Future for Online Pros - Page 2

MNpoker · #11 05-04-2006, 04:53 PM

Oh yeah and to actually answer the question.

In the last year I would guess my theoretical win rate has gone down at the Full Ring games. (I blame this mainly on the maniacs liking 6 max better, not them getting good).

So I'm currently in transition to 6 max. You can't keep fishing a pond with no fish left, but the fish aren't extinct they just may be switching ponds.

PairTheBoard · #12 05-04-2006, 05:21 PM

[ QUOTE ]
Anyone who thinks very profitable online poker is going to last forever is completely naive. I agree with you that the money pool is drying up. Obviously the very top pros have nothing to worry about but the majority will find themselves struggling to turn out a decent living within a few years.

[/ QUOTE ]

It's that "within a few years" I'm questioning. I'm wondering if what we're seeing is an acceleration of game deterioration. Fish are finding better gambles in the online Casino. The early WPT broadcast did not air last night. Over just a few weeks period, BonusWhores Cut Party's Rating from "some of the softest games online" to average and below average. I'm wondering if the "within a few years" thing that we've always known about has just entered the "within a few months" phase.

PairTheBoard

bobbyi · #13 05-04-2006, 05:57 PM

[ QUOTE ]
I opened up my copy of SS1 the other night and found the LHE section to be humorous (And I was jealous!!) It said LHE is a game where 5 to 7 people typically see the flop and ....... (And this was the $10/20 to $20/40 game back in the 1970's (with inflation I have no idea, but they made it sound big ))

[/ QUOTE ]
There was no online play when the book was written. They are talking about live games. Live 10/20 to 20/40 games today are usually at least as loose as you describe... so why the jealousy? I don't see who things are any worse now.

mbishop · #14 05-04-2006, 06:15 PM

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I opened up my copy of SS1 the other night and found the LHE section to be humorous (And I was jealous!!) It said LHE is a game where 5 to 7 people typically see the flop and ....... (And this was the $10/20 to $20/40 game back in the 1970's (with inflation I have no idea, but they made it sound big ))

[/ QUOTE ]
There was no online play when the book was written. They are talking about live games. Live 10/20 to 20/40 games today are usually at least as loose as you describe... so why the jealousy? I don't see who things are any worse now.

[/ QUOTE ]
Just today I saw a 20/40 game online that met this criteria. (And no, I'm not saying where.)

Uncle Wimp · #15 05-04-2006, 06:28 PM

[ QUOTE ]
Sure i make really dumb mistakes once in a while but thats due to me 8 tabling the SH games and not the fact that I am a bad player.

[/ QUOTE ]

I think you hit on the main reason for tougher games, and it has to do with multitablers. Tough players like you multiply themselves to 8 tables, while fish play 1 or 2. A tough player like you might have a tiny reduction in BB/100, but it's more than compensated by the extra tables.

A year ago at this time, I could only play 4 tables. Now I can play 9. Website upgrades have made multitabling easier for everyone, but the tough players take advantage of it the most.

talentdeficit · #16 05-04-2006, 06:33 PM

two years ago, the big online game was 30/60 and most 'pros' were playing 10/20 and 15/30. i think once you adjust for the inflation in game sizes, they're just as weak as ever. there might be a slight tightening up now as the relatively new 100/200 games shake out and people have stopped bouncing up and down limits as frequently, but the sky has been falling for five years in online poker, i'm not worried yet.

MNpoker · #17 05-04-2006, 06:38 PM

[ QUOTE ]
There was no online play when the book was written. They are talking about live games. Live 10/20 to 20/40 games today are usually at least as loose as you describe... so why the jealousy? I don't see who things are any worse now.

[/ QUOTE ]

Guess I don't play live enough.

AncientPC · #18 05-04-2006, 07:22 PM

Being a shark or fish is all relative, just learn to improve faster than your opponents. [img]/images/graemlins/tongue.gif[/img]

Flintoff · #19 05-04-2006, 07:46 PM

[ QUOTE ]
I play only semi-pro (meaning I have a real job as well as making a nice income from poker).

I have noticed no drop off in my earnings, no drop off in numbers of fish, no drop off whatsoever. In fact, if anything I think the number of fish player higher stakes is increasing.

I played at Prima for about a year. I havent played there in about 3 months but Im about to go back so I did a bunch of datamining. I see an abundance of ne players that Ive never seen before and their stats and win rates (loss rates) are as bad as ever.

The poker boom is alive and well and isnt going anywhere anytime soon.

[/ QUOTE ]

ginko · #20 05-04-2006, 07:59 PM

I think the future for online pros depends completely on the new legislation. If its banned then say bye bye to online poker. If its not banned, things will continue or get better(especially if they legalize it and advertise at full speed)

I still make money, but Im also improving, so its hard to say. But the people winning at 3bb/100 will lose to the people winning at 10bb/100 because they are just inferior players. And by the time the 3bb winners notice they have lost their edge, their bankroll will be serverly hurt(im talking about NL here).