|
|
#81
11-16-2007, 03:41 PM
|
|||
|
|||
Re: Dating a poker pro- From the perspective of a non-playing girlfrie
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] Security from gambling is way way way higher than a job. I control my income and my fate. I work more if I want more money, work less when I don't. [/ QUOTE ] Keep telling yourself that. If you somehow always think that the more you gamble, the more money you will make, and you control your income, I want to know what color the sky is on your planet. [/ QUOTE ] Golfnut do you play poker yourself? Do you feel it's not possible to win at poker in the long run? 
|
|
#82
11-16-2007, 03:55 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Dating a poker pro- From the perspective of a non-playing girlfrie
[ QUOTE ]
Golfnut do you play poker yourself? Do you feel it's not possible to win at poker in the long run? [/ QUOTE ] Yes, I have played poker the past 18 years. And I am a long-term winner. There have been periods of variance and anyone who has played long enough knows it. There is no definitive the more you play, the more you win in month. It is like the stock-market. Overall, it rises, but there can be losses day to day, month to month and even year over year. There are extremely few people who can sustain a career just from playing poker. That is the same for all high-risk professions -- acting, pro sports, music, etc. The only difference is not the lack of transferable skills that poker has (because it is the same for music or acting) but the corruption of the value of money that comes along with poker that makes getting a 'fall-back' job incredibly more difficult.
|
|
#83
11-16-2007, 04:18 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Dating a poker pro- From the perspective of a non-playing girlfrie
[ QUOTE ]
Golfnut do you play poker yourself? Do you feel it's not possible to win at poker in the long run? [/ QUOTE ] [ QUOTE ] Yes, I have played poker the past 18 years. And I am a long-term winner. [/ QUOTE ][ QUOTE ] There is no definitive the more you play, the more you win in month. [/ QUOTE ] Do you mean to say, "there is no definitive the more play the higher your WINRATE is in one month? "
|
|
#84
11-16-2007, 04:40 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Dating a poker pro- From the perspective of a non-playing girlfrie
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] Security from gambling is way way way higher than a job. I control my income and my fate. I work more if I want more money, work less when I don't. [/ QUOTE ] Keep telling yourself that. If you somehow always think that the more you gamble, the more money you will make, and you control your income, I want to know what color the sky is on your planet. [/ QUOTE ] Okay please explain to me how "you" control your fate more than I do. I choose the hours I work. I understand basic math. I know what the "long run" is for the games I play. I know how to ride the varianceaments out. Given the fact my income is ~10x my expenses... I think I'll be able to make it. Tell me something else hilarious next. More about how your a winner, but had a really bad downswing. Or how you got sick and it decimated your roll. Or how I'm wasting my youth playing pokerz and wanting to retire absurdly young while I should commit myself to toiling 9-5 for the next 40 years.
|
|
#85
11-16-2007, 04:50 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Dating a poker pro- From the perspective of a non-playing girlfrie
[ QUOTE ]
There are extremely few people who can sustain a career just from playing poker. That is the same for all high-risk professions -- acting, pro sports, music, etc. [/ QUOTE ] I think you are confusing high failure rate with risky. I dated a girl who wanted to be an actress. This was a very risky choice and I tried to talk her out of it. I don't know exactly what the success rate is but I think 1% or less seems realistic. So it was high risk. That was when she started. Now years later she has had some minor parts in a few quasi-successful movies, she has stared in some direct to video movies, had a few ancillary roles on tv series. The risk at this point is no greater than any other job. Short of something extraordinary happening she will always have an income stream from acting. Now I agree with you that a vast majority of people who want to gamble for a living will fail. But those that succeed will have no greater risk than any other form of employment. Also if someone is honest with themselves they can test the water with gambling while still pursuing something more traditional until they are sure they can succeed at gambling. The pitfall being that I don't believe most people will be honest about their chances. Because they want to be a poker player they will just be wilfully blind to their lack of ability and try to force it. I'm curious how do you feel about being a real estate agent as a career?
|
|
#86
11-16-2007, 04:51 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Dating a poker pro- From the perspective of a non-playing girlfrie
[ QUOTE ]
Do you mean to say, "there is no definitive the more play the higher your WINRATE is in one month? " [/ QUOTE ] Yes. If you play 20 hours and win a little, playing 40 hours doesn't mean you will win a lot.
|
|
#87
11-16-2007, 04:59 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Dating a poker pro- From the perspective of a non-playing girlfrie
[ QUOTE ]
Yes. If you play 20 hours and win a little, playing 40 hours doesn't mean you will win a lot [/ QUOTE ] I can't predict my income for any 20-40 hours of poker nor can I predict my income for any week of sports wagering. I can predict my income for a year of sports wagering or for 500 hours of poker.
|
|
#88
11-16-2007, 05:10 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Dating a poker pro- From the perspective of a non-playing girlfrie
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] Do you mean to say, "there is no definitive the more play the higher your WINRATE is in one month? " [/ QUOTE ] Yes. If you play 20 hours and win a little, playing 40 hours doesn't mean you will win a lot. [/ QUOTE ] huh? if you are a winner, playing 40 hrs means you will win 2x what you won by playing 20 hrs. and yes i understand that variance exists, i'm speaking in terms of expected value.
|
|
#89
11-16-2007, 07:24 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Dating a poker pro- From the perspective of a non-playing girlfrie
the vast majority of people who try to play poker will not win. The vast majority of the general population will not be rich. The vast majority of the general population will not have a degree higher than an undergraduate degree. The vast majority of the population are of average intelligence. The vast majority of the population needs security provided by others for them. The vast majority of the population will not take risk.
however one part of the population will be rich. one part of the population will be able to take calculated risks. one part of the population will be able to put faith and trust into something they may not know works and keep going through all adversity, keep making sure they are making the correct decisions, do not get discouraged, and come out much more successful than the general population. this one part of the population will be successful businessman, will be self-employed, will be able to beat the stock market, will be able to beat poker, become an elected official on a state or federal level, and be over all winners in life without needing someone to nurture them and protect them and provide their security. this part of the population knows what it is like to work hard and more importantly to work through the hardest blows life can deal. these will be the people who set themselves apart from others. These people will be the somebody's in life.
|
|
#90
11-16-2007, 09:59 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Dating a poker pro- From the perspective of a non-playing girlfrie
[ QUOTE ]
These people will be the somebody's in life. [/ QUOTE ] Just because someone isn't successful doesn't make them a nobody. Career/being rich isn't the most important thing in life to many people. And many people who attain what they thought is success find out it may not be cracked out to be that great. Many rich people are miserable. Go figure.
|
 |
|
|
Linear Mode
