Why Current Online Win Rates Won't Persist

I've read several discussions about whether or not the fish will eventually go away. Thats hard to predict, but one that is is clear is that online poker would be an extremely attractive job for individuals in developing countries. This is the one unique chance to participate in the USA/European economy with few barriors to entry. Given that they are willing to work in a factory, as doctors, computer programmers..etc for a fraction of the wage of a USA worker, why wouldn't one expect them to play poker at similar pay scale? Assuming that they required a premium of 100% of their normal job, then the tables would tighten by about 2 levels. E.G. 5/10 would start plaing like 15/30 tables of today..etc. Basically there would have to be a shift down until it no longer became advantageous for them to leave their jobs, where as now (although probably not in equilibruim) its basically limited to the point where USA/European workers find it advantageous. The net impact, based on my guesswork is that the average pro would lose about 50% of his earning ability. Online poker hasn't caught on in south america like it has here, but I see no reason why it won't.

Those fish have less $ to give away while the sharks can consume with the best of them. Globalization of poker, will not be a good thing for current pros in my view.

I had posted this on another forum among peers who I highly respect. They didn't seem to be in agreement with me, so I thought I would seek out more opinions here. Fire away!

<font class="small">Code:</font><hr /><pre> Limit Tables Rate/Hour % of population Foreign Job Muliple of Job Mult after 2 Level Tightening Impact on US Pro
1/2 2 3 13 45.0% $2.8 4.81 2.3 -55.6%
2/4 4 3 22 35.0% $4.0 5.39 2.6 -43.5%
3/6 6 3 30 24.0% $5.9 5.15 2.5 -35.7%
4/8 8 3 39 12.0% $8.5 4.54 2.3 -36.7%
5/10 10 3 47 6.0% $11.9 3.95 2.0 -47.2%
10/20 20 2 61 3.0% $16.7 3.66 1.9 -64.7%
15/30 30 2 89 1.0% $23.3 3.82 1.9 -73.9%
30/60 60 2 173 0.5% $32.7 5.30
60/120 120 2 341 0.3% $45.7 7.46
</pre><hr />

* Included $5 per hour for Rakeback/Bonus
** Percent of population is the percent that is mentally capable of beatting the level, not the percent that I think would beat that level.
*** In reality, I think at equilibrium players would not require a premium to their current job pay rate, do to the flexible life which poker allows.
**** This ignors the obvious tightening of the game due to an improving player base.

[crazy canuck]

Currently developing countries have poor internet access and computers are relatively expensive. But this might change in a few years, so you might be right. It is a funny concept tho....even poker professionals will be outsourced!

[lefty rosen]

The few Russians and Chinese that have some wealth already have made some levels more rock gardenish. I remember keeping 80 cents in Paradise poker and playing the 2 max NL games and turning that into about 60 bucks before I got sick of the game and seeing a bunch of mainland Chinese players who played like super rocks. It was probably because 2 dollars US was the equivalent of 25 dollars US to them...... /images/graemlins/grin.gif /images/graemlins/blush.gif /images/graemlins/cool.gif

[ QUOTE ]
Currently developing countries have poor internet access and computers are relatively expensive. But this might change in a few years, so you might be right. It is a funny concept tho....even poker professionals will be outsourced!

[/ QUOTE ]

True, but the economics are still there to support buying more expensive equipment, you don't even need high end stuff to play poker. Also public internet kiosks/stores are common, these would easily be more profitibable if they were filled with 30 people playing poker 1/2 limit and spitting the winnings, rather than 30 people paying the store 20 cents a minute to surf.

I think it will be exported quickly, unless poker sites segregate the players. I'm hopeful, if the government ever legalizes and regulates the sites, that they require it to be US vs US only.. it even makes sense when one considers that it would limit capital drain from the usa.

[SomethingClever]

You forget one key point: Most people suck at poker, and always will.

[gabyyyyy]

I don't buy the argument that the fish will eventually run out of money.

Tons of suckers go to vegas to play blackjack and slots every year and lose. Yet they go back year after year.

[FlFishOn]

The race to the bottom will be slow. Many barriers will keep the turd world out of the game for the bulk of this decade at least.

The quantity of collusive cheating will spike as the heat gets turned on and that will kill WRs first. Bots to follow.

[ QUOTE ]
You forget one key point: Most people suck at poker, and always will.

[/ QUOTE ]

No I didn't. I assumed profibility above the rake remained, just at lower magnitudes to to an influx of serious players (sharks) who found playing to be advantageous over their profesional career in a depressed economy. The same thing would happened if every winning USA player decided to play poker rather than have a job. The win rakes would fall like a rock. Luckily many winning players have a greater earnings potential at their real job. This is not the case in other countries.

USA wages are ridiculous compared to those in other countries playing poker should/will be a much more attractive career people in countries with high unemployment in low wages.

[ QUOTE ]
The race to the bottom will be slow. Many barriers will keep the turd world out of the game for the bulk of this decade at least.

[/ QUOTE ]

Would you be willing to name a few of the many?

[ QUOTE ]
I don't buy the argument that the fish will eventually run out of money.

Tons of suckers go to vegas to play blackjack and slots every year and lose. Yet they go back year after year.

[/ QUOTE ]

I never said they would. I said that, in effect, the number of sharks would increase to a point where the distribution of the fishes money is no longer attractive for the next shark to start playing. This level will be set based on what the lowest shark requires, given the pay differential the shark from the developing countrie will have the lowest requirements. Hence, they replace the USA pro.. or the USA pro accepts lower wages.

[FlFishOn]

The biggest is the capital requirement. You don't go from dirt poor to DSL fired puter and BR.

There are many cultures where poker as a career would be unthinkable. Think Utah.

[ QUOTE ]
The biggest is the capital requirement. You don't go from dirt poor to DSL fired puter and BR.

There are many cultures where poker as a career would be unthinkable. Think Utah.

[/ QUOTE ]

There are people with capital willing to invest if need be. I saw a site aimed at staking USA citizens, how much cheaper would an Indian or Brazilian be to employ?

And fyi, computers and internet are not uncommon in south america.

[FlFishOn]

"And fyi, computers and internet are not uncommon in south america. "

As is the Catholic church. Mama won't let Jose grow up to be a gambler.

[SinCityGuy]

[ QUOTE ]
Tons of suckers go to vegas to play blackjack and slots every year and lose. Yet they go back year after year.

[/ QUOTE ]

They also go for shows, meals, etc. Very few of them actually track how much they lose specifically to gambling. Many of them actually delude themselves into thinking they broke even or won a little bit. They can do this because all of their vacation expenses came out of the same pool of money.

Online, the losing player is faced with the prospect of having to refund his account. There is no way he can deny the cold reality that he is a loser, and many of them just quit at that point.

[eMarkM]

Tourney 4243060 on Stars to see these warriors battle it out for the final table. I'm in the other game with kfelly

[eMarkM]

That battle lasted only a few minutes as Kurn beat AAmazon rather promptly.

[scrapperdog]

This post is lame. How many times do we have to see the same post over and over? At least this one has a twist in that now people from 3rd world countries are gonna take poker over but still it is the same post that is posted here at least once every 2 weeks. Almost every person in this forum knows current win rates will not last forever, and every time the person that posts this is shocked they did not discover something new. This is like telling a person a wheel is round ... every 2 weeks.

What makes someone think they can turn an army of 3rd world factory workers into winning poker players? Only 8% of the people win as it is. And almost nobody wins when they first start playing. You do realize that they are gonna have to reload their accounts multiple times before they start winning, if they are in fact good enough to be in the 8% that can win. I dont think spending a years salary in an effort to see if you can be sucessful in an area that 92% of people fail is going to attract a ton of poor people.

[Petomane]

Like the man said, most people suck at poker.

I have a few friends who play at the B&amp;M on a regular basis, but can't win online.

I'm not worried about my win rate. Being a consistent winner is more difficult than you think.

[MicroBob]

I see no reason to believe that players from 3rd world countries would be especially strong at poker.

My GF is from South America. In her country of Peru I just don't think it would be very realistic because there is not too much disposable money there. This shouldn't be a surprise.
My GF is a nurse in the U.S. and makes more money than her Dad who is a doctor in Peru.

Her family does have internet though (they IM each other all the time) as do many down there...so they could play if they wanted to I guess.
They also have a couple of casinos in Lima...and I know that a couple of her aunts or cousins or something like to go to one of them occasionally to play 3-card poker or caribbean stud or one of those types of games.

So perhaps there is some disposable income down there where it could actually happen.

I gave some of the free party and stars stuff (sihrts, jackets, hats) to my GF's Mom who passed it around to other family members. So I guess I'm doing my part to promote online-poker in South America!!

Obviously there are some people in some of the wealthier nations who have disposable income. I think Brazil and Argentina qualify. I have met players from both of those countries online before.


But I still don't see why bringing in players from other countries automatically means they won't suck as much as most everyone else does.

[Adam22]

honestly my favorite part of SSH is how [censored] long all of microbob's posts are. love it.

i think this post is going over peoples h eads. He is not saying players living in bad economies will be better players, he is saying eventually people in mexico and southamerica will discover poker. The crappy players will not play it because they can't afford too. the good players will. Hence the ratio of sharks to fish will increase. the post makes complete sense. I have thought about moving to mexico or costa rica for this exact reason. I can still make 35bucks an hour in costa rica but the cost of living is dramatically less. It will be like I'm making 90 bucks an hour(number pulled out of my ass but you get the gist).

I've thought about the practicality of this concept some months ago, like many other people. I mean, why can't someone with an internet connection in some 3rd world developing nation just play poker?

I'm sure there's no threat of an influx of these sorts of players. Firstly, there's the whole statistical normal distribution of bad to good players entering. Secondly, much of the poker literature is in English and costs money. (While I am somewhat of exception, I must have invested some 500 or so bucks, probably a little less, into books and software before wagering a nickel.) As others have said, you have to pay for your education some way. Most commonly through the price of books and experience at the tables.

Basic economic laws also apply. If there's N sharks in the kiddie pool, then at some point there will be diminishing returns for the (N+1)th shark. (Not to mention that being a shark is a relative term as well.) It would have to be a proven certainty to a new pool of serious players that they'd be winning.

Then there's the whole cultural thing. Gambling is either a positive or negative thing in many cultures.

Lastly, most people do not have an analytical background, understanding, or even basic education. This is a large barrier for entry. Many people, even in developed nations, do not understand basic mathematic principles. For instance, plenty of people think that if two days have a forecast of 50% rain, they think they have a 100% chance of rain over the two day period. Much of what we learn is actually counterintuitive.

Oh, this is kinduva stupid paranoia thread, btw. Somewhat pointless. I'm not sure why I even thought about it originally...maybe it was because it would be cool to move to country with a much lower standard of living and make a killing with the same "wage". /images/graemlins/smile.gif

[RunDownHouse]

[ QUOTE ]
The few Russians and Chinese that have some wealth already have made some levels more rock gardenish.

[/ QUOTE ]
Boy, it really sucks that your opponents no longer have exploitable tendencies. How will you ever make money?

[scrapperdog]

[ QUOTE ]
i think this post is going over peoples h eads. He is not saying players living in bad economies will be better players, he is saying eventually people in mexico and southamerica will discover poker. The crappy players will not play it because they can't afford too. the good players will. Hence the ratio of sharks to fish will increase. the post makes complete sense. I have thought about moving to mexico or costa rica for this exact reason. I can still make 35bucks an hour in costa rica but the cost of living is dramatically less. It will be like I'm making 90 bucks an hour(number pulled out of my ass but you get the gist).

[/ QUOTE ]

Why is it that mexico will have a higher % of people that play and win as compared to any other country? Is it the free copies of SS that poker missionaries are translating to spanish and bringing down there?

[scrapperdog]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
You forget one key point: Most people suck at poker, and always will.

[/ QUOTE ]

No I didn't. I assumed profibility above the rake remained, just at lower magnitudes to to an influx of serious players (sharks) who found playing to be advantageous over their profesional career in a depressed economy. The same thing would happened if every winning USA player decided to play poker rather than have a job. The win rakes would fall like a rock. Luckily many winning players have a greater earnings potential at their real job. This is not the case in other countries.

USA wages are ridiculous compared to those in other countries playing poker should/will be a much more attractive career people in countries with high unemployment in low wages.

[/ QUOTE ]

You act like being a winning poker player is like joining the army. You sign your name, take a physical, and get rolling. It does not work like that. Why do you think that 92% of the people lose?

[MicroBob]

[ QUOTE ]
honestly my favorite part of SSH is how [censored] long all of microbob's posts are. love it.

[/ QUOTE ]


i aim to please.

[BradleyT]

Anyone into online MMORPGs has probably heard of Lineage 2 and overseas Adena Farming sweatshops. Companies set up labs with dozens of computers and pay people $.50 per hour to play the game and then sell the currency for a large profit. The economy of many foreign countries is so bad that $.50 per hour is actually above average.

There is really nothing (except maybe gambling laws) preventing them from setting up poker sweatshops.

[Alobar]

[ QUOTE ]
You forget one key point: Most people suck at poker, and always will.

[/ QUOTE ]

bingo

[lefty rosen]

Trust me you won't win with worse reads online and ever increasing rake. One thing though the nano limits where you could make more than the average Chinese, Indian worker are profitable enough for them to live on. But an American couldn't do more than earn beer money. So these limits could be their domain...... /images/graemlins/grin.gif /images/graemlins/blush.gif /images/graemlins/cool.gif

[gabyyyyy]

[ QUOTE ]


My GF is from South America. In her country of Peru I just don't think it would be very realistic because there is not too much disposable money there.

[/ QUOTE ]

You got one of dem mail order brides?

[SinCityGuy]

[ QUOTE ]
If there's N sharks in the kiddie pool, then at some point there will be diminishing returns for the (N+1)th shark.

[/ QUOTE ]

Something that tends to get overlooked is the fact that most of the sharks are playing anywhere from 4 to 12 tables, and most of the fish are playing one table.

In the long run, this will probably result in the same thing that happens in commercial overfishing, when fishing mortality reaches a level where the stock biomass has negative marginal growth.

In online poker, new signups are declining, while the number of multitablers is increasing. The games will get much tougher over the next few years at all limits.

[gabyyyyy]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
If there's N sharks in the kiddie pool, then at some point there will be diminishing returns for the (N+1)th shark.

[/ QUOTE ]

Something that tends to get overlooked is the fact that most of the sharks are playing anywhere from 4 to 12 tables, and most of the fish are playing one table.

In the long run, this will probably result in the same thing that happens in commercial overfishing, when fishing mortality reaches a level where the stock biomass has negative marginal growth.

In online poker, new signups are declining, while the number of multitablers is increasing. The games will get much tougher over the next few years at all limits.

[/ QUOTE ]

Good Id rather play decent players.

Atleast I won't get sucked out on as much.

[BradleyT]

I hope you're being funny but my gut feeling is you aren't trying to be.

[MicroBob]

[ QUOTE ]
I hope you're being funny but my gut feeling is you aren't trying to be.

[/ QUOTE ]

[Innocentius]

[ QUOTE ]

You act like being a winning poker player is like joining the army. You sign your name, take a physical, and get rolling. It does not work like that. Why do you think that 92% of the people lose?

[/ QUOTE ]

This point has been made by a number of posters, and I think it's missing the OPs point completely. Let's assume that 8% of all players today are good enough to beat the games for at least a small amount. This doesn't mean that 92% of todays players are inherently incapable of becoming good poker players, or that if 100 dedicated and smart nigerians decide to try to make a living at poker, 92 of them will fail. Most of the playes today play recreationally, and don't bother much about improving their game, something that the 100 nigerians in my example would probably do.

That said, I don't agree with the OP that this is likely to happen, especially not anytime soon. The reasons for this (lacking funds, education, infrastructure, etc.) has already been elaborated by other posters.

[timprov]

[ QUOTE ]

In the long run, this will probably result in the same thing that happens in commercial overfishing, when fishing mortality reaches a level where the stock biomass has negative marginal growth.


[/ QUOTE ]

Except that we don't then eat the worst fishermen. There the metaphor falls apart.

[grinin]

Great post!! Again a few folks are not following the argument, so to boil it down...

Hypothesis: As online poker becomes more and more available to the third world, the average earn of an online poker player will decrease.

Currently, the average poker player comes from an industrialized nation where the avg wage is much higher than that of the third world.

For a worker in an industrialized nation to take up online poker as a career, his earn should normally be higher than that which he can make outside of poker. The same will hold true for a third world worker.

OP is not saying that third world players will be better... they will simply be satisfied with a far smaller earn, than a worker from the avg industrialized nation.

ie; Adding thousands of happy 0.2 bb/100 winners into online poker is not a good thing for those of us that make far more than that.

[mackthefork]

A 0.2 bb/100 player could easily loose even a 2000 bb roll, I would reckon third world players might tighten up the lower limits for a time, because what they can earn there at say 25/50c limit is plenty, this might create its own set of problems for higher limit pros in the west.

Mack

[SinCityGuy]

[ QUOTE ]
Except that we don't then eat the worst fishermen.

[/ QUOTE ]

That is true. They just quit and move on to something else.

[MyTurn2Raise]

jeez... and I was worried Ljubljana was going to take it all over.

The Chinese and Russians too; where's McCarthy?

[ QUOTE ]
I see no reason to believe that players from 3rd world countries would be especially strong at poker.

My GF is from South America. In her country of Peru I just don't think it would be very realistic because there is not too much disposable money there. This shouldn't be a surprise.
My GF is a nurse in the U.S. and makes more money than her Dad who is a doctor in Peru.

Her family does have internet though (they IM each other all the time) as do many down there...so they could play if they wanted to I guess.
They also have a couple of casinos in Lima...and I know that a couple of her aunts or cousins or something like to go to one of them occasionally to play 3-card poker or caribbean stud or one of those types of games.

So perhaps there is some disposable income down there where it could actually happen.

I gave some of the free party and stars stuff (sihrts, jackets, hats) to my GF's Mom who passed it around to other family members. So I guess I'm doing my part to promote online-poker in South America!!

Obviously there are some people in some of the wealthier nations who have disposable income. I think Brazil and Argentina qualify. I have met players from both of those countries online before.


But I still don't see why bringing in players from other countries automatically means they won't suck as much as most everyone else does.

[/ QUOTE ]

Think about it. Her father is a doctor! and makes less than a nurse here. Most doctors have the inteligence and dedication to beat online poker if they wanted to at say the 5/10 level. Winning poker players can make much more than a nurse in the USA. The dad is the one that I'm saying will play seriously. As you mentioned the uneducated fish won't have much money to contribute to the online community. The USA fish is extremely wealthy when looking at the world wide picture.

[scrapperdog]

[ QUOTE ]
Anyone into online MMORPGs has probably heard of Lineage 2 and overseas Adena Farming sweatshops. Companies set up labs with dozens of computers and pay people $.50 per hour to play the game and then sell the currency for a large profit. The economy of many foreign countries is so bad that $.50 per hour is actually above average.

There is really nothing (except maybe gambling laws) preventing them from setting up poker sweatshops.

[/ QUOTE ]

Yep it is that easy to become a winning player. Set up a sweatshop, put asses in the seats and I am sure this will work out great.

What people dont seem to realize is that is that there is a set of intangibles that enable a person to become a winning player. You will never know if a person has these before they start playing. Thus 92% of the people in the sweatshop are gonna be losing players.

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]

You act like being a winning poker player is like joining the army. You sign your name, take a physical, and get rolling. It does not work like that. Why do you think that 92% of the people lose?

[/ QUOTE ]

This point has been made by a number of posters, and I think it's missing the OPs point completely. Let's assume that 8% of all players today are good enough to beat the games for at least a small amount. This doesn't mean that 92% of todays players are inherently incapable of becoming good poker players, or that if 100 dedicated and smart nigerians decide to try to make a living at poker, 92 of them will fail. Most of the playes today play recreationally, and don't bother much about improving their game, something that the 100 nigerians in my example would probably do.

That said, I don't agree with the OP that this is likely to happen, especially not anytime soon. The reasons for this (lacking funds, education, infrastructure, etc.) has already been elaborated by other posters.

[/ QUOTE ]

I agree with the first paragraph.

There are plenty of educated underpaid (relative to usa standards) people in developing countries. These same individuals tend to have PC's and internet conections.

[ QUOTE ]
Great post!! Again a few folks are not following the argument, so to boil it down...

Hypothesis: As online poker becomes more and more available to the third world, the average earn of an online poker player will decrease.

Currently, the average poker player comes from an industrialized nation where the avg wage is much higher than that of the third world.

For a worker in an industrialized nation to take up online poker as a career, his earn should normally be higher than that which he can make outside of poker. The same will hold true for a third world worker.

OP is not saying that third world players will be better... they will simply be satisfied with a far smaller earn, than a worker from the avg industrialized nation.

ie; Adding thousands of happy 0.2 bb/100 winners into online poker is not a good thing for those of us that make far more than that.

[/ QUOTE ]

Exactly! However, you present my arguement more clearly. Hopefully, now people will understand my arguement and stop talking about the fish and start focusing on the underpaid sharks coming in.

Thanks for the clarification!

[Arnfinn Madsen]

I think you are right (those not agreeing fail to look at thing in a large perspective IMO), but it is a very slow development. Remember that the 2nd &amp; 3rd world-players have a negative edge as they are currently less experienced in poker and also remember that in many 2nd &amp; 3rd countries those who have starting capital and computer and internet access already belong to a "class" where average salaries are close to the US.

[ QUOTE ]
I think you are right (those not agreeing fail to look at thing in a large perspective IMO), but it is a very slow development. Remember that the 2nd &amp; 3rd world-players have a negative edge as they are currently less experienced in poker and also remember that in many 2nd &amp; 3rd countries those who have starting capital and computer and internet access already belong to a "class" where average salaries are close to the US.

[/ QUOTE ]

I agree they are behind on the skillset, but seriously how long do you think it takes an educated person to beat a Party 1/2 table? One or two months tops (i was a winning player the day i started online.. simply because i started at low limits).

It's not just the factory workers who make fractions of what we do... same goes for Doctors, Economist, Actuaries, Engineers..etc.

You don't need much capital, but they would have less and therefore start at lower stakes, which coincidentally will lead to a larger percent of them having success right off the bat.

[augie00]

Nice thought, but no.

[Delphin]

[ QUOTE ]
There are plenty of educated underpaid (relative to usa standards) people in developing countries. These same individuals tend to have PC's and internet conections.

[/ QUOTE ]

Yes, and as these people get into online poker some % become fish and some % become sharks. There is no good reason this % should differ overseas.

Some guy in a developing country that sees the WSOP and thinks he can make money playing online poker is just as likely to become a fish as someone guy living in the US.

[Predator314]

Saying that poker will run out of fish is like saying the world is going to run out of people. There is a fishy life cycle. It usually goes something like: 1.) Deposit, win big, 2.) Play some more, lose it all 3.) Complain about bad beats, cashout curse, sunspots, etc 4.) Re-deposit and suck again. This cycle might repeat indefinitely or just once or twice. It depends on the person. However, when one person quits depositing, another will come along and take his place.

Also, I've never met a losing player. They are all winners when you talk to them. People that think they are better than they are can be very profitable. This probably makes up roughly 97% of the poker population. The good thing about these people is that since they have this false sense of superiority, they will not work on their game to turn themselves into a decent player. They will eventually lose all their money and re-deposit or die out and become re-incarnated as a different donkey.

Remember: there's a sucker born every minute. Eventually the sucker will deposit some money on Party Poker.

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
There are plenty of educated underpaid (relative to usa standards) people in developing countries. These same individuals tend to have PC's and internet conections.

[/ QUOTE ]


Yes, and as these people get into online poker some % become fish and some % become sharks. There is no good reason this % should differ overseas.

Some guy in a developing country that sees the WSOP and thinks he can make money playing online poker is just as likely to become a fish as someone guy living in the US.

[/ QUOTE ]

Do you really think that a college educated person is as likely to suck as the average joe? Hell no. Maybe only 8% are winning players. I would say that if you looke at people with Masters or a Math/Science degree probably 25 to 50% are winning players, and if you look at all others (excluding Advanced degrees) the % that win is probably only like 5 or 6%.)

[BradleyT]

What people aren't seeming to grasp is that sharks don't drown.

If there are 4,823 sharks on party this year, how many will there be next year?

[ QUOTE ]
Great post!! Again a few folks are not following the argument, so to boil it down...

Hypothesis: As online poker becomes more and more available to the third world, the average earn of an online poker player will decrease.

Currently, the average poker player comes from an industrialized nation where the avg wage is much higher than that of the third world.

For a worker in an industrialized nation to take up online poker as a career, his earn should normally be higher than that which he can make outside of poker. The same will hold true for a third world worker.

OP is not saying that third world players will be better... they will simply be satisfied with a far smaller earn, than a worker from the avg industrialized nation.

ie; Adding thousands of happy 0.2 bb/100 winners into online poker is not a good thing for those of us that make far more than that.

[/ QUOTE ]

Do you think the online sites would/could segregate the market? The only site i ever had boot me for being American was Expekt. It seems like it might be dificult although Neteller could tell that i logged on outside of the USA once and froze my account for supscisious behaving, so i guess they can track ips. i hope that when the US government regulates the industry, that they will require some sort of segmentation.

[grinin]

[ QUOTE ]
Yes, and as these people get into online poker some % become fish and some % become sharks. There is no good reason this % should differ overseas

[/ QUOTE ]

Again this is not the argument.

There is a very good reason that once players DO enter from the third world, those who are winning players will be willing to play at a far less earn than current players.

The avg worker in US, EU, etc makes over $10/hour (number pulled out of air). The avg. worker in the third world makes less than $1/hr. This differential will drive US, EU players who make less than $10 per hour playing poker, OUT, and third world players who can make more than $1 per hour IN. Although the US player who could make $1-$9 per hour would be +EV, he simply has better EV opportunities outside of poker, this is not the case for the third world player. There is simply an untapped, underpaid, group of billions of people, many of whom will have the intellect to beat poker for far more than they could earn in regular jobs in their homeland. They will be willing to play for far less than I am.

[grinin]

[ QUOTE ]
Saying that poker will run out of fish is like saying the world is going to run out of people.

[/ QUOTE ]

Reading comprehension is not your strong point. At not time did OP make a statement such as this.

[grinin]

[ QUOTE ]
Do you think the online sites would/could segregate the market?

[/ QUOTE ]
Yes. But they won't. It is not in their interests.

[TheGame1020]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
The few Russians and Chinese that have some wealth already have made some levels more rock gardenish.

[/ QUOTE ]
Boy, it really sucks that your opponents no longer have exploitable tendencies. How will you ever make money?

[/ QUOTE ]

NH sir.

[CORed]

I think that online games (Party anyway) are getting tougher and may continue to get tougher, but I think they will reach an equilibrium. Sure, some fish will either give up or learn to play well enough that they are no longer fish, but I think an equilibrium will be reached. There are plenty of fish who gamble for entertainment, and will continue to do so. The casinos haven't run out of slot and table game players, and I don't think poker (online or B&amp;M) will run out of fish any time soon. Also, as the games get tougher, some of the borderline winners will becom losers. If their primary motivation for playing is to make money, and they find it is no longer possible, some of them will quit. I'm more concerned about bots. I think making a bot that can play winning poker is very difficult, but I don't think it's impossible. If I had a year to spare, I think I could do it myself. Unless poker sites' bot detection is good enough to keep most of the bots out, I think they could eventually dry up the games.

[ QUOTE ]
Reading comprehension is not your strong point. At not time did OP make a statement such as this.

[/ QUOTE ]
Apparently grammar is not yours?

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Do you think the online sites would/could segregate the market?

[/ QUOTE ]
Yes. But they won't. It is not in their interests.

[/ QUOTE ]

I think it is. I would argue that its in their interest to kick the best players to the curb. They take more money off the tables than they contribute in rake. Thing about it this way. Given a finite number of players and finite bankrolls, would the site be better off if all players had the same skill, or if it was highly polarized with the better players taking the worse players money? People of equal skill swap the money, letting it get raked and reraked, good players take their winnings (raked once) and deposit it in the bank.

Not a perfect comparison but one could see how the same arguement could be made for segmenting the market. Allowing an unproportional number of good players from developing countries would lead to more money being pulled off the table and less total rake being generated.

This thought process requires a long term view on profitablity/rake, not short term where obviously the more players the better.

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Yes, and as these people get into online poker some % become fish and some % become sharks. There is no good reason this % should differ overseas

[/ QUOTE ]

Again this is not the argument.

There is a very good reason that once players DO enter from the third world, those who are winning players will be willing to play at a far less earn than current players.

The avg worker in US, EU, etc makes over $10/hour (number pulled out of air). The avg. worker in the third world makes less than $1/hr. This differential will drive US, EU players who make less than $10 per hour playing poker, OUT, and third world players who can make more than $1 per hour IN. Although the US player who could make $1-$9 per hour would be +EV, he simply has better EV opportunities outside of poker, this is not the case for the third world player. There is simply an untapped, underpaid, group of billions of people, many of whom will have the intellect to beat poker for far more than they could earn in regular jobs in their homeland. They will be willing to play for far less than I am.

[/ QUOTE ]


Yup, seems so obvious yet people refuse to admit their cash cow is limited.

[excession]

lol you are kidding - an Chinese or Indian maths graduate ain't going to stick at nano limits - he's going to want to play dumb drunk americans at the $200 tables at midnight (US time) Saturday night...same as the rest of us /images/graemlins/grin.gif

[ QUOTE ]
jeez... and I was worried Ljubljana was going to take it all over.

The Chinese and Russians too; where's McCarthy?

[/ QUOTE ]

Don't worry, Bush has a little more time to get another war on with these countries. Write a letter to your local senator and we will stop these "low wage" poker players from invading our God given right!!!11! After all, Gore invented the internet, it's ours!

[grinin]

ooooh! a typo! such an egregious error.

[fire_fly]

do you even play poker?

from the content of this post, i'd guess no...

[ QUOTE ]
ooooh! a typo! such an egregious error.

[/ QUOTE ]
Maybe you'll proofread what you write if you're planning on criticizing someone's language skills.

why are people assuming the ratio of shark/fish brought in by 2nd and 3rd world countries will be the same as it is here. If(most likely when) people in mexico discover online poker; people who recognize it as a difficult place to make money WILL NOT take up the game. People who have dreams of making it big at the tables WILL NOT take up the game(when you are poor you are very practical and realistic, trust me). For the same reason people who want to have fun and do some gambling will not take up the game either. The people who will take up the game will be people who recognize their own intelligence and mental acumen and furthermore recognize they will be +ev at the tables. In america 9 out of 10 players will be losers. When people in mexico start playing this will not be the case. There will be many more sharks then fish coming into the game. And the fish are going to quit playing very quickly.

Someone mentioned sshe is only written in english. A very large number of educated people in other countries speak english. This is just another reason the ratio of sharks to fish will be greater.

It seems like people are picturing a family with walking sticks walking to the river to get water supply and living off chickens in their backyards is what 2nd and 3rd world countries are.

In Mexico, in Belize, in Brazil, in India, in China, there are very intelligent people that get paid small wages. If they become aware of the wages people are making playing poker they are definately going to look into the game. These guys are not going to take up nano limits for profit. Maybe just to get aquainted with the game. They will play lowstakes and up. As the tables become tighter they will continue to play where many american "play to live" players will not.

[ QUOTE ]
do you even play poker?

from the content of this post, i'd guess no...

[/ QUOTE ]

Why would you say that?

I do play, not as my sole source of income, but I do manage to earn about 2k a month playing the weekends and after work, mostly at lower limits 2/4 to 5/10.

It was the differential between what I earn playing and what several south american friends earn that got me interested in ths subject.

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
ooooh! a typo! such an egregious error.

[/ QUOTE ]
Maybe you'll proofread what you write if you're planning on criticizing someone's language skills.

[/ QUOTE ]

Why? The guy he critiqued either didn't read my post or lacked the ability to comprehend what he was reading.

[grinin]

I don't have an overwhelming desire to criticize anyone's language skills (unlike others).

The problem is, his post is similar to others, which basically are assuming that OP said we are going to run out of fish. It was already pointed out that that was not what OP was talking about. It's simply dissapointing to have the same old distractions in a good thread.

So if I undertsand your logic, you're basically saying you only want to play against people in your own wealth bracket, and you don't think poor people should be allowed to play with rich people?

Or is it OK with you if poor Americans play against you, just not poor foreigners?

Do you think this stance is morally defensible, or do you just hope that regulations will be structured to maintain a pool of players that you think you can make money off of (for pragmatic rather than moral reasons)?

I hope this doesn't sound like an attack, I'm just curious about where you're coming from with this. I, for one, enjoy the fact that I can play with people from around the world; its one of the things I love about the internet. But I'm not playing poker professionally.

Also, I don't think its accurate to think that poker players in poor countries will stick to lower limits. I think that, like many people who play now, they will try to play at the levels that are most profitable for them. So, when someone from a poor country gets good enough to dominate at one limit level, I think they will move up. If someone understands poker well enough to win big consistantly at one level, I think they'll understand that its profitable to move up in limits at some point.

[pineapple888]

Yeah, I see your point.

Cause when your home table champs found Vegas and the WSOP, and were satisfied with much less in winnings than the top pros, the top pros really got hurt bad.

Then when college students, who were satisfied with much less in winnings than online pros with actual responsibilities, found online poker, the online pros got hurt bad.

Oh, wait... never mind...

[Innocentius]

[ QUOTE ]
So if I undertsand your logic, you're basically saying you only want to play against people in your own wealth bracket, and you don't think poor people should be allowed to play with rich people?


[/ QUOTE ]

I really can't understand where you got this from. It's not even remotely like anything the OP has written. Are you just making things up or did I miss something?

[ QUOTE ]
Someone mentioned sshe is only written in english. A very large number of educated people in other countries speak english. This is just another reason the ratio of sharks to fish will be greater.

[/ QUOTE ]

When I said this in my original reply this thread, it was in regards to the general population of a non-English speaking country. These people that you talk about are only a small percentage of the population and the exception.

And even if the country has English as it's common language, there's other barriers to entry. India, while making great strides, is generally a poor country. Most people have difficulty purchasing a basic computer (http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/south_asia/4735927.stm), but there are plenty of very educated people there with the analytical background.

You should think of all of the barriers to successful entry as a linear equation where each factor will have weights with respect to the general population of a nation.

I still believe that the only way this would be a serious concern is when the ratio of sharks to fish entering the pond is off balance. But poker is very Darwinian and equalibrium will be reached regardless of what happens. I would be more concerned when an "unnatural species" is introduced into the environment like a bot; this is something that could destroy online poker.

Here are the problems with the OP's argument as I see it.

1. Most of these countries have a poor economy because they have a small middle class. There are wealthy and poor people with not much in between. Introducing a game to these countries will also bring wealthy players who will splash around at the higher limits.

2. Winning 15/30 players do not grow on trees. Few adults that do not currently know the rules of poker could be winning players at 15/30. The lower limits you could teach someone a formulaic approach to win, so any affect would likely only be felt there.

3. Most "sweatshops" do not require much training for the work involved. It will likely take months of training before any employee is profitable. The employees will be paid a low wage to train, but it still takes time and money, plus you have to have someone educate them. I think setting these sweatshops up is easier said than done.

[ QUOTE ]


When I said this in my original reply this thread, it was in regards to the general population of a non-English speaking country. These people that you talk about are only a small percentage of the population and the exception.



[/ QUOTE ]

This is not true. How many people in japan and germany and france speak english? It is by no means a small percentage of the population. In south america and in mexico the percentage is much smaller, but among educated people it is still substantial. Either way, if watching poker were to become popular in south america and mexico, someone is going to write or translate poker books into spanish anyways.

I still think you are thinking of kids in sandals and flies on their face when you think about 3rd world countries. I am not sure about india, but in mexico and south america, plenty of people have computers and internet. Most of them are educated and a large number of them speak english. Ricky martin, shakira, salma hayek, antonio banderas, are examples of upperclass educated people from mexico that spoke english long before they came here. This is the case with most college educated people from 2nd and 3rd world countries. Basically poker is not going to appeal to lower class citizens in these places, it will to upperclass citizens. Most of them will be educated, most of them will have access to the internet. If poker becomes trendy in these places, they will be the ones joining the game. I don't think this is going to dry up the fish pool, but it is going to dilute it enough that winrates will drop. And like the OP said, they will settle for lesser win rates then we do.

[Innocentius]

[ QUOTE ]

Ricky martin, shakira, salma hayek, antonio banderas, are examples of upperclass educated people from mexico

[/ QUOTE ]

This is of course completely beside your point, but I think Antonio Banderas is from Spain, and Shakira from Columbia.

you are right, I confuse thalia and shakira. Thalia also speaks english though. And i always thought Antonio spoke funny spanish, so that makes sense.

[RikaKazak]

don't forget about big tournament wins, people who get lucky, win $1 million in a tourny, often will give a lot of it back (yes I know taxes etc. take away) but they'll give it back and it'll just circulate.

Also, a lot of "sharks" are leaving too. I myself want to get out as soon as possible and just deal with the real estate I'm buying off my poker winnings. So in about 5 years my playing will drop from 25 hours a week 4-8 tabling to 5-10 hours a week 2 tabling (my favorite amount)

Also I myself play drunk 3/6 limit and I know I lose in that game, just entertainment to me to raise 7,2o UTG and crack AA, so there will be those players.

AND when online gets fill with other country pros, online may or may not get hurt, but if it gets hurt bad we'll just move to live play.

[pyroponic]

Don't forget BR and swings, getting a good BR together for $.5/1 or $1/2 might be a stretch, plus there'd more incentive to withdraw if that BR got to a decent size, and the natural poker swings may discourage them from playing much quicker than a U.S. microlimit player.

[RikaKazak]

Well, I make $150 a hour, I know many U.S. workers that are making $30 a hour as an engineer. If you're an engineer I would generally say you have what it takes to beat online poker. So why wouldn't a U.S. engineer quit his job and play poker for a living if he can make 3 times that fairly easily?

Theres LOTS of reasons, religion, doesn't enjoy it, etc. etc. the same will happen in 3rd world countries.

[ QUOTE ]
This is not true. How many people in japan and germany and france speak english? It is by no means a small percentage of the population. In south america and in mexico the percentage is much smaller, but among educated people it is still substantial. Either way, if watching poker were to become popular in south america and mexico, someone is going to write or translate poker books into spanish anyways.


[/ QUOTE ]

I don't disagree with the fact that many people speak/know English as a second language...but many people believe, esp. Americans, overestimate (http://www.harrisinteractive.com/harris_poll/index.asp?PID=146) the percentage of people that know English. I believe the actual estimate is around 15-20% including native language speakers. (As an aside, I think it's a popular belief that English as a whole will decline (http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2004/02/0226_040226_language.html).)

FWIW, I was refering to lesser developed nations, not the countries that you mentioned.

[MrDannimal]

One thing people seem to be missing in comparing this idea to the MMORPG "sweatshop" is that with the MMORPG, there is no point at which the employee has access to actual money.

They sign on, grind out in-game currency, and at the end of their shift, they give that currency to another character (who is like the "bank" holding the currency for sale). There's no way to get actual real-world money other than as pay.

This is substantially less true in the hypothetical poker sweatshop. Even if the "company" sets up all the accounts and handles the process of getting money into the poker account, what's to keep the pleyers from chip dumping to a friend who isn't in the sweatshop? That friend then gives them a cut after cashout, and all it has to do is be bigger than their hourly pay and voila!

Also, with an MMORPG, there is no risk of losing real money. The only fear is that an employee won't reach his quota (and in fact, you can often fleece gold farmers at the end of their shifts as they cut "prices" on items in an effort to make quota), that he won't generate enough on-line currency.

In poker, there is a definite risk of losing real world money. In my last 6 hours of play, I made 8 BB. Two 3-hour sessions, one was -37 BB, the other was +45 BB. Both are outliers in comparison to what I normally see in a single session result (although the net result is a little low, it's pretty inline for a small sample). But imagine I'm working for a "poker farm", and finish my shift down 37 BB. Do I even get the chance to have the +45 BB session tomorrow?

On top of that, there's a definite cost involved in finding out if a given employee is a winning player. It's not like you can dump 100 people into the play money pool (or even micro-limits) and say "Learn!". There is far less cost involved with an MMORPG. There is a LOT of zero-revenue time spent learning how to even be a .2 bb/100 player at even 2/4.

Overhead/startup cost is also much greater. Let's assume that the equipment cost is the same (1 station per employee). If you're going to put your employee at .5/1, you would need to bankroll each player with AT LEAST $100 (and probably more). MMORPGS cost less to play in places like China and the like (partly because they can't afford $15/month). Even at the U.S. rate of $15/month, that's almost 7 months worth of play!

From a "farming" standpoint, there's little financial incentive to try poker over any MMORPG.

Now, I'm not saying that there won't be people in foreign countries who will play and win, and be happy winning at a much lower rate than your average american. In fact, I think the individual player is the only one there's any amount of concern about. However, those individuals fall under the same fish/shark rule that any other poker player would. For every third world player who comes in and is happy at .2 bb/100, there will be 5-10 more who lose money trying and the barrier to entry is much higher than that for a company.

Yes, if you suddenly added a large # of marginal winners to the playerbase, it would impact the existing winning players AT THAT LEVEL. I don't think worrying about this scenario happening is any more worthwhile than worrying about extracting the maximum from a flopped Royal Flush. It's so unlikely, and there are so many other things you could be thinking about that would have a greater EV.

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
So if I undertsand your logic, you're basically saying you only want to play against people in your own wealth bracket, and you don't think poor people should be allowed to play with rich people?


[/ QUOTE ]

I really can't understand where you got this from. It's not even remotely like anything the OP has written. Are you just making things up or did I miss something?

[/ QUOTE ]

Maybe I'm misunderstanding, but I think the point of this thread is something along the lines of a concern that when people in poor countries start playing online poker more, good players will be happy to play at lower limits because the profit at those levels will be high compared to what other jobs pay. And, that this will make it harder for the current players to make money, since there will be a worse player to fish ratio...

Then, the poster I replied to said:

[ QUOTE ]
I think it will be exported quickly, unless poker sites segregate the players. I'm hopeful, if the government ever legalizes and regulates the sites, that they require it to be US vs US only.. it even makes sense when one considers that it would limit capital drain from the usa.

[/ QUOTE ]

So, sorry for assuming too much in my post. Let me rephrase my question. The poster would like to limit play to US vs US players. One reason stated is to limit "capital drain from the usa." ... presumably capital moving from the usa to people in poor countries. So, the poster doesn't want to play online poker with people from foreign countries. I wanted to clarify if this was for pragmatic (profit) reasons, or if he thought the "capital" drain, or something, was a morally bad thing.

Also, limiting play to US vs US only would also exclude European countries, for example, which hasn't been the topic of this thread. So, is that something that this poster doesn't like too? (the non-american players currently in the internet pool).

Hope my question is clearer now...

[ QUOTE ]
Here are the problems with the OP's argument as I see it.

1. Most of these countries have a poor economy because they have a small middle class. There are wealthy and poor people with not much in between. Introducing a game to these countries will also bring wealthy players who will splash around at the higher limits.

2. Winning 15/30 players do not grow on trees. Few adults that do not currently know the rules of poker could be winning players at 15/30. The lower limits you could teach someone a formulaic approach to win, so any affect would likely only be felt there.

3. Most "sweatshops" do not require much training for the work involved. It will likely take months of training before any employee is profitable. The employees will be paid a low wage to train, but it still takes time and money, plus you have to have someone educate them. I think setting these sweatshops up is easier said than done.

[/ QUOTE ]

1) I agree, small middle class. However, even their upper class (my main concern) is poor by USA standards a high school graduate can go to Pizza Hut and make more waiting tables than a college grad in these developing countries.

2) I realize 15/30 players don't grow on trees. I've got pretty strong analytical skills (not communication) yet I'm fairly far off from beating 15/30. Do I think i could if i focused more? Probably. I'm not sure what % I estimated had the mental ability to beat it, but i think i suggested less than 3%. This is hardly growing on trees!

3)Highly disagree. Smart people could beat the .5/1 tables with less than 80 hours of practice, assuming they are given the right guidance.

Correct, I think the good players from foreign countries will be more apt to play full time, as its advantageous vs their real world job. As more players enter, the tables will tighten and good players will be forced to play lower limits if they want to remain profitable, at which point it will not be favorable for many pros in the developed nations to play.

I would be fine playing US players only. I prefer to play with whichever players are most +EV for me. I see no moral issues. As such, i prefer to play with an average USA player over an average person from a third world country because the average USA player (per my assumptions) will have more disaposable income and tend to be less inteligent.

[ QUOTE ]
Correct, I think the good players from foreign countries will be more apt to play full time, as its advantageous vs their real world job. As more players enter, the tables will tighten and good players will be forced to play lower limits if they want to remain profitable, at which point it will not be favorable for many pros in the developed nations to play.

I would be fine playing US players only. I prefer to play with whichever players are most +EV for me. I see no moral issues. As such, i prefer to play with an average USA player over an average person from a third world country because the average USA player (per my assumptions) will have more disaposable income and tend to be less inteligent.

[/ QUOTE ]

Thanks for explaining. IMO, we're better off with a larger pool of players in general. Maybe you'd be happy if the poker sites provided a reliable geographic location of players, based on IP? Then you could choose tables with US based players...

I still think the full-time players will move up in limits as they improve. Most people want to make more money if they can. Plus the equilibrium of fish-sharks is not easy to predict. If the number of sharks increases, the relative number of fish drops, making the game less profitable for sharks, so some sharks will stop playing, which increases the ratio of fish... its a dynamic system, that doesn't necessarily have an equilibrium solution.

The restrictions you propose sound like a big gamble from EV perspective... What if they somehow stop Americans from accessing foreign poker sites (maybe with a china-style firewall?), and it turns out that the rest-of-the-world sites are more fishy than the US sites? US players will be pissed to be excluded... I guess the US casinos would be stoked though...

[blackize]

I refuse to read all these posts. But here is why you are wrong.

It takes money to play poker. You need substantial capital for a bankroll and to buy computers and pay for your internet connection. Just this investment alone will hinder people in underdeveloped nations from playing.

Now how did you learn to play poker? You probably bought a book and then lost a bunch of money honing your skills. I would venture to say that most players do not become profitable for several months. The people in these countries don't have the time or the money to invest in learning poker.

[scrapperdog]

[ QUOTE ]
The people who will take up the game will be people who recognize their own intelligence and mental acumen and furthermore recognize they will be +ev at the tables.

[/ QUOTE ]

Again, people seem to think that becoming a winning player like joining the army.

Let me tell you how many of the people that play poker think they are +EV. 99%. Only 1% tell the truth to themself. Even the largest dumb ass in the world thinks he is smart. In fact every person I know thinks they are smart.

That being said, even being top 1% IQ is far from a lock that you are gonna be a winner. There are tons of factors here, intelligence is just one of many. IMO steam control and dicipline are just as important. And there are 10 or so other factors that need to be added in. There is no possible way of knowing if you are going to be a winner before you start playing and prove you are a winner.

[ QUOTE ]

Again, people seem to think that becoming a winning player like joining the army.

[/ QUOTE ]

I bought sshe, read it and deposited 600 bucks into two poker sites. I have never redopisited money and quit my job 1 month after. Before I did this I was very confident this would be the case. After a few months of playing I talked to two friends of mine that I thought would be interested in playing pro. Neither had ever played cards before(one was a professional chess player at one point in his life). One of the friends has had the same experience i did, and the other I am backing at the end of december in complete confidence that my money will be safe. IMO IQ and good analytical skills are very big factors in winning at online poker. Starting at low stakes, it is definately enough to keep you afloat until you develop the better understanding to move up(coupled with good guidance). I'm sure there are a handfull of people here at the forums that started as break even or slightly winning players before quickly becoming consistent winners.



[ QUOTE ]
Let me tell you how many of the people that play poker think they are +EV. 99%. Only 1% tell the truth to themself. Even the largest dumb ass in the world thinks he is smart. In fact every person I know thinks they are smart.

[/ QUOTE ]

This is largely an american additude. This ego is non existent in other places. People from developing nations are very practical and realistic. I have already mentioned this. It's just another reason why there will be more fish to sharks from countries like america. I talk about this because I am a second generation american and most of my family are from Mexico and south america. People from these place simply do not have these attitudes.

[ QUOTE ]
That being said, even being top 1% IQ is far from a lock that you are gonna be a winner. There are tons of factors here, intelligence is just one of many. IMO steam control and dicipline are just as important. And there are 10 or so other factors that need to be added in. There is no possible way of knowing if you are going to be a winner before you start playing and prove you are a winner.

[/ QUOTE ]

This is true, but I would be much more willing to back someone with a 140 IQ then your average joe. and I think top 1 percent is like 160 and up. I would back these guys no question.

[ QUOTE ]
I refuse to read all these posts. But here is why you are wrong.

It takes money to play poker. You need substantial capital for a bankroll and to buy computers and pay for your internet connection. Just this investment alone will hinder people in underdeveloped nations from playing.

[/ QUOTE ]



You should have read the whole thread as this was already addressed. Yes people in developing nations have a harder time getting computers then people from developed nations. Crayzee put up a good link explaining that. It is not impossible and many people in these nations already have computers. His link even explained how it is becoming easier to get computers for these people and that computer use in these places is going to take huge jumps in the coming years.

[ QUOTE ]
Now how did you learn to play poker? You probably bought a book and then lost a bunch of money honing your skills. I would venture to say that most players do not become profitable for several months. The people in these countries don't have the time or the money to invest in learning poker.

[/ QUOTE ]

This is exactly why fish in these places won't take up the game, and why the ones that do will quit very quickly. That leaves only sharks, and soon to be sharks to take up the game. The ops argument as I understood it was that the ratio from these countries will be different, and they will settle for lower wages then current professionals. This makes complete sense to me. The only real question is how likey is poker to become popular in developing nations. I think it is unlikely to happen in the near future, but it will eventually.

[CORed]

[ QUOTE ]
The biggest is the capital requirement. You don't go from dirt poor to DSL fired puter and BR.

There are many cultures where poker as a career would be unthinkable. Think Utah.

[/ QUOTE ]

You can't be serisous about Utah. Who do you think keeps the casinos in West Wendover and Mesquite in business?

[ QUOTE ]
I refuse to read all these posts. But here is why you are wrong.

It takes money to play poker. You need substantial capital for a bankroll and to buy computers and pay for your internet connection. Just this investment alone will hinder people in underdeveloped nations from playing.

Now how did you learn to play poker? You probably bought a book and then lost a bunch of money honing your skills. I would venture to say that most players do not become profitable for several months. The people in these countries don't have the time or the money to invest in learning poker.

[/ QUOTE ]

I did read a book, but i never lost money. I started with 50 and never had to redoposit. Its really not that dificult if you start at lower limits to get experience and play profitably.

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I refuse to read all these posts. But here is why you are wrong.

It takes money to play poker. You need substantial capital for a bankroll and to buy computers and pay for your internet connection. Just this investment alone will hinder people in underdeveloped nations from playing.

[/ QUOTE ]



You should have read the whole thread as this was already addressed. Yes people in developing nations have a harder time getting computers then people from developed nations. Crayzee put up a good link explaining that. It is not impossible and many people in these nations already have computers. His link even explained how it is becoming easier to get computers for these people and that computer use in these places is going to take huge jumps in the coming years.

[ QUOTE ]
Now how did you learn to play poker? You probably bought a book and then lost a bunch of money honing your skills. I would venture to say that most players do not become profitable for several months. The people in these countries don't have the time or the money to invest in learning poker.

[/ QUOTE ]

This is exactly why fish in these places won't take up the game, and why the ones that do will quit very quickly. That leaves only sharks, and soon to be sharks to take up the game. The ops argument as I understood it was that the ratio from these countries will be different, and they will settle for lower wages then current professionals. This makes complete sense to me. The only real question is how likey is poker to become popular in developing nations. I think it is unlikely to happen in the near future, but it will eventually.

[/ QUOTE ]

About the popularity. I travel to Argentina about 4 times a year and speak to a brazilian kid a lot. Poker is catching on down there. Getting popular among friends and more popular online too. It seems like to me they are about 2 years behind us (seems to to have explosive growth the year moneymaker won and it was televised on ESPN. And even if the game didnt' catch on, it certainly would among those who wanted to pursue it as a career. A job is a job.

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Correct, I think the good players from foreign countries will be more apt to play full time, as its advantageous vs their real world job. As more players enter, the tables will tighten and good players will be forced to play lower limits if they want to remain profitable, at which point it will not be favorable for many pros in the developed nations to play.

I would be fine playing US players only. I prefer to play with whichever players are most +EV for me. I see no moral issues. As such, i prefer to play with an average USA player over an average person from a third world country because the average USA player (per my assumptions) will have more disaposable income and tend to be less inteligent.

[/ QUOTE ]

Thanks for explaining. IMO, we're better off with a larger pool of players in general. Maybe you'd be happy if the poker sites provided a reliable geographic location of players, based on IP? Then you could choose tables with US based players...

I still think the full-time players will move up in limits as they improve. Most people want to make more money if they can. Plus the equilibrium of fish-sharks is not easy to predict. If the number of sharks increases, the relative number of fish drops, making the game less profitable for sharks, so some sharks will stop playing, which increases the ratio of fish... its a dynamic system, that doesn't necessarily have an equilibrium solution.

The restrictions you propose sound like a big gamble from EV perspective... What if they somehow stop Americans from accessing foreign poker sites (maybe with a china-style firewall?), and it turns out that the rest-of-the-world sites are more fishy than the US sites? US players will be pissed to be excluded... I guess the US casinos would be stoked though...

[/ QUOTE ]

First paragraph you rephrased my point. HOwever, the key is that it will be the USA player which will be encouraged to leave the table first as they will reach the point where they could earn more at a REAL job much more quickly than their Indian counterpart.

We are the wealthiest nation in the world. Dumb people have access to large ammounts of money. Hence, i would be fine playing US players only.

Not to mention we are extremely wastefull which i think translates to ones willingness to toss money away on the table.

[gabyyyyy]

This is one of the most retarded threads on 2+2.

Reasons people from 3rd world countries don't play poker online??

Well [censored] duh they dont have computers.

[ QUOTE ]
This is one of the most retarded threads on 2+2.

Reasons people from 3rd world countries don't play poker online??

Well [censored] duh they dont have computers.

[/ QUOTE ]

Gabby.. i imagine you are one of my fellow American's that i love to play poker with. /images/graemlins/smile.gif

[ QUOTE ]
This is one of the most retarded threads on 2+2.

Reasons people from 3rd world countries don't play poker online??

Well [censored] duh they dont have computers.

[/ QUOTE ]

lol, the avatar really helps this post.

[kapw7]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
This is one of the most retarded threads on 2+2.

Reasons people from 3rd world countries don't play poker online??

Well [censored] duh they dont have computers.

[/ QUOTE ]

Gabby.. i imagine you are one of my fellow American's that i love to play poker with. /images/graemlins/smile.gif

[/ QUOTE ]

Who's Gabby? I thought it was G. W. Bush. /images/graemlins/crazy.gif

[kapw7]

That's so scary. That means some of the ppl that left college to become online poker pros will have to collect garbage in the near future? That's so incredibly amusing.

[gabbahh]

You are now assuming that people from developing countries make great poker players.

[kapw7]

[ QUOTE ]
You are now assuming that people from developing countries make great poker players.

[/ QUOTE ]

They make great doctors, great lawyers, great scientists, great athletes, great chess players etc. What's so special with poker that is beyond their abilities?

[FromTheSouth]

Hi all. I am from Argentina. I haven't read all the posts here because I got tired at number 20. Despite that, I can talk from my experience. I play at the 200 NL and 400 NL. There are several factors that would influence in making the decision of making a career at poker. We can discuss it later if you want.
But I think in this discussion the the bottom line is: 2 OF 10 PEOPLE AT THIS BUSINESS is/are a winning player/s (meaning by this capable of a wealthy life wherever he/she lives).

[Rudbaeck]

I'm amazed that there aren't Chinese Poker Sweatshops already.

[ QUOTE ]
Hi all. I am from Argentina. I haven't read all the posts here because I got tired at number 20. Despite that, I can talk from my experience. I play at the 200 NL and 400 NL. There are several factors that would influence in making the decision of making a career at poker. We can discuss it later if you want.
But I think in this discussion the the bottom line is: 2 OF 10 PEOPLE AT THIS BUSINESS is/are a winning player/s (meaning by this capable of a wealthy life wherever he/she lives).

[/ QUOTE ]

I'll be in Santa Fe in 2 weeks.. can't wait!

The difference is that probably only 5% could afford a wealthy USA lifestlye via playing poker, while 15 to 25% coud afford a wealthy lifestyle in Argentina playing poker (if the current loosness remained). Hell, beating 2/4 Limit would be a great wage down there. That would be 57 pesos an hour or about about 113k a year. My friend worked her ass off for 6 years to get a masters in economics then went through a rather discriminating job interview process (going to phsycholigist, stating age, Pictures, marital status, blood profile???..etc) just so she could get a job maining 17k. However, she enjoys her work and has wealthy parents so she isn't that interested in poker. Your younger brother (still in college) is and I'm planning to teach him the game over christmas. He is a very bright kid as are his 3 siblings and I'm sure all four could beat limits up to 5/10.

[Degen]

interesting theory

as one who is currently living in thailand i can tell you that this is very unlikely to ever happen

the reasons it wont happen now...

1. Computer literacy
2. English language literacy
3. Expense of books
4. Speed of internet connections
5. Expense of computer equipment

and on top of that, at least in the asian countries...gambling is heavily frowned upon, these people would never do something, at least on a large scale, that they know their family would dissaprove of

study individualism/collectivism for more on this

[KaneKungFu123]

[ QUOTE ]

gambling is heavily frowned upon, these people would never do something, at least on a large scale, that they know their family would dissaprove of


[/ QUOTE ]

thai people are gambling maniacs and do alot of things their parents dissaprove of, however, I guess the smarter, more educated players who are more likley to be winners would steer clear of it.

[crazygoose]

IMO I definitely don't agree with the original post. I think you can think of online poker as a business supply and demand model quite simply. One assumption I am making is that there will be a more or less constant supply of fish. As more "good" players start playing, players that used to be marginally beating the game will notice they are losing and quit. Or pros will notice too large a drop in their winrate to continue playing and have it be worth their while. A shift will occur in the demand and an equilibrium point will be reestablished. Even if the supply of fish does change, a new equilibrium point will be established with fewer sharks. The weakness in this model is variance. It will take players a fairly long time to realize they aren't making as much which will create a pretty sibstantial timelag. Especially since it is almost impossible to tell over 20k hands if the conditions of the game have affected your winrate or not. I don't think online poker will stop becoming lucrative anytime soon.

[gabbahh]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
You are now assuming that people from developing countries make great poker players.

[/ QUOTE ]

They make great doctors, great lawyers, great scientists, great athletes, great chess players etc. What's so special with poker that is beyond their abilities?

[/ QUOTE ]
Americans make great doctors, great lawyers, great scientists, great athletes, great chess players etc. What's so special with poker that is beyond their abilities?
I have no idea.

[gabbahh]

[ QUOTE ]

and on top of that, at least in the asian countries...gambling is heavily frowned upon, these people would never do something, at least on a large scale, that they know their family would dissaprove of


[/ QUOTE ]
Except the chinese. Gambling equals luck and happiness in their culture. Chinese immigrants flock casino's in Holland. If China would become a democracy expect some crazy poker boom. Don't see that happening though.

[Voltron87]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]

and on top of that, at least in the asian countries...gambling is heavily frowned upon, these people would never do something, at least on a large scale, that they know their family would dissaprove of


[/ QUOTE ]
Except the chinese. Gambling equals luck and happiness in their culture. Chinese immigrants flock casino's in Holland. If China would become a democracy expect some crazy poker boom. Don't see that happening though.

[/ QUOTE ]

go check average household income in china

[pokerjoker]

[ QUOTE ]
Anyone into online MMORPGs has probably heard of Lineage 2 and overseas Adena Farming sweatshops. Companies set up labs with dozens of computers and pay people $.50 per hour to play the game and then sell the currency for a large profit. The economy of many foreign countries is so bad that $.50 per hour is actually above average.

There is really nothing (except maybe gambling laws) preventing them from setting up poker sweatshops.

[/ QUOTE ]

The possibility of them losing

[lefty rosen]

Also Utah has alot of escort services. The Olympic bribe controversy from 02' would tell us that.......

[lefty rosen]

There is a poster from Russia who posts here. He said if makes 300 US a month he is making more than the average Moscowvite. How hard is this if he just bonus hustles and plays break even poker?

[Rudbaeck]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Except the chinese. Gambling equals luck and happiness in their culture. Chinese immigrants flock casino's in Holland. If China would become a democracy expect some crazy poker boom. Don't see that happening though.

[/ QUOTE ]

go check average household income in china

[/ QUOTE ]

Well, with over one billion citizens there are enough above average households for a pretty solid poker boom.

hi guys I'm new here.

slightly off topic question for pondering. Do you think legalization of online gambling in the US would cause a huge increase in the fish population?

I'd say so, because don't most credit cards deny US citizens from making a deposit? meaning that anyone with a credit card could just pop in money and play it all away. (i could be wrong, do they allow straight credit card transactions here in the US? (visa, mastercard, etc) most fish don't want to go through the hassle of netteller or firepay do they?

soap box...not that I see this happening. the US has such a messed up moral system, a legalization bill would likely be shot down.

[ QUOTE ]

Do you think legalization of online gambling in the US would cause a huge increase in the fish population?



[/ QUOTE ]

I am hoping this happens in about 4 or 5 years. This will create an enormous boom in fish. There are so many people who are intimdated and avoid poker for the simple reason that the U.S. government frowns upon it. A US stamp of approval should do away with these attitudes and bring in a large amount of casual players.

[MyTurn2Raise]

approval of online gambling would bring regulation by the US gov't and you do not want the US gov't involved in anything

You think Party Poker is bad...wait 'til Uncle Sams hands find the till

ENJOY!

[ QUOTE ]
There is a poster from Russia who posts here. He said if makes 300 US a month he is making more than the average Moscowvite. How hard is this if he just bonus hustles and plays break even poker?

[/ QUOTE ]

Not hard at all. I think that most USA players don't realize how large the income differential is between industrialized and developing countries for individuals with similar skillsets.

Those who think you need a large capital base to cover up front losses are nuts. Start at micro limits and follow a rule.. say, move up when you hit 200BB at the next limit, down if you hit 150BB at current limit. It takes minimal restraint, might cost some EV but basically limits ruin to zero.

[Degen]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
There is a poster from Russia who posts here. He said if makes 300 US a month he is making more than the average Moscowvite. How hard is this if he just bonus hustles and plays break even poker?

[/ QUOTE ]

Not hard at all. I think that most USA players don't realize how large the income differential is between industrialized and developing countries for individuals with similar skillsets.

Those who think you need a large capital base to cover up front losses are nuts. Start at micro limits and follow a rule.. say, move up when you hit 200BB at the next limit, down if you hit 150BB at current limit. It takes minimal restraint, might cost some EV but basically limits ruin to zero.

[/ QUOTE ]

exactly why i moved to thailand

add to this that if you live abroad you don't pay taxes on your first 80k a year...ands it pretty much a no-brainer

average income here is in the ballpark of $0.50 an hour

[Mempho]

How does this make your individual situation worse? The amount of tax you owe will not change. Yes, it would create government red tape, but you will have to deal with no more than you do already....unless you fear a W2-G on tournament winnings or P&amp;L statments (which should make your job easier).

[twang]

[ QUOTE ]
My GF is a nurse in the U.S. and makes more money than her Dad who is a doctor in Peru.

[/ QUOTE ]

There was a thread recently where the OP said that Scandinavians were colluders because there were so many of them in the top places of Stars MTTs.

The reason scandinavians rock the poker world (%-wise) is because a high level of eduacation, sucky salaries and everyone and their polar bear being online makes poker a really good deal. Assuming the availability of internet access will rise in less developed countries, I can't see what would stop your father in law to double his paycheck by releasing overpaid americans from their $$$.

[dlk9s]

I hope my current online win rate won't persist, because it's not very good.

[twang]

[ QUOTE ]
Not hard at all. I think that most USA players don't realize how large the income differential is between industrialized and other industrialized countries for individuals with similar skillsets.

[/ QUOTE ]
FYP.

[Greg J]

[ QUOTE ]
Do you think legalization of online gambling in the US would cause a huge increase in the fish population?

[/ QUOTE ]
It would, IMO, lead to a golden age of online poker. The fish would literally jump into the boats. /images/graemlins/grin.gif

And keep in mind that technically the current illegatily/ambiguious legality of online poker is technically in violation of international trade agreements we have made (according to WTO rulings). The next presidential administration and congress might lead to the full legalization of online gambling. The gambling industry in this country is eager to cash in on the power of the internet. So don't be too pessimistic, but I don't see it happening until 2008 at the earliest.