish are going broke at a faster rate and are not being replenished. There's a real danger that games will slowly become worse and that eventually the players who are mediocre winners and/or run bad over a long stretch will go effectively bankrupt.

Is this preordained to happen? No, and there's a lot of people who have a major incentive to keep a poker economy going. But it does mean that deciding at this point in time to go pro -- instead of say, working a day job for the time being while playing on the side and feeling out how the poker ecosystem evolves over the next few months -- is probably a poor decision.

I hope it works out for people who are relying on poker as their sole source of income, but I fear that it will not end well for everybody in this situation.

[/ QUOTE ]

I find your posts about the poker ecosystem quite interesting sweetjazz but dont you think if the games will gettin tougher that a lot of wannabe semipros will leave becauze they dont think its worth anymore to play and that leaves enough fish for us?I read some post in a german forum that they think in the future they dont think it is worth anymore to put time and work in poker when they dont can expect a great winrate and some already stopped playing because of that so my assumption is that the games get obv tougher that a lot of tags will leave poker because they think it isnt worth for them anymore because i cant imagine that the poker ecosystem is that fragile...sure the games got tougher but do you really think its possible that the poker ecosystem breaks down or that the games get so tough that you almost can grind out 0.5BB at your A++ game? I cant imagine that but i dont know of course

[/ QUOTE ]
There was a lot of easy money floating around 3 years ago, this is now gone. Losers quit playing or inevitably move to lower limits. This is fine as long as the player pool was expanding -its not anymore. Now the US fish are gone and the US represented 2/3 of the cash from poker.
Poker is a game best used as a hobby or 2nd income until you make it big. $40/yr is't worth it if you wnat to raise a family and no it will not be easy to get a good job if you wait a few years let your comp sci skills deteriorate and fall behind in your field.

[Heisenb3rg]

I agree with nearly everything sweetjazz said, which is why solid/flexibile backup plans are needed.

You guys have inspired me to write an essay on the future of poker. I wanted to put it in a different forum incase anyone else wanted to add to it. Plus I spent way too long writing this , FU 2+2 stop wasting my time [img]/images/graemlins/laugh.gif[/img]

There's tons of assumptions and it's fairly general, but I wouldn't be surprised if it's kind of accurate.

http://forumserver.twoplustwo.com/showth...=0#Post10083124

[sethypooh21]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Its not just about maximising income, the alternative is a day job and that sucks for some of us (I left a lot more than $50,0000 and wouldn't go back and I'm not even any good).

[/ QUOTE ]

I understand that there are some downsides to day jobs and one of the most appealing aspects of online poker is the freedom that comes with being able to play whenever you feel like it. That said, that freedom is going to be increasingly diminished to the extent that it becomes harder and harder to find a nicely profitable game at any time in the day. Second, if the games become sufficiently tough that it becomes difficult to maintain a winrate above a few tenths of a BB/100, then the danger of going broke is going to be severe. Imagine a 1000+ BB downswing that takes place over several months of play. That means losing 1000 BB in cash + whatever your living expsenses for that time period are.

Are the games *that* bad yet? No, I don't think so, but the poker ecosystem is in a very fragile state. The number of weak fish that support the winning players is much lower than it has been in the past. With tougher games all over the place, the fish are going broke at a faster rate and are not being replenished. There's a real danger that games will slowly become worse and that eventually the players who are mediocre winners and/or run bad over a long stretch will go effectively bankrupt.

Is this preordained to happen? No, and there's a lot of people who have a major incentive to keep a poker economy going. But it does mean that deciding at this point in time to go pro -- instead of say, working a day job for the time being while playing on the side and feeling out how the poker ecosystem evolves over the next few months -- is probably a poor decision.

I hope it works out for people who are relying on poker as their sole source of income, but I fear that it will not end well for everybody in this situation.

[/ QUOTE ]

I find your posts about the poker ecosystem quite interesting sweetjazz but dont you think if the games will gettin tougher that a lot of wannabe semipros will leave becauze they dont think its worth anymore to play and that leaves enough fish for us?I read some post in a german forum that they think in the future they dont think it is worth anymore to put time and work in poker when they dont can expect a great winrate and some already stopped playing because of that so my assumption is that the games get obv tougher that a lot of tags will leave poker because they think it isnt worth for them anymore because i cant imagine that the poker ecosystem is that fragile...sure the games got tougher but do you really think its possible that the poker ecosystem breaks down or that the games get so tough that you almost can grind out 0.5BB at your A++ game? I cant imagine that but i dont know of course

[/ QUOTE ]
There was a lot of easy money floating around 3 years ago, this is now gone. Losers quit playing or inevitably move to lower limits. This is fine as long as the player pool was expanding -its not anymore. Now the US fish are gone and the US represented 2/3 of the cash from poker.
Poker is a game best used as a hobby or 2nd income until you make it big. $40/yr is't worth it if you wnat to raise a family and no it will not be easy to get a good job if you wait a few years let your comp sci skills deteriorate and fall behind in your field.

[/ QUOTE ]

FWIW, I think SJ's concerns are probably correct re: mid-limits and up. That said, I recently came back from not having played since about Oct. '05, and the PS 2/4 and 3/6 games...play exactly the same. (Not exactly true, the big losers are about 90% maniacs, rather than the 60/40 station/maniac split I recall) But, I'm happy making a couple bills extra a week, fairly risklessly at 2/4, and not necc. interested in moving up - the earn at 10/20 and above was likely people sort of like me who were 'moving up' or 'taking shots' and basically dropped 5-10k in free money on the table - and since there were a lot of bad players at 1/2 - 3/6, there was plenty of extra money to be made for taking these shots.

I'm not sure that the lower and middle-lower limits will ever become terrible as I don't really foresee many of the mid-hi stakes winners being able to maintain the interest in beating 5/10 or lower, so instead of moving down, they'll just get real jobs. And there's still a lot of people out there who are willing to lose $500-1000 over a few months donking around at low stakes, wondering why they're so unlucky.

As for OP, I think he's got a decent plan - make some good $'s over the summer and then move on to real life while keeping poker on the side. As a word of wording, be careful about burnout - it's so easy to just play and play and play that all of a sudden, it's bed time, and you've done nothing all day. A few weeks of that is pretty similar to going on a bender, and can be just as expensive...

[Beastmaster]

OP- I thought you just went through a bad downswing or am I thinking of someone else? maybe your back out and feeling better about your game...the +3bb WR is impressive.

[Oink]

First of, I think OP will do just fine if he plays anything like he posts.

I disagree with the doomsday stories about online poker. Basically it just suck being a US (limit) poker player these days. I have played some Stars 3/6 to 10/20 and the games there are IMO quite a bit worse than they currently are at party or Ongame. There is definetely still money to be made in the 5/T and T/20 games at party.

The stuff about the ecosystem of poker is reasonable enough. But people should remember that the earnings for the online poker firms have been huge and they havent had to compete that much yet as the cake has been plenty big for all of them. The minute the player pool stops increasing or starts decreasing, we will see cut throat competition and lower prices on poker. I.e. they will start compeeting with better bonus/rakeback deals and lower rake. There is WAY to much money in online poker for it to die. Ever!

[marching_on_together]

"My winrate has also been well above the 2+2 "expected win rate" at 3.0BB/100 over this sample"

Just out of interest what is your went to SD and won $ at SD for this period.

If your a young guy with no dependents then i say go ahead and give it a go, What's the worst that can happen you "waste" a few months of your life lose your bankroll and have a few months gap in your CV. As long as your not going to take out any kind of loans to fund this and are happy that you might lose what you have already made from poker then fine.

Bear in mind though whether you make it as a pro will have more to do with luck than your own skill level (assuming your game is at least of a reasonable standard, which it seems to be).

[Heisenb3rg]

[ QUOTE ]
OP- I thought you just went through a bad downswing or am I thinking of someone else? maybe your back out and feeling better about your game...the +3bb WR is impressive.

[/ QUOTE ]

Well just under 300BB , it was all in a 4 day period which is what it really intense. I won it all back and a little more after that..

Before that my WR was 3.5BB/100

I just got a new computer (thank you stars FPP), I deleted pokertracker on my old computer so I wouldn't be tempted to play during the end of school so I couldn't give you my WTSD and WASD. It was something like 36/52 IIRC but it included my 2/4 and my 5/10 DB, which are very different games.. My style has changed drastically since then. I showdown WAY more at 5/10.

Lag's used to be able to pick me apart, now I probabily play better against them than nits.