What`s all part of being a pro?

[Student Caine]

I gotta' be honest, but I really admire you guys that can play cards as a sole source of income. I cannot even fathom the level of stress you deal with.

When I first started playing I fantasized about things that I think a lot of people fantasize about - winning a ton of cash in the WSOP, playing in the 4/8 game in "The Room" at Bellagio, raking in pots worth tens of thousands of dollars. I thought about how cool it would be to have this fat bankroll and so many chips I can hardly see the other players. Of course, never once did I think about how great it would be to rake in a big pot and think "Nice, I can use this to pay my rent!" or "Sweet, medical insurance!" haha.

This is not sour grapes or any bs like that, just something that I thought about long ago when I made the conscious decision to keep my day job. [img]/images/graemlins/tongue.gif[/img]

[ike]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Limon can you please expand on that, Im sure its something not any of us are doing.

[/ QUOTE ]

[/ QUOTE ]

[/ QUOTE ]

in my experience most wanna be pros start out thinking their gonna love playing poker forever and so they never prepare for that day when it all comes crashing down. so when they make their first 50k playing 5-10nl or whatever they just move up to the next highest limit that they can barely afford. so even though they are moving up limits their lifestyle isnt changing and they still have all thier eggs in one basket. this is bad for financial and psychological reasons. inevitably they go on a massive losing streak and because they were always playing right on the edge of what they could afford it buries them. now they have to work their way out of this hole and it becomes a horrible grind, many go on life tilt at this point. fully coming to the realization of how many hours theyre gonna have to put in ,they borrow money (from people like me) to make a quick hit and then really get stuck. a smarter plan would be to move up slower and invest on the way so you never have to do any one thing to survive. sooooo, instead of jumping straight from 5-10 to 10-20 buy a little triplex. instead of jumping straight from 10-20 to 25-50 buy a laundromat or a parking lot. instead of buying into 20 events at the wsop parter w/ someone in a business venture that you find interesting. instead of playing 70 hours a week play 40 and get a part time job you really enjoy (i still do golf club repair to this day). keep your ears open at the casino for opportunites, (one of my biggest f-ups was not partnering w/ co owner of an l.a. casino who was starting an offshore sportsbook a decade ago), pretty soon you realize that you never have to play poker again...then your poker game becomes unbeatable and you see the grinders in a totally different way. i guarantee you 10 years from now the "winners" who post on 2+2 will NOT be the guys playing 6 screens 80 hours a week at higher and higher stakes. it will be the guys who are writing books or software or starting "poker schools" and it wont be because they made a fortune doing any of these things it will be because they diversified early and stepped out of the boom/bust cycle.

[/ QUOTE ]

good post but I disagree with a lot of it. Many of the biggest winners online are ones that took shots aggressively knowing they had the humility and discipline to move back down if they lost. Often they did, and quickly clawed their way back up. Also, these are guys who have made 1-2 mil in their first couple years of playing and will probably have huge sums by their mid-20's specifically because they focused almost solely on poker poker poker.

The guys that are smart enough to perhaps have taken your advice are the ones that will escape the boom/bust cycle not by investing elsewhere but by getting good enough to demolish the games for millions and have a huge enough roll to pad against the variance.

[/ QUOTE ]

what you're talking about describes how something like 25 people's lives play out. if you were born with freakish poker talent and can just sit down at your computer whenever you want, play against whoever you want, and print money even when you're not on your a-game you don't have to do much else right.
limon is talking about how to go from 5/10 winner to long term financial success. most of the people who try to do that by moving up and up and up will eventually fail. their chances are much better if they follow his advice.

[ike]

[ QUOTE ]
but your roi in poker is going to be way higher than any investments isnt it?

[/ QUOTE ]

this is only relevant if bankroll is the limiting factor in the stakes you play.

[Student Caine]

I think that Limon's advice works for everyone in general to be honest, no matter what the profession. I once read a blurb from one of the mainstream "how to get rich" books and it had a really interesting discussion on "Investment Income" vs "Employment Income" and the conclusion was that people do not get wealthy off of employment income. So the way to become wealthy is through investments.

[Student Caine]

[ QUOTE ]
but your roi in poker is going to be way higher than any investments isnt it?

[/ QUOTE ]


I don't think so. I posted in another thread that I own a small business. I also have a day job. My day job makes 3-4 time more annualy than the small business. I probably spend 10 hours at my day job for every 1 on the small biz, so the roi (i being my time) is better for the small biz. Granted there is an initial financial outlay, and the time investment at the start is significant, but as time goes on, these initial investment factors become very, very small.

The key to investments (laundromats, stocks, authored books, etc.) is that they generate income while you are doing other things and that income can be very steady, based upon the type of investment. Your bankroll only generates income while you are sitting at the table and it is income that can subject you to huge cashflow problems (e.g., a downswing leaving you unable to pay rent).

[lapoker17]

[ QUOTE ]
OP, the question you pose is a difficult one that unfotunately doesnt have one clear answer, many people have definitions of what they think a pro is. The simple definition of a pro in poker in my opinion is one who derives his income, and pays his living expenses with poker.

[/ QUOTE ]

QFT

[king_of_drafts]

[ QUOTE ]


what you're talking about describes how something like 25 people's lives play out. if you were born with freakish poker talent and can just sit down at your computer whenever you want, play against whoever you want, and print money even when you're not on your a-game you don't have to do much else right.
limon is talking about how to go from 5/10 winner to long term financial success. most of the people who try to do that by moving up and up and up will eventually fail. their chances are much better if they follow his advice.

[/ QUOTE ]

I shouldn't have said I disagreed with it. It's very good advice, I just don't think the people that might benefit from it will take it because everyone wants to get to the top, and you don't do that by funneling money into other investments

[Slappz]

Moving up is obviously a major goal of all poker players. But you shouldn't sacrifice investing your income, especially when 90% of this board is at such a young age (Hello compound interest). limon is speaking with lots of experience, and if you know anything about investing you know that he's laying out the groundwork to be wealthy and that is probably the real goal for everyone who considers themself a pro. I'd listen to what he says as i've heard it from many wealthy individuals. Great post btw.

[schwza]

i think investing is important but there's no special reason it has to be investing in particular businesses. i've got a lot invested but it's all in index funds. having outside hobbies is good but trying to figure out whether to invest in my neighborhood laundromat or hardware store sounds like a huge headache to me personally.

[Matt Flynn]

[ QUOTE ]
The simple definition of a pro in poker in my opinion is one who derives his income, and pays his living expenses with poker.

[/ QUOTE ]


so Phil Hellmuth, Daniel Negreanu, and any number of "pros" aren't pros. they don't derive a major portion of their incomes from playing poker.

and what happens if nothing provides a majority of your income?


imo this definition appeals to those who have not had time to build alternate sources of income, or don't know how to do it, or just spent it all. once you reach steady-state of strong earnings, in ten years that shouldn't be your primary source of income. unless you're bad at investing and creating new wealth. a college kid sees $500K/year as a plum impossible to turn down. and he shouldn't, because it's so much better than his alternatives. but it's a stepping stone to wealth, nothing more. after 10 years of steady-state at the top that college kid should not be a pro under your definition. he should be a successful investor. if not he's just a high-income grinder. and he can't get there investing in mutual funds.

poker is much better as part of a portfolio of work and investment income. if money is your only goal, why would you play cards exclusively? poker is mid-level income only. if you can win at nosebleed poker you can create similar or greater income elsewhere. the guys at cardrunners understand this.