Ed Miller's Going Pro II

[crunchy1]

In this article Ed suggests that a player who is going to begin playing professionally should do so with 3 months worth of expenses in savings. I think this number is low and should probably be closer to 6 months or more. I think this is even more true in today's poor economy with the length of time it can take to potentially acquire new employment if poker doesn't work out.

Maybe some of you, or even Ed himself, could comment on this.

[Matt Williams]

From a personal standpoint, I wouldn't go pro until I had saved up at least 1 year's worth of savings. I wouldn't feel comfortable otherwise.

[PokerHorse]

if you want to go pro then you can easily find out if you're going to make it, thanks to the internet. Simply play 2-3 hours a day for 6months in between work and see how you come out. While evryone is talking about multi-tabling the bigger advantage of the internet is that you dont have to quit your job in order to find out how good you are, sense you can play at least 300-400 hands a day which is more than 8 hours of B&M. I dont see a downside.

[Ed Miller]

Obviously, the more savings the better. Three months is definitely a minimum. And it's a minimum only for the audience I defined in Part I: single people with no kids, dependents, or significant financial responsibilities.

Having said that, I do think three months is sufficient for single people with no dependents who can just go out and get a job if they go broke.

[SirFelixCat]

I am going to "officially" go pro on May 1st of next year (as I wrote up here: Why I'm going pro (http://forumserver.twoplustwo.com/showflat.php?Cat=&Board=exchange&Number=2671648&fp art=&PHPSESSID=) ). I have figured out what I will need, bankroll and savings-wise. I had figured all of this out last month, prior to reading Ed's article(s) and I find myself quite pleased that I have thought thru everything, so it seems.

Now, I do have a dependant (wife) and I will have about 4-5 months savings saved up. Keep in mind that my wife works. She has a solid job (not a super-high paying job, but it's decent, steady income). So, since we do not have kids and she has a decent income, I can plan my nut as if I were single w/o dependants. In a sense, my expenses are no different that they would be, if I were single, BECAUSE she provides that decent, steady income. Do you guys feel that this thought process is misplaced?

Also, on a side note...Incorporating bonuses and rakeback, $3k a month really does not seem that difficult. That comes out to $36k a year. You can "easily" make $24k from bonuses alone.


[small hijack] I'd appreciate more input on my thread regarding going pro. Did I post that in the wrong area? [/hijack] /images/graemlins/wink.gif

[captZEEbo1]

I have another side question about Miller's going pro article, why is he so adamant about not quitting school? A lot of the top pros quit school before they finished. I guess I've gone pro now. The only reason I'm not "quitting" school is because I only have about a year's worth of credits left. The way I'm going to finish off my credits is to go to school part-time and play poker full time until I finish off my degree. I was just doing too poorly in my classes taking a full load and STILL trying to play poker full time. However, if I was only 2 years into my degree I certainly would just put it in on hold indefinitely and not go to school at all. Poker is just too fun and lucrative to not pursue it full time.

Sounds to me like you're doing the right thing for giving it a go. You only live once so try it. Good luck.
How can you make so much from rake back and bonuses?

[TimM]

[ QUOTE ]
I have another side question about Miller's going pro article, why is he so adamant about not quitting school?

[/ QUOTE ]

- No one knows the future of poker.
- No one knows if he will succeed as a full timer.
- It is much easier to finish school the first time around than it is later in life.

[ QUOTE ]
A lot of the top pros quit school before they finished.

[/ QUOTE ]

You are only shown those who succeed.

six months may not even be enough...it all depends on this certain person's situation

[Oblivious]

I quit school this last semester and moved to Vegas without any plan for making money other than playing cards. Unfortunatly I can't present myself as a case study where everything went better than my wildest dreams. Since quitting school Ive incured about $4500 in debt, eventhough Ive made money playing. I've now had to get a job paying $11 per hour to start. I wont be able to quit this job to resume playing full time for at least 6 months (more realistically a year). So I've gone from being a student full time and playing part time, to working a low paying job full time and playing even less than part time. For most people, the better choice between these two options is obvious.

So I stand as an example of how it might go wrong if you quit school to play. But I dont support the claim that it's better for EVERYONE to remain in school rather than playing poker full time. For a lot of people, the decision to remain in school depends on a lot of factors... even if we exclude poker as one of them. I was in a situation in school where I felt an enormous amount of pressure and stress. I was frustrated with my performance, and hard on myself for not being a perfect student. The stress caused from slightly poor performance led to even worse performance. I felt shame and embarassment when I had to discuss academics with family, friends, and professors. I felt guilty because I saw myself as lazy and undiciplined. There seemed to be nothing I could do to change my performance. I started talking with a psychologist about my academic performance, about dealing with depression, and about my family history. It turns out, that the problems I was having in school were manifestations of unresolved problems in my life outside of school. The best solution for me was to put school on pause, and try something else for a while, so I gave this a shot. Honestly, I dont regret it. If I were capable of succeding (and being happy) in school right now, I'd prefer to do that. I'd even give up poker to do that, but unfortunatly, its not possible. Now that Im in Vegas, I have an appartment and some means to live, and Im starting to build some sort of independant life, Im much happier than I was studying. I also believe that school will be easier when I return (if I do return)... simply because I'll be more stable and equiped to succede.

So sorry to ramble so long. I guess the point is that quiting school to play cards might be the right choice for some people, but only if youll be able to cary on more happily even if youre not successful as youd like to be at poker.

[benfranklin]

[ QUOTE ]
A lot of the top pros quit school before they finished.

[/ QUOTE ]

So did a lot of the bartenders, dealers, cab drivers, etc., in LV.

[Xhad]

Speaking as a university dropout, I can identify with a lot of what you're saying. However, I don't think dropping out of school to play poker is correct. Actually, my philosophy is that no one should drop out of school for anything ... the only reason to drop out is if you don't have the motivation to continue.

[Shoe]

IMO, 3 months living expenses isn't enough even if you have a job.

[MicroBob]

2-3 mths is okay if you ask me.....but you'll have higher stress.

I play lower than I need to bankroll and skill-wise (imo) because I'm more comfortable that way.
If I have a 150BB downswing or more right now I'm playing low enough where I can laugh it off. This is the limit of my psychological bankroll.

I'm probably not going to be a regular 10/20 or 15/30 player (perhaps some stabs at it...but not regular) until I have a bankroll in the $30k range so that I can truly be comfortable with the swings.


Interestingly, when I started at 3/6 multi-tabling my bankroll was almost exactly where Ed recommends...in the $8k range.
My formula is to have 500BB's plus 2 months living expenses rounded up significantly (which is pretty much the same as 3 mths of actual living expenses really).


I didn't have a huge sample-size to prove that I could win consistently when I decided to go for it.
But I had nothing to lose. I was working at a low-paying BJ dealing job that wasn't worth keeping. And I made sure not to burn any bridges there when I left so as to always have the option of returning to work on almost a moment's notice if I needed to.
So the risk for me really wasn't as high as it might be for others who have resume and bridge-burning considerations in there.

When I did it I went in with a mentality that I was just leaving my job for a couple of months to try it out but that I would almost certainly get my ass kicked online and would be crawling back to work after I lost too much dough. Thankfully that didn't happen.



To address another one of Ed's points regarding spending one's winnings. I'm practically afraid to spend ANY of my money (I still don't even have a Dell 2001 FP and I still drive the same 96 Chevy Cavalier with 170k miles).
I am deathly afraid of a losing streak of the kind that David Ross went through back in January....and I also want to build my bankroll to a point where I can more comfortably take more shots at higher limits.

I can either:
- Spend money now on little toys when I have a good session
and keep setting $1k/wk as my goal
or
- Save it up and have a very real possibility of doubling or tripling my income at a higher limit in the not-so-distant future (not unrealistic at all if I find it within to actually apply myself to the games a bit more)

[lighterjobs]

[ QUOTE ]
From a personal standpoint, I wouldn't go pro until I had saved up at least 1 year's worth of savings. I wouldn't feel comfortable otherwise.

[/ QUOTE ]

definately. plus a 300bb bankroll. that's a lot but i do love plasma tv's, drum sets and new cars.

[lighterjobs]

ed-

do you think that a 500bb bankroll is necessary even if a person's best game is an eight-or-better game?