How should a Poker Player Think of Money

[konrad]

Phil Laak, poker pro, said something along these lines: "to be a pro poker player, one should have no problem burning a 100 dollar bill."

Whether this is exactly what he said, or whether he never said anything like this at all doesnt matter; i know my conception of money has changed since i started playing poker. What do you guys think about this quote?

[rchandra]

I do feel that quote is ridiculous. Since I started playing poker, I often think of money as a tool that can get more money, in addition to whatever else it does for me. (Like buying bacon-wrapped scallops. I'm hungry.). But there's no gain in lighting $100 on fire. If there is a gain, then that falls under the "tool to get me more money" - maybe people will think I'm crazy and lose more to me, or give me free food. Then I'm lighting it on fire to gain more.

[Hoopster81]

[ QUOTE ]
Phil Laak, poker pro

[/ QUOTE ]

is an idiot

[-zero-]

Thats a ridiculous quote. When I'm playing I strictly think in terms of buyins so that I'm not affected by the value of what I'm throwing around. But I could never bring myself to waste money like that. You need to be able to ignore the value of money while you're sitting at the table, not in your everday life. And if you are someone who can burn $100 and not think twice about it I'd say you're actually worse off as a pro since you'd probably be foolish with your bankroll.

[bones]

I tell my non-poker playing friends that to have the proper disregard for money, the minimum you have to be willing to flip a coin for is $500. Otherwise you just won't be able to mentally handle the swings.

[deluz35]

Laak is far from an idiot. He seems to be a very intelligent successful player who was previously a stockbroker. He will often mix metaphors and act like he smokes too much pot, but the point he was making is:

You can't be concerned about the money, otherwise the game will eat you up.

"To the true gambler, money is never an end in itself, but simply a tool; as language is to thought." -- The Cincinnati Kid

[Innocentius]

I think it is very useful to have two concepts of money: the poker concept and the everyday concept. In other words: there is money in my bankroll and there is money in my bank account. With the money in my bankroll I am willing to take much bigger risks than with the money in my bank account. Obviously, this division is a bit artificial, since it is all my money, but I find it useful as a psychological tool (read crutch), since I would not be able to disregard the value of my poker chips if I didn't use this separation.

It should be added that I only play recreationally, and don't rely on poker as a source of income. I can't say anything about how a pro should think.

[glfrjack]

IMO... The way Innocentius describes the two concepts of money is much like how someone would describe the money invested in a business versus their salary. If a poker player looks at themself as a business, it's not difficult to visualize the distinction (or "crutch" as it were).

I can't remember where I read it, but someone used a story about a player who had to borrow money for a cab or a meal or something. When asked if he needed money for a big game coming up, the player said "No... I have money for THAT".

There is a certain disregard for the money you have to have when you play. Sometimes, you have to put money on the line when you don't really want (when you have pot odds while holding 72 offsuit, for instance), so you have to detach your feelings for that money at times. However (and I don't believe that Laak was being literal), playing recklessly for the sheer enjoyment of doing so (the proverbial "burning a $100 bill") does not bode well for those wanting to make poker a profession.

[pyedog]

I think this quote was actually by Phil Ivey. I remember him saying that he gives that advice to people who are considering taking up poker in an interview.

I thought it was a bit of a ridiculous suggestion too, but the point is that you need to be able to lose $100 without feeling too much anguish. He probably should have said you need to be willing to flip a coin for $100 instead. Many non-gamblers wouldn't be willing to do that even if they were getting 1.1:1 on their money.

[DJ Sensei]

ammunition