Best Location for a new pro

TakenItEasy · #1 04-11-2007, 05:39 PM

I am at a crossroads in my life and am considering taking a shot at turning to fulltime poker.

I am in my mid fourties, single, no kids. I prefer live play to online, and I prefer tournaments to cash although I have elevated my cash game in the past several months to reduce the MTT variance.

I currently play $5/$3/$2 to $10/$5/$5 spread limit and $224-$330 weekly tournaments and take occasional shots at $1,000-$2,000 buy-in tournaments. I also started playing sats for 10K events and won 2 seats so far. So far I am winning in cash with a small sample size. My online MTT experience has me as a significant winning player in the $15-$100 entries over around 250 tournaments. I currently am limited to weekend play. I expect to be able to elevate my stakes after playing full time.

In terms of casinos, stakes, living expense, living conditions, taxes, weather, etc. Where is the ideal spot in the U.S./World to make a living at playing poker.

DJ Sensei · #2 04-11-2007, 05:42 PM

well i'd say non-US for tax purposes. But los angeles might be the best place if you're looking to become a live pro, what with the big soft games at commerce and the close proximity to vegas.

selaman · #3 04-11-2007, 05:56 PM

I think there is no more attractive place than Monaco.Many casinos, low taxes, good weather, middle of Europe.

DJ Sensei · #4 04-11-2007, 05:57 PM

oh, and stop playing spread limit, that [censored] is wack.

TakenItEasy · #5 04-11-2007, 06:21 PM

[ QUOTE ]
oh, and stop playing spread limit, that [censored] is wack.

[/ QUOTE ]

I couldn't agree more but that's whats available after my weekly tournaments.

TakenItEasy · #6 04-11-2007, 06:27 PM

[ QUOTE ]
I think there is no more attractive place than Monaco.Many casinos, low taxes, good weather, middle of Europe.

[/ QUOTE ]

I don't know much about it but I would have thought it would be a high cost of living for a mid stakes grinder. I have some money but I'd like to keep a pretty healthy safety net. What is their housing market like now.

good2cu · #7 04-11-2007, 06:40 PM

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I think there is no more attractive place than Monaco.Many casinos, low taxes, good weather, middle of Europe.

[/ QUOTE ]

I don't know much about it but I would have thought it would be a high cost of living for a mid stakes grinder. I have some money but I'd like to keep a pretty healthy safety net. What is their housing market like now.

[/ QUOTE ]

Million+ euros for a one bedroom apartment/condo.

Newt_Buggs · #8 04-11-2007, 06:56 PM

[ QUOTE ]
My online MTT experience has me as a significant winning player in the $15-$100 entries over around 250 tournaments.

[/ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
So far I am winning in cash with a small sample size

[/ QUOTE ]

Based off what you have said in this one post I would strongly advise you to not go pro. It sounds as if you do not have a big enough sample size to know if you are a significant winner, nor do you fully understand how exorbitantly high the variance is in tournaments. If you have really only played 250 MTTs you are probably not ready to be playing for money that you depend on. I don't mean to be a dick, I actually feel that it would be meaner of me to just say nothing about this issue. I could be wrong though as you might have left some important stuff out of your post.

fitnessfreak · #9 04-11-2007, 07:09 PM

May i suggest my home town of Perth, Western Australia. You can play on all the fun sites (party, ipoker), plus our local casino has the softest 10/20 limit and 5/5,5/10 no limit games on the planet. Add to that the fact that it is actually a really nice city, albeit with not a lot of nightlife relative to most big cities, and you have a pretty damn nice place to set up shop as a pro [img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img]

TakenItEasy · #10 04-11-2007, 07:21 PM

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
My online MTT experience has me as a significant winning player in the $15-$100 entries over around 250 tournaments.

[/ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
So far I am winning in cash with a small sample size

[/ QUOTE ]

Based off what you have said in this one post I would strongly advise you to not go pro. It sounds as if you do not have a big enough sample size to know if you are a significant winner, nor do you fully understand how exorbitantly high the variance is in tournaments. If you have really only played 250 MTTs you are probably not ready to be playing for money that you depend on. I don't mean to be a dick, I actually feel that it would be meaner of me to just say nothing about this issue. I could be wrong though as you might have left some important stuff out of your post.

[/ QUOTE ]

No, I appreciate what your saying and do understand the variance issue and am properly rolled to sustain it. I know my recorded play time is seriously undersized to be reliable but I have been playing poker casually for 30 years. In the last 5 years I probably spend twice as much time studying/thinking/learning the game than playing it which translates to smaller sample size but I think my deeper understanding of the underlying principles make up for my lack of table time.

Work has limited my felt time to only around 18 hrs/wk but not my studying the game on the forums, reading, discussing hands, and theory with some good players I know.

I am considering this a 1 year experiment to see what I can do with the increased time at the table.