Why don't succesful online pros play more cards?

[Nate tha' Great]

This is spun out of a discussion in the HU/SH forum. The question is why big winning online players - I'm speaking of people who can make $200/hour or more playing cards on the internet - don't play more hours. Without getting into a discussion about win rates, I fall comfortably into this category, and I probably play 20-25 hours a week. Of course that is an average and there are some 45 hour weeks and also some 0 hour weeks. I do have another job that requires some of my time (though less than full time), as well as a relationship and the vague remnants of a social life, so there are some competing interests. But certainly there's also some downtime turing a typical week and I could play more than 20-25 hours if I desired.

My impression is that almost all of the other online pros and semi-pros who are capable of big earns also don't play as much as you might think. Some people manage 30 or 35 or *maybe* 40 hours a week, but almost nobody is playing much more than this (feel free to come in and correct me if I'm wrong). I've periodically seen reference on the forums to players who are playing more than this, but generally they are playing for smaller stakes, and their expected cash win rates aren't as high.

The question is why. After all, there's a naive (IMO) interpretation that if you can earn that much money doing anything, you'd want to do it as often as possible.

It seems to me there are basically three explanations for why this might be so. These explanations need not be mutually exclusive.

1. Boredom / burnout. Poker begins to feel like a job when it is your job. Moreover, especially online, it's a job that is quite stressful, quite repetitive, and generally quite draining of one's mental resources.

2. Diminshing marginal returns. Making an extra $50,000 is a lot more attractive to someone used to a $40,000 income than someone used to a $200,000 income. The pros are simply behaving rationally.

3. Temperment. We're wandering into speculative territory here, but my guess is that many or even most people who are capable of gambling and winning big at poker and *also* have decided *not* to take a job in the straight world have somewhat irregular or compulsive or even manic temperments. These people aren't sitting down in front of their computers and treating poker as a job at all so much as they're playing poker when they "feel like it", which may be a lot at some times and much less at others, a sort of manageable addiction.

So which do we think it is?

[spy587]

I think its probably all three in different combinations for different people. Also, my gut feeling is that 1,3 are stronger than 2, but maybe thats just for me.

[Bodhi]

Forgive the short remark (I'll think about this more) but why can't it be all 3?

Also, some people are maximizers and some are satisfiers. I imagine that a lot of card players are in the latter category, because if they wanted to maximize their income they would have gone to law school or something. Poker allows them to satisfy their desires without putting in an insane ammount of hours every week.

[Lawrence Ng]

You pretty much nailed them all for me Nate..

Lawrence

[theBruiser500]

nate i'm surprised you play 45 hours in a week, that is a ton of hours. my impression is also that most people play less than 25 hours a week. when i think i've played a lot, i sometimes look at the clock and realize that "a lot" is only 2 or 3 hours

[uw_madtown]

I'd expect that all three are possible depending on the person.

As I said in the originating thread, the main reason I wonder why pros capable of $200+/hr don't play more is that I personally don't think this opportunity is going to last for more than five more years or so. I view it as a "get all the money while you can" proposition. Some of you guys are good enough to grind like hell for four or five years, stick money away in investments, and you'd never have to work a job you didn't want for the rest of your life. You could be a writer or a teacher or whatever you'd enjoy doing, without having to worry about needing to pay the bills (as long as you lived modestly).

I've never spoken with GoT, gonores, or bicyclekick about the hours they put in, etc, so I apologize if I misrepresent anyone. But when I see comments from GoT and gonores about how they can't be bothered to put in the hours, and then see BK posting screenshots of a $100k month... well, my point is that while some people dislike BK's personality on here, I respect the guy if for no other reason that he seems to be capitalizing on his opportunity as much as he possibly can.

As I said though, if I had some assurance that online poker was not in danger of serious decline in my lifetime -- that I could make $100-$200/hr for my entire life -- then I'd definitely be less motivated to grind out massive numbers of hours, especially once I had a huge BR built up. I think in that case, reason #2 particularly applies.

[TeeJayORTj]

[ QUOTE ]
nate i'm surprised you play 45 hours in a week, that is a ton of hours. my impression is also that most people play less than 25 hours a week. when i think i've played a lot, i sometimes look at the clock and realize that "a lot" is only 2 or 3 hours

[/ QUOTE ]

Im not a pro...but as a college student only taking one summer class i certinly have plenty of free time. But the only way I can play more then 2-3 hours is if im 2 tabling some SH games or SNGs and doing a lot of other random crap. If im trying to even 3 or 4 table then 3 hours seems like a lifetime.

Right now I have had 1 or 2 pokerroom games open for the past 5 hours and I feel like I hardly played.

But I agree, even with all this free time I can't put in the hands I want too. I dont know why...I really wish I knew the answer.

[dhende3]

I am by no means great, I only make about 25 bucks an hour playing SnGs but I get burnt out WAY too easily. If I am on a losing session I 'quit for the day', as is the preferred strategy among successful gamblers. If I am winning I will quit because I don't want to ruin it with a bad run... certainly not the smartest thing to do. Last week I made $1250 playing $22 SnGs (a ridiculous upswing) and now I am scared to play because I know the negative variance is coming. I really need to change my mindset...

[Nate tha' Great]

[ QUOTE ]
nate i'm surprised you play 45 hours in a week, that is a ton of hours. my impression is also that most people play less than 25 hours a week. when i think i've played a lot, i sometimes look at the clock and realize that "a lot" is only 2 or 3 hours

[/ QUOTE ]

Read the post, dawg! I play probably 20-25 hours a week on the average. I'm guessing I've had a couple of >40 hour weeks over the past year or two though.

[Ulysses]

Most people who can make big money at poker are pretty smart. While it might take some a little longer to realize it, many very smart people find poker to be a relatively boring endeavor, especially when not learning new games/limits.

[uw_madtown]

[ QUOTE ]
Most people who can make big money at poker are pretty smart. While it might take some a little longer to realize it, many very smart people find poker to be a relatively boring endeavor, especially when not learning new games/limits.

[/ QUOTE ]

Many, many people work overtime hours at jobs they hate just to make extra money, or work boring day jobs to support themselves while pursuing their "dream job." Monotony is not unique to poker.

[diddle]

simple answer: poker is just a stupid card game

imagine there were millions of nickels lying on the ground and you could get as many as you want, but you can only pick up one nickel at a time.

Now imagine you are a smart and talented individual. How many hours per week could you spend picking up nickels?

[Alex/Mugaaz]

I don't see how you can say that someone who is addicted to something will not do it as frequently as possible. There are a few great players who seemed to also be addicted to playing (Stu Ungar, maybe Phil Ivey). I don't see someone like Howard Lederer being like....oh man.. I gotta get my fix!

The real reasons are most players are young and stupidly independent. Most young people with a lot of money kind of like to ..well spend it / enjoy themselves.

I think it's so crazy that people think poker is going to cease to exist with the next 1-5 years. Seriously, as a worst case scenario I see myself having to move down in limits (maybe substantially) and work my way up again. So be it. Online poker is a new thing, and has made poker easier than it has ever been, and as long as there is online poker it will be more profitable than it has ever been before you could play on a computer, period.

The real reason is simply a lack of discipline in most people with no one looking over your shoulder. Look at davidross, I think he plays 40-45+ hours a week every week. He has responsibilities and knows he has to take care of them.

Personally I haven't decided whether it's better to enjoy being young and having plenty of spending cash, or to spend your twenties earning as much as possible so you can retire before you hit 30. I think both strategies have a lot to say for them. Option A is obviously much easier, that's why more people choose it. It's the path of least resistance.

The only thing I know for sure as I don't want to have to play poker in order to get by when I'm 40-50+ years old. When/If I reach a point where playing is only for enjoyment/competition then I really doubt I'd play more than 15hrs a week, if that.

[Justin A]

Nate I'm glad you posted this, it's been on my mind a lot lately. I'm not in the $200+ per hour range, but what I make is still a very significant income and I should be playing more. It's probably costing me even more money to not put in a lot of hours because if I play more poker, I'll get into the $200+ per hour bracket much more quickly.

I'm a super procrastinator, and it seems like I treat poker the same way as I treat school a lot of the time. That is, I know I should play, but I find something else to occupy myself with instead. Then at the end of the day I look back and wonder why the hell I didn't play more poker.

[brassnuts]

I think boredom and burnout each deserve their own category. And, I would lean towards burnout more than boredom. I can't think of many jobs as mentally exhausting as multitabling online. It has to be up there with flight traffic controllers and the such. Of course, I am not nearly at the $200/hr mark, but just my thoughts.

[BluffTHIS!]

I make a lot of money playing big bet games online, and the reason I don't play even more hours is simply because it requires constant focus and attention and is very tiring after a while when I might begin to make bad decisions. I would compare multi-tabling for serious money to being a traffic controller in the constant attention that has to be paid to many factors, with catastrophies resulting from losing attention and focus. Added to that is the fact that is necessary to study and think about poker every day in my opinion, and time has to be allotted for that offline too.

[theBruiser500]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
nate i'm surprised you play 45 hours in a week, that is a ton of hours. my impression is also that most people play less than 25 hours a week. when i think i've played a lot, i sometimes look at the clock and realize that "a lot" is only 2 or 3 hours

[/ QUOTE ]

Read the post, dawg! I play probably 20-25 hours a week on the average. I'm guessing I've had a couple of >40 hour weeks over the past year or two though.

[/ QUOTE ]

sorry i wasn't clearer, i still see this as playing a lot of hours, 40+ hours ever is a monstrous week

[the_joker]

I'm not a successful online pro, but if I ever get to the point of making $200/hour, I'd only play 20 hours per week or less. I'd much rather make 150K/per year and have a lot of free time than 300K/per year and have little free time. Also, I would spend the extra free time hedging my bets in case online poker becomes unprofitable/illegal, like starting my own business, going to graduate school, etc.

[hurlyburly]

[ QUOTE ]
Many, many people work overtime hours at jobs they hate just to make extra money, or work boring day jobs to support themselves while pursuing their "dream job." Monotony is not unique to poker.

[/ QUOTE ]

It is unique in that you can actually lose money for that overtime, especially when you are bored.

[hurlyburly]

I totally agree. My game made a huge bump when I decided to stop counting hands and setting a win goal/loss limit. I never feel stuck or tired, rarely see more than 100-200 hands/session, and generally have more fun. It's also easier to review hands and situations.

Isn't the whole goal of experience get more for doing less?

[SparkyDog]

I think that plays a pretty big part of it... right now I'm mostly playing just for the feeling I get of taking shots at higher levels and watching the bankroll grow... it doesn't really feel like money when it's in my poker account, but it does give me some feeling of accomplishment.

[gomberg]

I've noticed this as well. I'm glad other people don't play a lot. I'm close to $200+ / hour right now and am not a pro. I used to play roughly 100 table/hours per month playing 1-2 tables at a time. I have a day job and this was a lot of hours on the side.

Now, since I make a lot more, I still make about the same per month in poker income, but I play 30 table hours / month. I feel like an idiot because I could move up stakes so much quicker if I just put in more hours, but relationships, playing in hockey leagues, going out at night has been a higher priority to me and I can't bring myself to play more hours.

[rory]

Multitabling online is very mentally taxing, probably moreso than B&M because of the higher volume of hands-- I can only play for 1 or 2 hours at a time before I get tired and start to lose focus and I only play two tables. I have no idea how the people who 6 or 8 or 16 table or whatever do it.

Also I have to try to play my absolute best at all times so I need to take a lot of breaks. I am not as good as a lot of the better mid-limit players and that means to win I have to be playing my A+ game, otherwise I run the risk of morping into a losing player.

So it just works out that I only play for about 3-4 hours a day, 7 days a week. There is just only that much time where I feel awake and focused and steady and ready to play my best game. I wish that I could play more but I can't do it.

[LuvDemNutz]

[ QUOTE ]
I've noticed this as well. I'm glad other people don't play a lot. I'm close to $200+ / hour right now and am not a pro. I used to play roughly 100 table/hours per month playing 1-2 tables at a time. I have a day job and this was a lot of hours on the side.

Now, since I make a lot more, I still make about the same per month in poker income, but I play 30 table hours / month. I feel like an idiot because I could move up stakes so much quicker if I just put in more hours, but relationships, playing in hockey leagues, going out at night has been a higher priority to me and I can't bring myself to play more hours.

[/ QUOTE ]

You make $200 hr playing what?

400NL?

[gomberg]

multitabling 5-10NL

[SomethingClever]

[ QUOTE ]
simple answer: poker is just a stupid card game

imagine there were millions of nickels lying on the ground and you could get as many as you want, but you can only pick up one nickel at a time.

Now imagine you are a smart and talented individual. How many hours per week could you spend picking up nickels?

[/ QUOTE ]

Make 'em dollars and the analogy is more accurate.

[mperich]

Very interesting question Nate. I have friends who claim if they made the money I do in my "slacker" "job", they would play 60-80 hrs a week. Apart from the reasons you mentioned, I like to practice pretty good table selection, so I play almost exclusively during peak hours. Since I also go out pretty much every fri/sat night, this doesnt leave me much time to play, even if I was not burnt out.

-Mike

[warlockjd]

For multitablers, 7 tables is hard and requires a lot of concentration and wears you out a lot more quickly, than say, an accounting job where you surf the net 5 hours a day

[warlockjd]

[ QUOTE ]
Most people who can make big money at poker are pretty smart. While it might take some a little longer to realize it, many very smart people find poker to be a relatively boring endeavor, especially when not learning new games/limits.

[/ QUOTE ]

Great point.

I quit every corporate job I had almost right after achieving a very high level of competence largely due to boredom.

In poker, you can (almost) always move up tho.

[VBM]

perhaps a corollary to point #1 (which probably applies widely outside of poker);

maybe i'm just turning into an old man, but in my profession i've become a bit disillusioned in the sense that the work i've chosen does little to impact or benefit anyone in any meaningful way.

i think this applies to poker as well. you could even make the case that your gain necessitates another's loss. Now, this is not a negative statement about poker! I think there are a lot of benefits to poker that aren't nearly talked about enough:
1. The ability to separate emotion with critical decision making
2. Thinking of everyday decisions in terms of EV
3. Adjusting your "game" to your opponents/other "players"(i.e. your boss, your spouse, your coworkers, etc...)

But, in the end, its just shifting piles of virtual chips when your talents/intelligence/ability could be making some type of perhaps more personally-meaningful difference.

[diddle]

[ QUOTE ]
Make 'em dollars and the analogy is more accurate.

[/ QUOTE ]

No. You would make thousands per hour picking up dollars.

[OtisTheMarsupial]

Because it's hard on their eyes?

Seriously, it's hard work and who wants to work hard?

[creedofhubris]

I've asked myself this question a lot, now that I am approaching/at that magic $200/hr point. I too am in the 20-25/hr a week club and have been for over a year now. The only exception is if I am stuck for the week, then it seems to be no problem to put in lots of hours. I think your third criterion, the irregular hours/slacker temperament, is the key.

El D would suggest I start a business, but that requires serious capital, so I'm gonna get cracking. I've decided to see if I can handle 30-40/hr weeks.

[TStoneMBD]

playing that much poker is hard. you become robotic.

some people would prefer to have a rock hard body then 100k yet most of them dont go out and lift weights 40 hours a week.

most successful pros spend time analyzing their play through methods like twoplustwo, which accounts for hours spent on poker. ive spent a good portion of the past year grinding 35hours a week and spending another 35hours a week on twoplustwo. thats alot of hours and i wouldnt be makind the kind of money i am now if i didnt. ive been reading less twoplustwo lately because my motivation is lapsing. i dont think many people can possibly play poker for 60 hours a week and spend their downtime surfing twoplustwo. as a result they will not develop skills at a noticeable rate and what good is that as the games slowly grow tougher?

[bkholdem]

So how does the hours of study per week in the $200/hr+ group compare to the hours of study/research for non poker players who make $200/hr+ in a flexible job that doesn't require a minimum # of hours?

[Slimmah]

Poker players should factor in study time into their hourly rate.

Nate, it's all 3 plus laziness. You play less if you're not hungry.

[cdxx]

move up in limits. the dime and quarter rooms are way more fun than the nickel room.

[SinCityGuy]

[ QUOTE ]
and I probably play 20-25 hours a week.

[/ QUOTE ]

I think this is probably a good number for people playing multiple tables. It's not like a typical desk job where you might do 15 actual hours of work in a 40 hour week.

Playing multiple tables is probably most similar to being an air traffic controller. If you play for 25 hours a week, you're being mentally taxed for the entire 25 hours.

[Gramps]

If you have the mental aptitude to make $200+/hr. multitabling online, and are willing to work 40+ hours per week at a mentally taxing and at times boring job in order to make as much $$ as you can, you're probably working as a lawyer, investment banker, etc.

If you have the mental aptitude to make $200+/hr multitabling online but find it's just not worth it (by your actions) to work more than 20-25 hours per week on average when you make good money at those hours, then...there's a good chance that (consciously or subconsciously) you've worked to the point where you can make $200+/hr at something that you can do when you want, for as long as you want, so that you don't have to go the standard career route, b/c you're not fired up on working 40+hours per week at any job (with a few exceptions maybe) that pays that much.

I.e., it's not about poker, it's about doing any reptitive/mentally taxing/at times boring activity.

Of course, there's exceptions. Some people will put in long hours at boring/reptitive activities (like poker) to maximize $$ b/c working for the man/on someone else's schedule is highly odious to one's zealousness for daily self-determination. The at times boring/reptition of the routine is tolerable, so long as one has control over when and how they're bored/repititious...

[flair1239]

A couple things.

The OP said he could make Up to $200 an hour. I take that too mean an upper limit.

Anyway another thought is aside from previous factors mentioned. With the limits that you need to play to make this rate, I imagine game slection is important. I would imagine that consistent 40 hour weaks would result in a lower net hourly rate (while still making more money overall), due to the game selection factor alone.

[Zygote]

[ QUOTE ]
This is spun out of a discussion in the HU/SH forum. The question is why big winning online players - I'm speaking of people who can make $200/hour or more playing cards on the internet - don't play more hours. Without getting into a discussion about win rates, I fall comfortably into this category, and I probably play 20-25 hours a week. Of course that is an average and there are some 45 hour weeks and also some 0 hour weeks. I do have another job that requires some of my time (though less than full time), as well as a relationship and the vague remnants of a social life, so there are some competing interests. But certainly there's also some downtime turing a typical week and I could play more than 20-25 hours if I desired.

My impression is that almost all of the other online pros and semi-pros who are capable of big earns also don't play as much as you might think. Some people manage 30 or 35 or *maybe* 40 hours a week, but almost nobody is playing much more than this (feel free to come in and correct me if I'm wrong). I've periodically seen reference on the forums to players who are playing more than this, but generally they are playing for smaller stakes, and their expected cash win rates aren't as high.

The question is why. After all, there's a naive (IMO) interpretation that if you can earn that much money doing anything, you'd want to do it as often as possible.

It seems to me there are basically three explanations for why this might be so. These explanations need not be mutually exclusive.

1. Boredom / burnout. Poker begins to feel like a job when it is your job. Moreover, especially online, it's a job that is quite stressful, quite repetitive, and generally quite draining of one's mental resources.

2. Diminshing marginal returns. Making an extra $50,000 is a lot more attractive to someone used to a $40,000 income than someone used to a $200,000 income. The pros are simply behaving rationally.

3. Temperment. We're wandering into speculative territory here, but my guess is that many or even most people who are capable of gambling and winning big at poker and *also* have decided *not* to take a job in the straight world have somewhat irregular or compulsive or even manic temperments. These people aren't sitting down in front of their computers and treating poker as a job at all so much as they're playing poker when they "feel like it", which may be a lot at some times and much less at others, a sort of manageable addiction.

So which do we think it is?

[/ QUOTE ]

i make just about 100/hr playing 15/30 and 10/20, but I work an avg. of 8 hours a day, 6 or 7 days a week. If i was making 200/hr, i would only work as much you. I'm building a bankroll now to hopefully do that, though. I also think i'll need to do some skill building too.

[steaknshake925]

nate, i think the most important factor in not playing more hours is that after a while you dont play as well as if you were fresh, and your winrate would probly drop drastically. when i play for more than say 2.5 hours i definitly start noticing more mistakes and probly make alot that im not noticing.

[cwes]

Economists believe in an underlying utility function U(.) that represents an individual. The conclusions you can derive from the analysis of this function supplement your second conjecture.

Now assume the parameters of U(.) are just income (I) and Leisure (T-L,T: available Time, L: working time (Labor)). Now income is just a function of labor I(L). Hence U(.) can be written as:

U(I(L),(T-L)).

As we see it is now just a function of labor (L).

Now assume income and leisure are somehow multiplicative associated (easiest: Cobb-Douglas function):

U(I(L),(1-L)) := I(L)^a * (T-L)^b

Now it will depend solely on a and b how much time you spend working. You can do some math on this stuff, but I do not want to bore you.

What everybody should easily be able to see is that if you work ALL your time (i.e. L=T) (T-L)^b=(T-T)^b is zero. The whole product will become zero and there is no utility left for you. Also if you work too much, the increase of I(L) will not be able to compensate for the decrease of T-L. That is why you stop working at a certain level of income.

And hey: $4-5k a week is not so bad, is it?

[cwes]

[ QUOTE ]
Economists believe in an underlying utility function U(.) that represents an individual. The conclusions you can derive from the analysis of this function support your second conjecture.


[/ QUOTE ]

I'm still learning...

[Jacqueline]

Yup... hence the backward bending labor supply curve. /images/graemlins/smile.gif

Glad to see another econ geek went into details, I was tempted to go get my Intermediate Micro book. /images/graemlins/smile.gif