Is There a Pro in the House?

According to Sklansky's definition of the '500' club, players making over 50k a year in non-tournament ring games.

I guess what I'm really asking is IS THERE A NL PRO IN THE HOUSE?

Someone who makes that kind of money in satellite, over the net , or ring games APART from tourneys.

If not why is this site called Pot AND No-Limit?

Wouldn't it make more sense to include NL together with the "Tournament" section of the 2+2 Forum?

Yes.

I assume implicit in your reply is: "affirmative. There are many pros here who make a very neat profit in NL other than in tournaments."

(consequently NL should obviously be discussed in the PL forum, not in the tournament one

Gentlemen: would someone be so kind as to post an explicit answer to my question ?

Because, unless I'm mistaken, the other implicit argument from S & M's writing in the "original essays"
section of 2+2 is that one would be far better off as a high limit player, if the goal is to make serious money
i.e; the "500 club."

If I've misunderstood, please accept my apology. I'm NOT trying to be a wiseguy here, so if it is not too much to ask, could we skip the jokes, and may I humbly request a straight answer?
Thanks.
' /forums/images/icons/confused.gif

[AlanBostick]

Being a "professional," even if you don't put ridiculous income qualifications into one's definition of "professional, is not the be-all and end-all of serious poker.

Because of its reputation as "the Cadillac of poker games," there is lots of interest in no-limit Texas hold'em, even among recreational and casual players. And there are a lot of experienced NLHE players who contribute to this forum, whether or not they qualify as "professionals" by your standards.

The bottom line is that this forum exists because (Mason Malmuth thinks that) there is interest in discussion of big-bet poker outside the context of tournaments.

Personally, I'm glad of this, because while I do play NLHE in tournaments, most of my experience, such as it is, is in live-game play.

Thank you Alan. One clarificaton.The standards, ridiculous or otherwise, are not mine. They're form D.Slansky's article "pros vs. wannabe" in the original essay of this forum:

" I am talking about the 500 or so professional or expert poker players who make at least $50,000 a year (or $20 an hour) in public ring games
routinely spread by cardrooms around the country. "


What I wanted to know was, other than tournament Poker , if it IS viable to make fair to good money in live ring NL games. As to the fascination with NL, w're in complete aggreement, I would not even be asking for opinions were it otherwise.

[Jeffage]

The problem with playing NL professionally is that the games don't go that often, and are not spread in many places (save for some areas of CA where these games are played for high stakes). The reason they are not spread often is that, bad players lose their money too fast and have few winning nights. Mason has written about this in his essays book. Your best bet would be to become proficient enough to play big bet poker so that u are able if the opportunity arises, but to rely on it exclusively would probably not be wise IMO. Limit poker is where the money is.

Jeff

[AlanBostick]

There are a number of NLHE games spread regularly (in California and Nevada) that are for stakes that are basically no higher than mid-limit limit games.

The $2-$3-$5-blind, $10-to-go, game that goes down weekend evenings at the El Dorado in Reno comes to mind, as does the Sunday night game at Artichoke Joe's in San Bruno (just south of San Francisco) with the same structure.

In both of these games, I know pros who play them consistently. But I don't think the no-limit games are the only ones these pros play.

[AlanBostick]

Not the original poster, but where exactly is the money?

I mean if I'm a newbie and I want to make the most money playing poker as I can, should I concentrate my efforts on mastering limit, PL and NL, or tourneys? There seems to be no shortage of any of these online so a discussion about availability may not be relevant, unless you're talking about the big money tourneys. TIA.

[AlanBostick]

The smoothest way to the money, if you are a newbie, is limit poker. If you learn only one game, it probably ought to be (in the western US) limit holdem or (in the eastern US) limit seven-card stud. In the west, the second game you should learn is limit omaha/8, because if it is available it will become your bread-and-butter game. I don't know enough about east-coast game selection to say, but I suspect your second game there should be hold'em.

The real reason people play big-bet poker is the ego trip of playing "the Cadillac of poker games". If you have discipline and courage to go along with your big ego, big-bet poker can be very rewarding. You don't need a big ego to do well at big-bet poker; but if you didn't have one, you'd settle for that juicy omaha/8 game instead of the pot-limit omaha high game.