Cost-benefit analysis of going pro, please help (VERY LONG)

[El Diablo]

Gild,

"A smart guy with 300k at 25 is set for life, imo. I could invest that in my education, or start a business, or open a jazz club."

That could also easily mean that you're 26 and broke, but at least got to take a shot at something you really like that could make you a lot of money and now have some great experience and experiences.

I'm obviously all for that, but thinking that 300k is enough to BOTH take shots at new businesses AND be financially secure is just plain false.

300k gives you the opportunity to try some things that you might not otherwise. But if you take those chances, you give up the financial security that 300k would otherwise give you.

[gobboboy]

Gild,

I've been lucky to get where I am right now but I don't regret dropping out of school at all. Since you already have a great job and have great poker skills, even if poker doesn't work out after a year you have the chance to go back and do something else. I dropped out after a semester of school and going back will be very tough if poker dies. I've made the transition over to a lot of live play so hopefully I can make a nest egg before that happens, and maybe you can do the same thing. But it seems like you're in a position where you have a much better chance of making it going pro than I do.

I'm very happy with what I'm doing. I'm meeting tons of new people, dealing with business and the day to day lifestyle of being lazy or productive whenever I want. I have very little responsibility and I can go do whatever I want whenever I want, and lots of friends and family are jealous of me for that. You have a good head on your shoulders, and I have no doubt you could make it work (and even if it doesn't, just go back to regular work).

I'm obviously pretty biased, I don't think anyone expected me to say "stay at your work, my life sucks." Poker's one hell of a ride though.

[Aloysius]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]

I would say that these five are generally reflective of my college peers from MIT.

[/ QUOTE ]

I very highly doubt that. I went to Waterloo, which as you probably know is right up there with schools like MIT in the tech field. Most students are average or slightly above, your sample represents the top students.

[/ QUOTE ]

Correct in that the average MIT graduate's net worth from Howard's class *likely* isn't >$10MM... but he did say his peer group there.

Anyway let's not gloss over his main point, which imo is very important to consider:

[ QUOTE ]
The economic leverage you get from smarts in the open marketplace is vastly higher than you're likely to get from poker.

[/ QUOTE ]

Gildwulf:

[ QUOTE ]
If I take a few years off and play poker, and all goes well, I could have 300k saved up by the time I am 25. I don't play pit games, I don't do drugs, I almost never tilt and I don't have any real vices beyond taking my girlfriend out to nice dinners. A smart guy with 300k at 25 is set for life, imo. I could invest that in my education, or start a business, or open a jazz club.

[/ QUOTE ]

I think this betrays, perhaps, a lack of understanding of what your going-forward economics should look like if you want to be financially stable for a long period of time, while taking shots in other endeavors. Diablo's post is correct.

In general, from skimming the thread, it seems alot of the calculus in forming your argument to go pro, is premised on the idea that your gambles will work out while not fully considering your exposure. Meaning you will have $xxx from poker, and that $xxx can be leveraged successfully.

Perhaps this is because you're younger (I'm 30), and haven't been exposed to the downside suffered from taking shots in your peer group yet... but many of my peers (very well educated, very smart) take shots at small businesses and fail miserably (I also worked in venture capital for years, even for the most heavily funded, prestige VC-backed, well-executed ideas... there is a ridiculous amount of failure).

Not trying to rain on your parade or optimism, just an attempt to balance some of the advice with the reality that despite how smart you are, luck will play a role in any investment scheme you partake in. And from your OP you sound like the kind of guy who would like to be protected on the downside in the event of failure.

-Al

[SEABEAST]

I'm in the Isura/AJFenix camp. I play for a living and love it. I don't think I could possibly play for my whole life, but right now I love the freedom it affords me, and the possibilities I feel I am setting up for myself for the future in terms of investing, travel and so on.

I played LHE for a living from 2002-2005. To be honest, I mostly hated it and wasn't fulfilled by my life. I had very little interest in moving up or really achieving anything, it was just a way to avoid work and be lazy, but still sustain my existence. Then after a pretty harsh breakup I began to re-evaluate my life and realise that I am restless of mind/self-critical to the extent that I would not be able to play for a living for my entire life, and that because poker wasn't leading anywhere the way I was approaching it, I needed to either quit or start taking it seriously.

I chose the latter and started really working on my game, and embracing the learning component. This made the game so much more fun for me, and when I decided to finally learn NL this took it to another level altogether. After about a year of crushing 200-600NL I fulfilled one of my dreams and bought an apartment. This was really satisfying but curbed my enthusiasm a little so I started mixing in some 1K-2KNL when there were fish around, and that has kept me interested since then (have been rolled for 5KNL for a long time, but I am one of those care about the rest of my life/sanity more than poker guys tstone talked about in nvg thread).

I have to fight the feeling that I am not putting my intellect to use in a productive enough manner, and the fear that I will grow into a David Benyamine sort of guy with all the money in the world but hunched over a table obsessed with a game, a guy who you just don't want to become. I find the best way to ignore this is to dream of all the things I'm going to do with the money one day, like owning houses in different countries, running a restaraunt, traveling a lot. Buying a house was the first dream and I have now realised it, next on the list is a long Europe trip with my gf. In the future I am sure I will learn stocks and experiment a lot with entrepeunerial endeavours, and this makes the 4-500/hr I am pulling in seem to mean so much more.

You don't have to worry at all about failing. Party is still ridiculous and you are the type of guy who will succeed at anything. It's just a matter of what is the most important to you, maintaining a strong connection to society at large, or freedom/money. If you will be motivated enough to try and care, you will pull in an ungodly amount of money, but there is a social sacrifice whether you want to admit it or not. Seeing friends all the time for a coffee is a nice thought, but in reality most of them are at work/uni all day and you will just get used to being alone most days with the gf on her way home later on in the back of your mind.

You seem to understand the pros and cons and you seem like you will succeed at whichever option you go for, it's just the type of thing where you have to really listen to yourself because you obviously know the answer, it's mostly a case of admitting it to yourself.

[sethypooh21]

[ QUOTE ]
but I am one of those care about the rest of my life/sanity more than poker guys tstone talked about in nvg thread

[/ QUOTE ]

I'm glad you brought that thread up, as Shaniac had some relevant thoughts as well, I think.

[Howard Treesong]

[ QUOTE ]
These people are all multimillionaires by 40...what kind of hours did they work to achieve these goals? I'm guessing 60ish for the scientist, and 90+ for the rest of them.

[/ QUOTE ]

That's probably a bit aggressive but your basic point is right. I will say, though, that except for the polo guy, it was mostly a labor of love. In my career, I've worked dog hard at times, but only very rarely did someeone ever tell me I had to work: I worked hard for a sense of craft and to squelch a fear of failure. I suspect my friends were motivated similarly. Thus, the unspoken premise of your observation, that working very hard is a tragic burden, is perhaps not as valid as you might think.

[ QUOTE ]
Even for hotshot jobs there are these kind of sacrifices, no?

[/ QUOTE ]

Yes. Are you terribly proud of your father? This actually brings up another point: your motivations are highly likely to change over time.

[ QUOTE ]
My initial plan was to use poker as a leapfrog over the initial BS normal people have to deal with in jumpstarting their career.

[/ QUOTE ]

I think in each case, one key is developing expertise. That's certainly true of the CERN guy and the Spacedata guy and the surgeon and me and, well, . . . .all of these guys. I know that if my company imploded tomorrow, I'd have a job by close-of-business Monday.

[ QUOTE ]
The research scientist probably did his PhD in 5 years and graduated at 28 with no money but great job prospects.

[/ QUOTE ]

Actually, he was a bit older, having done a stint in the Greek armed forces before his undergrad days. And he worked harder than any of us. Plus, he was smarter than any of us by rather a long shot.

[ QUOTE ]
If I take a few years off and play poker, and all goes well, I could have 300k saved up by the time I am 25. I don't play pit games, I don't do drugs, I almost never tilt and I don't have any real vices beyond taking my girlfriend out to nice dinners. A smart guy with 300k at 25 is set for life, imo. I could invest that in my education, or start a business, or open a jazz club.

[/ QUOTE ]

Mostly true, except that I agree with El D about the $300K number -- especially if you have kids. But as I thought about this thread today (I'm firewalled from 2p2 at work, but my email receives posts on my favorite threads), I think the key to my leverage point is expertise. At 30, you'll be richer than most of your peers, but you'll be an expert at poker. At that point, I was 3/5 of the way along to the first partner cut and still on the steep part of the learning curve.

[ QUOTE ]
The real question is what gets me to a life of security and comfort faster and which is better in the long-term...a short-term jolt of poker followed by smart investments, or taking a conventional route like 5 years of work experience, two years of MBA, starting off at 100k when I'm 30 and going from there?

[/ QUOTE ]

I think you've generally got the structure right. The trick is finding a career that you enjoy. I like the doing of my job, which it makes the burdens manageable. Most of my pals feel the same, with the notable exception of Mexico/Polo, who always seemed to be burdened and pessimistic by his career track.

[ImsaKidd]

Howard:

I really like your story and admire you (and your circle of friends) who have worked their asses off and been super successful.

How do you feel about quality of life in those "grind" years before the more fun/interesting jobs?

For example, I think being a doctor/scientist would really be engaging and very rewarding. But going from being 20 to 28 years old, studying your ass off in school, with very little money, would significantly impact my quality of life. This would be a tradeoff for a much better quality of life later on.

I think that is another factor to consider, enjoying your younger years instead of aiming for having xx dollars by a certain age (but not totally sabotaging your future).

It seems as though becoming a pro now would really improve gilds quality of life for the next few years. Having more money and free time while you are in your early twenties seems like a very positive thing compared to grinding away at a desk job.

This is by no means downing you or your friends Howard. Just an alternative viewpoint to the "work 90 hrs/week" thought process.

[prodonkey]

I've played professionally for almost 5 years now.. My problem comes from a lack of motivation. I can work like 10 hours a week and pay my bills plus enough to go get drunk on whenever I feel like it, but that's not really getting me anywhere. I'm a low limit guy, haven't really played much over 2/4 nl.. occasional 5/10 pl 8 game. I haven't moved up in limits in a long time. It's basically just like any other job for me now and I HATE that. I used to like playing poker. I took almost 6 months off last year and did uhm.. nothing. I've made up my mind I'm going to bust ass in June and quit just surviving.

[Howard Treesong]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]

I would say that these five are generally reflective of my college peers from MIT.

[/ QUOTE ]

I very highly doubt that. I went to Waterloo, which as you probably know is right up there with schools like MIT in the tech field. Most students are average or slightly above, your sample represents the top students.

[/ QUOTE ]

I should have been more precise: this is my crew and doesn't purport to be representative of the broader whole. I'd find it unimaginable that my gang was in any way composed of top students, however -- other than the CERN guy, who graduated with perfect grades. The rest of us were rather middling as academics, I would say.

I don't think that pure grade success translates into dollars, by the way at the very high end of the scale. Some of the academics I knew weren't all that pragmatic in their outlook.

[Howard Treesong]

[ QUOTE ]
How do you feel about quality of life in those "grind" years before the more fun/interesting jobs?

[/ QUOTE ]

I would say that there was one case in my junior three years as a lawyer that I hated. We were working in a conference room on the corner of an airport in Tucson (which was cool because you could see ANG jets taking off) late one night and I went down the hall in socks to buy Cheetos and a soda from the vending machine. When I came back, the senior partner on the case gave me a half-hour lecture about professionalism. I simply listened, but my internal Howard was saying "FU, pal." He and I eventually developed a decent relationship, but if that case had been generally reflective of my law career, I'd have quit.

[ QUOTE ]
For example, I think being a doctor/scientist would really be engaging and very rewarding. But going from being 20 to 28 years old, studying your ass off in school, with very little money, would significantly impact my quality of life. This would be a tradeoff for a much better quality of life later on.

[/ QUOTE ]

I think you're exactly right but I don't think the difference is economic: I think those eight years are key for learning what it is that you're going to be doing.

[ QUOTE ]
It seems as though becoming a pro now would really improve gilds quality of life for the next few years. Having more money and free time while you are in your early twenties seems like a very positive thing compared to grinding away at a desk job.

[/ QUOTE ]

I'm by no means telling Gidwulf that he shouldn't go pro. I do think (as seems to be the case for many around here) that he has plenty of opportunities elsewhere and that he should think deeply about his preferences here, for his decisions are likely to have long-term consequences.

[ QUOTE ]
This is by no means downing you or your friends Howard. Just an alternative viewpoint to the "work 90 hrs/week" thought process.

[/ QUOTE ]

Obv none taken. Good Lord, this is a discussion board. I would hope I have rather thicker skin.