A question about High Stakes Pro's

[Action Scott]

This question was of discussion between myself and some of my friends at our weekly game. I always hear stories about the big time pro's (Brunson, Reese, Chan..whoever) playing in these extremely high-limit games (300/600, 1000/2000). My question is, if these guys are all sitting around playing against each other at these high-limits, how are any of them making any $money$ as a professional. Wouldn't they all just keep giving and taking and coming out about even? I can't imagine there to be too many fish at a 1000/2000 limit. Your responses are greatly appreciated. Maybe Sklansky himself would be the best one to answer this, but I would value any of your opinions.(I hope I posted this in the correct forum, it does say High Stakes). Thanks

[JeffO]

This is just a guess but I would think that 1 or 2 Larry Flints or Ben Afflaks would be enough to make these games profitable. Of course if it were all players of the same skill level there would be no long term winners.

[AceHigh]

A fish (or whale) can't sit down in a 1000/2000 game unless Doyle and Chip, etc. have one going.

[Lawrence Ng]

Agreed, often times I will gladly start up a SH higher limit game with some pros. Gradually, as the high stakes gamblers start coming in, they will sit down. Usually the game fills up nicely within half an hour. But someone has to get the ball rolling.

The problem with a lot of players is that they don't want to play SH, so either no game gets going or it breaks up. It drives me nuts because these players are the same ones that are very fast to come back once the seats start filling up.