For those of you that believe Poker is gambling. - Page 12

Vince Lepore · #**111** 04-02-2005, 07:35 PM

[ QUOTE ]
There are very many dopes who decide to make poker their full-time job. That's their profession, but they will lose money at it.

[/ QUOTE ]

You better hope that Sklansky doesn't read this. He will bar you from posting. Maybe, this will help. "ALL" professional poker players have a positive EV before they enter a poker game. That is, that they have demonstrated over a significant nnumber of hours that they have a positive EV. We may argue over what constitutes a significant nmber of hours at a given game and given limit but I like to use 3000 hours. 2000 might be enough. We could generalize and say a significant number of hours is a number that when a normal session or two, say 8 to 16 hours, is added to it, an insignificant difference will reult in the hourly rate. For example say you play 3000 hours and win 30,000 cookies. This equates to 10 cookies per hour. Now, if you play 16 more hours and don't win or lose your hourly cookies will equal 9.94 per hour or a reduction of a little more than 1/2 of one percent. That's not a very significant difference.

Beacause a player has a positive EV does not in and of itself make him a professional. If the only income he has is from Poker Playing and he needs that money to pay his bills then he is playing poker for a living and is a professional. Now, his expenses might be more than his income and he might go broke because of it but that does not make him a losing player or non professional. I would advise him to seek another profession though. One that pays the billd. But there is no way that a player playing at a specific limit for a significant number of hours that has negative results is a professional poker player. Regardless of how delusional he might be.

Vince

lastchance · #**112** 04-02-2005, 07:41 PM

I think you're using a different definition than what I'm using.

A poker professional is someone who does not anything to gain money besides play poker. Is this not a correct definition?

lehighguy · #**113** 04-02-2005, 07:59 PM

There is a huge difference. The casino has a zillion tables running all day. They have a huge bankroll to handle downswings if some lucky high roller comes through (casinos have gone out of business this way before).

You play what, 30 hands per hour live, maybe 200 over the internet. Your given weekly, even monthly results can vary wildly despite excellent play. When I go to the casino I know I'm "more likely" to walk away with more money, I'm not completely sure.

This is why we have bankroll management. When I sit down at $500NL or something I'm not worried. Why? Cause I can lose 2 or 3 buy-ins and I'm not to worried. However, even if I thought I could beat the 4k/8k NL game I wouldn't try because I could lose my house on one hand.

It is a simple risk reward system. Just as stocks with more risk offer greater return, higher stakes games over greater reward and greater risk.

I don't know anything about your poker career, but haven't you had a downswing before? How much money, how long? How long have yo been playing, how many hands?

Vince Lepore · #**114** 04-02-2005, 08:25 PM

There is only one reason to play poker: to win money! Well, some will definitely argue thiat. I am sorry but I will never accept your definition of a pofessional poker player. If someone claims to be a professional he best be able to point to something that proves it. An hourly rate over a significant period is the only way I know of that will do that.

Vince

Vince Lepore · #**115** 04-02-2005, 08:28 PM

[ QUOTE ]
I don't know anything about your poker career, but haven't you had a downswing before? How much money, how long? How long have yo been playing, how many hands?

[/ QUOTE ]

All of these things are taken into accout when you decide what limits that you can play. You are the CASINO when you play poker. Think that way and you will think like a winner.

Vince

ZeeJustin · #**116** 04-02-2005, 08:32 PM

[ QUOTE ]
If any of you believe that poker is a gambling game, given this definition, and treat it as such, please play at my table.

[/ QUOTE ]

When you make up a crazy definition like this, you really fail to prove your point. By any standard definition, you would be flat out wrong.

lastchance · #**117** 04-02-2005, 08:42 PM

So, by definition, a poker professional MUST have a significant hourly rate? And gambling must mean that your bets are -EV?

o0.

Vince Lepore · #**118** 04-02-2005, 08:48 PM

[ QUOTE ]
By any standard definition, you would be flat out wrong.

[/ QUOTE ]

I found this definition on an investment firms website. Tell them they're wrong.

Vince

Blankstare · #**119** 04-02-2005, 09:27 PM

3 questions...

1.) If poker isn't gambling then why is it played at casinos?

2) If being a professional means you are successful, why are there so many struggling professional actors, musicians and artists?

3) Is this a serious thread or some sort of really slippery April fools joke?

lehighguy · #**120** 04-02-2005, 09:53 PM

You didn't really answer my question at all.

If you were thinking about these things, then you wouldn't make a statement like poker isn't gambling. Of course its gambling. Controlled predictable gambling perhaps, but still gambling.