xGoreDudex
09-19-2005, 08:25 PM
Going "Pro" is definatley appealing to anybody that hears that there are people outwhose sole vocation is playing poker.
In the 2+2 Magazine, Ed Miller and others have contriubted on a "know what your getting yourself" into mantality and gets people wised up as to what the negative side of going Pro is. I think anybody who has any common sense would agree with Miller & Co.
However, these writings seemed to be focused on mid-high limit players who "grind" bets for hours upon hours and make their wage. I've done some studying/interviews and research and came up with a pretty neat conclusion, nothing new, but something I feel should be talked about with cool heads.
I have a friend who has played roughly 250,000 hands according to his PT database. He's currently playing $10/20 six max and MT's it with a winrate of 1.6, not enough hands yet for his sample but he's working on it. However, through 70,000 hands respectivly at both $2/4 and $3/6 full ring games he is a 2.52(2/4) and 2.01(3/6) winner. Now, 70k isn't the largest sample in the world either, but I believe is signifigant enough for my example.
He also is a 2.3bb/100 winner in the $5/10 (6 max) over 50k as well, so I believe he's a winning player. I was picking his brain, he also plays 6-8 tables and finds he rarely tilts due to the sheer number of hands he plays daily.
So, take a person (which I'm sure many of you have similiar) numbers at these small stakes levels). Play your 8 table game and you'll see roughly 3,500 hands (assuming 55 hands per hour x 8)
I have this person waking up sometime between 8-9am, playing 4 hours with 2 hours to themselves. Then contiuning for another 4 hours, and enjoying the rest of their evening/night.
I also have 25% rakeback set up for this person in this example.
$2/4
3,500 hands x 2.00bb/100 (rounding it down from the 2.52 my friend acheived to present a more common scenario)
I'm also giving this person 1 full day each week of poker free living. So he will play 27 days (assuming 31 day month)
On a typical day this person will net $280 in poker winnings (now you know how varience works by now I assume).
Rakeback will net them according to statistics from various RB sites at the 25% will make around $1,000 in RB possibly more.
So, total from poker
280 x 27 days = $7,500
Rakeback = $1,000
total= $8,500
Now I realize a lot of you don't 8 table, but I believe with your own PT evidence, you can't tell me that if you did not have the time which I've alotted for this person in my example, and upped your desire, you could manage this schedual.
I'm not saying were all millionaires and should go wild, I'm saying that there is a lot of money in small stakes games on the internet right now, despite what people say. I can't speak for 10 years from now, but as of right now, there is good money to be made.
When Sklansky wrote "...It's now no big deal to be making $50,000 playing $3/6..." he wasn't saying it to make poker sound simple, he was saying it because this is the current reality of the poker community, that winning SS players can currently make a very good wage.
I know I will recieve the occasional (yeah man start 120 tabling..and the like). Thats not why I made my example. There are many 2+2'ers that play 6-8 tables, and many more that could adapt to it. If $ is your bottom-line, there is money in small stakes, based on your own numbers.
Find the time!...Go Pro? the jury is still out...make tons of money?...our evidence shows us its obtainable.
G.
In the 2+2 Magazine, Ed Miller and others have contriubted on a "know what your getting yourself" into mantality and gets people wised up as to what the negative side of going Pro is. I think anybody who has any common sense would agree with Miller & Co.
However, these writings seemed to be focused on mid-high limit players who "grind" bets for hours upon hours and make their wage. I've done some studying/interviews and research and came up with a pretty neat conclusion, nothing new, but something I feel should be talked about with cool heads.
I have a friend who has played roughly 250,000 hands according to his PT database. He's currently playing $10/20 six max and MT's it with a winrate of 1.6, not enough hands yet for his sample but he's working on it. However, through 70,000 hands respectivly at both $2/4 and $3/6 full ring games he is a 2.52(2/4) and 2.01(3/6) winner. Now, 70k isn't the largest sample in the world either, but I believe is signifigant enough for my example.
He also is a 2.3bb/100 winner in the $5/10 (6 max) over 50k as well, so I believe he's a winning player. I was picking his brain, he also plays 6-8 tables and finds he rarely tilts due to the sheer number of hands he plays daily.
So, take a person (which I'm sure many of you have similiar) numbers at these small stakes levels). Play your 8 table game and you'll see roughly 3,500 hands (assuming 55 hands per hour x 8)
I have this person waking up sometime between 8-9am, playing 4 hours with 2 hours to themselves. Then contiuning for another 4 hours, and enjoying the rest of their evening/night.
I also have 25% rakeback set up for this person in this example.
$2/4
3,500 hands x 2.00bb/100 (rounding it down from the 2.52 my friend acheived to present a more common scenario)
I'm also giving this person 1 full day each week of poker free living. So he will play 27 days (assuming 31 day month)
On a typical day this person will net $280 in poker winnings (now you know how varience works by now I assume).
Rakeback will net them according to statistics from various RB sites at the 25% will make around $1,000 in RB possibly more.
So, total from poker
280 x 27 days = $7,500
Rakeback = $1,000
total= $8,500
Now I realize a lot of you don't 8 table, but I believe with your own PT evidence, you can't tell me that if you did not have the time which I've alotted for this person in my example, and upped your desire, you could manage this schedual.
I'm not saying were all millionaires and should go wild, I'm saying that there is a lot of money in small stakes games on the internet right now, despite what people say. I can't speak for 10 years from now, but as of right now, there is good money to be made.
When Sklansky wrote "...It's now no big deal to be making $50,000 playing $3/6..." he wasn't saying it to make poker sound simple, he was saying it because this is the current reality of the poker community, that winning SS players can currently make a very good wage.
I know I will recieve the occasional (yeah man start 120 tabling..and the like). Thats not why I made my example. There are many 2+2'ers that play 6-8 tables, and many more that could adapt to it. If $ is your bottom-line, there is money in small stakes, based on your own numbers.
Find the time!...Go Pro? the jury is still out...make tons of money?...our evidence shows us its obtainable.
G.