Poker and Golf [Little Actual Poker Content]

[RavenJackson]

Have you ever noticed that the anecdotal reporting of success at golf and poker are similar?

For instance, nobody I know ever admits to shooting over 100, yet the statistics dictate that only 10% of golfers consistently shoot under 100.

Similarly, not many poker players admit to losing money and periodically replenishing their bankroll. Everyone seems to be building a bankroll and has a positive ROI. Can this be accurate? /images/graemlins/confused.gif

[Gramps]

The people I know who are bad at golf admit they are bad at golf. I think more people who lose money at poker profess to be "break even" players (or even claim to win money).

I think that there is a strong similarity between the two as far as being "process-oriented" games - you don't have as much control as you'd like over results in the short run (especially putting in golf, maybe not so much the other shots), but if you just play good process (regardless of how good/crappy your last result was), you'll have an edge on your competition.

Right before taking up poker, I worked hard on my golf game for 6 months, reading all the Rotella books on the "mental" side of the game. Some of the best poker (yes poker) books I even read. Have good process and be content in it regardless of what flows.

[J.A.Sucker]

That may be true, but I have a positive ROI and always break 100! /images/graemlins/grin.gif

[adanthar]

I'm sure that some golf book author has a website with a forum on which there are, say, a thousand competent golfers including a few PGA Tour pros.

I'm also sure that someone on those forums posts at least one thread per week about how no poker players ever admit to losing money and how similar golfers are to them.

I'm not that sure whether they also post that golf is rigged and Tiger uses extra good clubs...eh, probably.

The point of this post is that golf is boring and sucks.

[Gramps]

[ QUOTE ]
The point of this post is that golf is boring and sucks.

[/ QUOTE ]

Spoken like a true 90%er.

[adanthar]

[ QUOTE ]
Spoken like a true 90%er.

[/ QUOTE ]

Does it count if I've never played?

<font color="white">The important thing is that I can reach the green with my penis</font>

[pshreck]

It seems making an effor (atleast on the internet) to talk about anything is to claim you are good. For poker forums, lots of the posters have either had a) short term success (which everyone gets at one point) or b) are exaggerating how good they are.

Its the same on video game websites (I am better than everyone I know at Halo, etc) movie websites (I am a film buff, along with everyone on imdb).

I think with both golf and poker people have the ability to actually lie to themselves about their ability. When I first started, I had to reload every few weeks without cashouts, but I still thought I was above average.

Now that I pay all my bills and have things sitting in my living room paid for from poker, I know that I have been winning for atleast 2 months. I think many players don't sit back and look at really how much they are losing. They post when their bankroll goes up to 500, stay quiet while it goes to zero, then after they reload post again when it goes up to 450 again.....

My brother tells me about his golf game when he breaks 100. If he doesn't do well, he doesn't bring up golf at all.

This is all human nature stuff. We are all filthy liars.

[ZebraAss]

I would disagree with you, if you were wrong.

[pshreck]

I think a lot of people would like to disagree with my statement... but it's really true. I don't think it means people are bad, it just means we all have to find ways to cope with this world that can be very tough to live in.

It's official, I am the Socrates of the 21st century. Save all my posts.

[stupidsucker]

the roi/winning % of a player that posts in a forum like this should be statisticaly much higher then someone that doesnt. I have little evidence to back this up but I feel its true.

Lots and lots of people drop money into poker and no one even knows they play online, because they lose and dont talk about it.

I see your initial point, and it is true. Lots of people lie about their golf score or about their roi. If they dont lie they embelish. a person might say they are getting a 30% roi, and this is a true statement IF you only count the last 100 games. As far as I am concerned if you dont have at least 1k games under your belt for a limit, you dont even know your roi potential, and even then you only have an idea.

First sign of a gambling problem is lying about the money you lose. What about those that gamble while they play golf and LOSE.. poor souls.

[pshreck]

[ QUOTE ]
the roi/winning % of a player that posts in a forum like this should be statisticaly much higher then someone that doesnt. I have little evidence to back this up but I feel its true.

[/ QUOTE ]

I think you are righ... but I still think that is got to be a negative ROI. I think out of the whole poker population, I think about 1 in 20 people make money on poker playing lots and in the long run.

I think that on a site like 2+2, about 1 in 9 or 10 are making long term money. That number may seem harsh to many posters, but I really think its right.

[stupidsucker]

I think it is near impossible to find out. I can say with confidence that I am a +roi player from the 10s-30s.

Hehe, anyone that doesnt believe me is welcome at my table.

Of the "active" posters that claim a winning roi I am more apt to believe them.


Lets put up a poll(like this has never been done before), and as if it will give us any solid data anyways.

[adanthar]

[ QUOTE ]
I think that on a site like 2+2, about 1 in 9 or 10 are making long term money. That number may seem harsh to many posters, but I really think its right.

[/ QUOTE ]

I doubt that.

A sample of 100-500 SNG's, which most regular posters in the SNG forum have, is enough to measure two things: the amount of time you finish ninth and tenth, and, at the upper end, your ROI within, say, 20%.

Those two things are very related. If your 9th and 10th place finishes add up to 5-10% of your SNG total and your play is otherwise completely mediocre, congratulations: you're beating the game by a little bit and will continue to do so long term.

Similarly, if you have 500 SNG's and an ROI of 20%, you might not be a 20% player but it's statistically safe to say you're not a net loser, especially coupled with that 9th and 10th place finish sample.

On the other hand, if you define 'long term money' as 'able to make a living off it', yeah, there's maybe a couple of dozen people on the entire site that can keep it up long term. Plus, limit is muuuuuuch harder than sit'n'goes are; I can teach a monkey (or a bot) to play low limit SNG's based solely on its own stack size vs. the other players' and the blind level, and it will be a long term small winner. You can't do that in limit but you certainly could here (witness AleoMagus' FAQ.)

<font color="white">But as I said earlier, the really important thing is that I can reach the green with my penis. </font>

[RavenJackson]

Adanthar. If by "green" you mean the felt on the top of the poker table, then I can perform the same feat. /images/graemlins/laugh.gif

The better I get at poker, the longer I can go without depositing funds [months]. It has been a really cheap and fun hobby; however, it has yet to show any real profit.[Ok...I said it, anyone else want to come out of the closet?]

[dogsballs]

Dunno, but what I have noticed on Stars SNG's is that the players with golf-related names and/or avatars almost without fail SuCK big time.

OTOH, NFL-related names/av's are more likely to play well.

[Gramps]

As far as players that suck, don't forget anyone with a KGB Teddy-related name (or is it Teddy KGB? I've only seen Rounders once). The vast majority I've come across are the "think-they-know-it-all, but know very little" type.

[stupidsucker]

[ QUOTE ]
As far as players that suck, don't forget anyone with a KGB Teddy-related name (or is it Teddy KGB? I've only seen Rounders once). The vast majority I've come across are the "think-they-know-it-all, but know very little" type.



[/ QUOTE ]
lol I have said this before (maybe not on here)

I call everyone with a rounders name a "McD".

To be sincerly honest, I got more excited about poker after watching rounders for the first time about 6 years ago. I was once a McD myself. Gramps hit the nail on the head squarly. These people normally think they know everything about poker, and some of them are probably even winning players at low limit, because they do learn to be tight and aggressive. Missplaced aggression will put you in the dumpster though, and that's what happens to most McDs I see.

There was an old post about tells from poker monikers. It was interesting.

[David04]

Look at it this way. There are a few thousand people who are signed up here(just a guess) maybe 500 post regularly(again, just a guess) let's say a million people play poker regularly(probably a very low number) not all of those people are on 2+2 or RGP claiming that they are winning 3 BB/100. So not everyone who plays poker is a winner, but I think that the majority of 2+2 posters are consistent winners.