Ed Miller is a Failure as a Poker Pro - Page 3

flair1239 · #21 03-07-2005, 02:03 PM

Despite the slightly disrespectful tone of the OP; he has a point.

In some of 2+2's literatue, I forget where. They (S+M) say that one of the reason's their advice is so respected, is that they make a significant portion of their income from gambling.

So Ed not doing this, does go against the grain of their promotion literature. Not that it make a difference as to evaluating the content of the books though.

Bjorn · #22 03-07-2005, 02:32 PM

[ QUOTE ]

In some of 2+2's literatue, I forget where. They (S+M) say that one of the reason's their advice is so respected, is that they make a significant portion of their income from gambling.

[/ QUOTE ]

You can make a significant portion of your income from gambling without beeing a Proffessional player.

As a matter of fact I'd say that the wording rather sugests that they do not make ALL or even a majority of their cash at the tables.

If someone makes $30k a year at his day job and then $10k a year playing poker 10h/week those $10k are probably not insignificant.

/Bjorn

Ed Miller · #23 03-08-2005, 02:23 PM

[ QUOTE ]
In some of 2+2's literatue, I forget where. They (S+M) say that one of the reason's their advice is so respected, is that they make a significant portion of their income from gambling.

So Ed not doing this, does go against the grain of their promotion literature. Not that it make a difference as to evaluating the content of the books though.

[/ QUOTE ]

Well, that statement isn't true for David or Mason anymore either. They make so much money selling books now that it's hard to call their poker income "significant" in comparison.

I wasn't going to answer this thread, but since I seem to be here anyway, I will. I played $10-$20 to $30-$60 live for a living for a little over a year. I decided to start writing books because 1) I really enjoy teaching, and 2) I thought it would make me a bigger, more reliable income.

It worked out in both ways. I'm much happier now that I write full-time and play part-time.

UTGunner · #24 03-08-2005, 03:03 PM

I appreciate the reply.

I started this thread because I stumbled on that old post of yours in the Mid-High forum and figured a lot of people missed it. The issue of the importance of enjoyment while being a poker pro probably fits better in the Psych forum but more people would find the thread here. Having "Ed Miller" in the title would get more people to click on the thread.

In other words, I used you, Ed, for publicity purposes to remind people that playing poker for a living is not easy, especially psychologically, and that even the real pros are not into playing long days, 24/7 just to maximize the number of dollars earned.

Now I can quit sermonizing and go back to my lurking ways on 2+2. [img]/images/graemlins/cool.gif[/img]

SenecaJim · #25 03-08-2005, 03:30 PM

Ed,
If it's not too personal a question, could you share what your hourly rate was for that year? (for time playing, I know there must be a lot of down time if you are going several days a week looking for right game, waiting lists, etc.)

In fact, if you don't mind, how much down time would you say is average for a day or evening at the casino ?

MrGrob · #26 03-10-2005, 12:50 PM

Their was a chess player, Gatta Kamsky or Vladimir Kramnik (I think it was Kamsky), that gave up a life in chess to go be a doctor or something. Very few make it big in chess, but when they do, they can make it pretty well.

I do not believe that Ed is a failure or anything of the sort. Poker sucks. As a game, it lets the worse players win. You have to be of a certain mindset to be able to handle the bs you see over and over, and at the same time, realize that you could be doing something much more meaningful. I am playing poker almost full time now, but I would rather be doing a million other things for the same amount of cash.

If Ed wants to do something else, so what. His book is good, and he has proven that he can play too (something that not every good teacher can say in other sports). What more do you guys want? Just cause you can do something, and do it well, does not mean you have to. I wanted to be a pro bowler when I was younger. I had pros and their wives asking who I was when I was 10, as I had an awsome form and carried a high average (something that was more meaningful back then, as now, you can buy-a-score with all the balls out there). Today, I am thankful that fate took me in a totally different direction. Bowling sucks. It is now way too easy, and the scores are meaningless. The fact that I am a fat ars and can shot 200+ in any house at just about any time (and I only own ONE ball) shows just how retarded this sport has become. If I had writen a book, then gone pro, you can bet that I would have quit this sport as Ed did (well, maybe, as at least the pros bowl on conditions that are harder with heavier pins).

PS: They can fix bowling by adding magnesium pins (or even just heavier bottom weighted pins) and taking away the crap load of equipment so people cannot buy-a-score at thier local pro shop.

sammy_g · #27 03-10-2005, 01:08 PM

[ QUOTE ]
Their was a chess player, Gatta Kamsky or Vladimir Kramnik (I think it was Kamsky), that gave up a life in chess to go be a doctor or something. Very few make it big in chess, but when they do, they can make it pretty well.

[/ QUOTE ]
It was Kamsky. Last I played on the Internet Chess Club, he would play blitz matches against the strongest computers, all the while kibitzing to the crowd. He is a great guy and a phenominal chess player.