Several Hotshots Supposedly Broke Or In Debt

[grdred944]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]

Hasn't LV real estate tanked over the last 2 years?

[/ QUOTE ]Yeah but tanking if you are worth 8 figures still can't be too bad...

[/ QUOTE ]

it's not that hard to go from 8 figures to busto if you're highly leveraged like a lot of real estate investors are

[/ QUOTE ]

Correct. Las Vegas doesn't have the highest foreclosure rate in the U.S. because casino employees can't afford their townhouses. It is because most of the foreclosures are from investors having bought high in the last three years and finding they cannot sell high or rent high enough to keep up with their mortgage payments.

[xxThe_Lebowskixx]

wow. the next nl book is gonna be hotttttt

[GoldenIP]

[ QUOTE ]
"Where is the money going?" Through the magic of recycling, all the money Benyamine takes out of the big game has gone into the banks of P.A. and Aba. Both are up 1 mil+ this month, with aba up almost 2 mil and benyamine is down 2 mil online.

Also lol ELD is right again. And its worth noting that these guys prob. havent played over 200k hands in their lives. Think about this, at 30 hands an hour, playing 4 hours a day, 300 days a year, it would take 6 years to get in 200k hands. Live players are then prone to think they are teh awesome when in fact they just ran well for the past 5 years

[/ QUOTE ]

I find it hilarious to think that we onliners can play as many hands online in 4 months as a live pro can play in 5-6 years. And those live pros could lose all those 200k live hand winnings online in the space of a few weeks and wondering wtf hit them.One Mike Matosow springs to mind?

[Johnny Hughes]

This thread makes me feel good. When I wrote here and got trashed, it surprised me. Sklansky, the owner of the site and a man knowledgable of all things in the poker world makes a realistic, cautionary tale post and gets trashed for not having poor taste and naming names.

[nineinchal]

was that essay titled, "Never Go Broke" or something like that. Maybe it was Mason Malmuth who wrote it.

Anyway, since I took it to heart, its been one long freeroll, mostly limit. I started at $1/2, progressed to $2/4, 3/6, 4/8,/10, 6/12, 10/20, and now winning at 20/40, and looking upward. I also have an 18% return on investment at the single table no limit games.

I would rather be me getting fat on the comped food with my wife after a fun experience at the poker table, than being some ranked name player with coke residue on my lips, trying to hide my eyes from the camera lights. My sucess is greatly due to Slanksy's guidance.

I learned I don't have to be the biggest player at the largest stakes to play winning poker.

[Zetack]

[ QUOTE ]
This thread makes me feel good. When I wrote here and got trashed, it surprised me. Sklansky, the owner of the site and a man knowledgable of all things in the poker world makes a realistic, cautionary tale post and gets trashed for not having poor taste and naming names.

[/ QUOTE ]

Um...wait as second, are you claiming Sklansky doesn't have poor taste? Have you read these forums?

[nutsflopper]

[ QUOTE ]
This thread makes me feel good. When I wrote here and got trashed, it surprised me. Sklansky, the owner of the site and a man knowledgable of all things in the poker world makes a realistic, cautionary tale post and gets trashed for not having poor taste and naming names.

[/ QUOTE ]

You got praised waaay more than trashed, but you just focus on the negative. Your perspective here is way off too imo, Sklansky's post was awful.

[TStoneMBD]

nininchal, i think the reason youd rather be a 1/2 grinder instead of a named player on the verge of bustoing is because you have a life away from poker. i would make the contention that most famous players dont have a life away from poker. poker is their life. this kind of trait is one of the dominating reasons why people succeed in their ambitions, and its also one of the dominating reasons why poker players often end up broke. they make their ambitions their life. when being the best at poker is your aspiration, it can become quite easy to move up before youre ready to, because you want to get there so bad. its why people play underrolled and its why people refuse to move down. they want to progress, and to them, thats almost more important than the money. afterall, the word security to these players doesnt hold the weight that it may to you. they may have never had a job and plan to never have one in the future. they dont know what its like to not be able to pay their bills. paying their bills has never been an issue because they make so much more than their monthly nut. because of this, their objective in poker isnt to make ends meet, its to climb new heights.

[Pete H]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
No limit requires more skill than limit. Nearly everyone knows that.

[/ QUOTE ]

No, they don't.

I would say there is strong evidence against it and you can argue either way.

[/ QUOTE ]

What's the evidence? The "limit requires more skill because you might have to check-raise on the flop against a possible flush draw" article written by a limit player?

I thought limit HE was invented because the skill difference in no limit was too big and bad players busted too soon which meant less rake for the casinos.

[DeathDonkey]

Tstone you own this thread. Just want to say I try and read everything you write these days. See you in Vegas.

-DeathDonkey