How long did it take you to become a winning player?

questions · #1 03-14-2007, 10:51 AM

And can you give a cliffnotes version of your travails on the way to becoming one?

nuclear500 · #2 03-14-2007, 10:59 AM

What is a winning player defined as in your book?

questions · #3 03-14-2007, 11:01 AM

Only a poker player would ask something like that. [img]/images/graemlins/laugh.gif[/img]

I don't know - I guess a winning player is someone who annually wins an amount of money sufficient to support themselves in a lifestyle which would be commensurate with one they could have if they had a "regular" job.

questions · #4 03-14-2007, 11:03 AM

Or, if you play part-time, "you know who you are". Like that guy in the other thread who claimed to play only five hours per week but make 20-30k per year!

nuclear500 · #5 03-14-2007, 11:24 AM

I'm not really adding much to this thread..heh

I would consider what you're asking about then is more in line with "how did you become a professional poker player?"

I'm a "winning" player seeing as I've never had to reload and the little line on the graph has a steady upward trend, sure it has its dips like any player but thats expected, but I don't exactly support myself on 12 hours a week, 5.5 SnG's..heh

jeffnc · #6 03-14-2007, 12:45 PM

Why would anyone take "winning" to mean "professional" or even semi-professional? Winning means pretty much what it says, to me.

It took me about 2 weeks. That's because I only played play money while I studied a couple books for 2 weeks. Then I invested $50 and only play .05/.10 limit poker where there were players who were easy to beat based on the books I read. I eventually built that up into the thousands as I continued to learn.

ginko · #7 03-14-2007, 01:10 PM

Took me a few days/weeks I cant really remember. I started off reading books and playing play money also. I approached the game not for fun, but for money.

questions · #8 03-14-2007, 01:46 PM

I appreciate the responses. But I'm puzzled, because I've read some of the books from the poker "canon", like Hellmuth and Harrington, and they claim that all of the pros were losers until a certain point in their "careers". Yet, some here imply that it's as simple as reading a couple books and playing a few hands to catch on to the game.

Is there more to it than that? That is, had you already been playing poker for a while, or on and off? Are you a member of Mensa? Do you play one on TV?

Skleice · #9 03-14-2007, 02:59 PM

[ QUOTE ]
Yet, some here imply that it's as simple as reading a couple books and playing a few hands to catch on to the game.

[/ QUOTE ]

It's not easy. People may be have success for different reasons. They may have experienced a good rush of cards in the beginning, or they may have been conservative enough to start small and play tight to build a little roll. In my case, it was both of those. It's not in my nature to just throw money away and blow my whole roll and I played very cautiously in the beginning to get my feet wet. I started with $100 and built it up to $750 very quickly. Then I had some major ups and downs, but never went bust. This is when I was really starting to read books and try some things. Now, I've developed a way to approach the game that is profitable.

Big beginner problem...playing stakes that you can't afford....playing too many hands...and playing too aggressivley (thinking that all you have to do is bluff every pot). Those 3 reasons are why everybody goes bust.

Stake Monster · #10 03-14-2007, 04:16 PM

Took me a few months to start to have a clue, then another few to kinda know what I am really doing. Poker is a very deep game, full of intricacies and things that take years to really master. So yes I am a winning player now (been playing 5-6 months), but you have to keep learning every day to improve.

I would also say a big part of being a "winning player" would be to play within your bankroll, and not tilting easily, and if you do take a break for a while.