Comment on Miller's Editorial

[Mason Malmuth]

Hi Everyone:

In my private conversations the past few years I have mentioned that Two Plus Two'ers were slowly beginning to dominate poker. By this I mean that they will make up a large number of the best players regardless of the type of poker or stakes being played. This includes tournaments as well as the cash games, and Internet play as well as B&M. Ed's editorial is another bit of evidence that this is now happening.

Of course our books and this site have a lot to do with it, but another aspect of the type of people attracted to our stuff is that they are willing to work hard on their games. So Two Plus Two can't take all the credit, just a portion of it.

Anyway, as time goes on, we'll do our best to see that this trend continues.

Best wishes,
Mason

[tipperdog]

I sense gross exaggeration in Ed's note, and I would invite you and him to comment on these passages:

[ QUOTE ]

"I hear story after story that all go something like:

"I was a struggling $2-$4 player with a $2,000 bankroll a year and a half ago. Then [I moved up...(deletia)... and now my] main game is in the $100-$200 to $300-$600 range and my bankroll is $300,000"


[/ QUOTE ]

I moved from 2-4 to 100-200+ and banked $298,000 in a year and a half?! Ed says that he hears "story after story" like this, implying MANY stories (50-100?). I believe such a rapid rise is highly improbable. It's certainly unlikely to happen many times over.

[ QUOTE ]

[Years ago, David wrote that earning $50,000 a year from poker] "should be no big deal." Now it seems like maybe that number should be more like $200,000.


[/ QUOTE ]

A 30/60 player earning 1.5BBs/hr playing 40 hours/wk, 50 weeks per year would not earn $200K, and I suspect that VERY few 30/60 players can sustain that win rate over such a grueling schedule. I believe that earning $200K/yr would place you among the very top echelon of professional players--far from "no big deal" earnings.

I fear that advancing these earn/win rates sets up unrealistic expectations for the many aspiring pros that read these boards.

Ed/Mason, in the clear light of day, don't you think that you may have exaggerated just a bit?

As a fellow member of the dog-themed name contingent, I felt I should be the first to ask: You've never heard of multi-tabling?

[Ed Miller]

To be sure, these are not "run of the mill" results. These are the results of the most successful 2+2ers. But there are a lot of people who have stories like this, and if you doubt it, I encourage you to read the Mid- and High-Stakes forum for a couple of weeks.

Also, your calculation is for live play. Banking $200k+ a year playing live would indeed put you very near the top. But doing so online is not entirely remarkable.

So yes, I was exaggerating a bit when I said perhaps $200k/a year should be the new "no big deal." But otherwise, I'm telling true stories (that aren't being told outside 2+2) of a number of players.

[12AX7]

Hi Ed,
I've read your book. I still have bad results.

How about this challenge. You and 2+2 personally train me. I'll pay you a percentage of my 200K a year for the rest of my playing life.


[ QUOTE ]
To be sure, these are not "run of the mill" results. These are the results of the most successful 2+2ers. But there are a lot of people who have stories like this, and if you doubt it, I encourage you to read the Mid- and High-Stakes forum for a couple of weeks.

Also, your calculation is for live play. Banking $200k+ a year playing live would indeed put you very near the top. But doing so online is not entirely remarkable.

So yes, I was exaggerating a bit when I said perhaps $200k/a year should be the new "no big deal." But otherwise, I'm telling true stories (that aren't being told outside 2+2) of a number of players.

[/ QUOTE ]

[ QUOTE ]
So yes, I was exaggerating a bit when I said perhaps $200k/a year should be the new "no big deal." But otherwise, I'm telling true stories (that aren't being told outside 2+2) of a number of players.

[/ QUOTE ]

It may have been an exaggeration, but to me it seemed like a writing style to get the point across. Obviously, $200k is a good "earn" that many 2+2ers don't make.

Maybe some dumb college kid reading the editiorial will get googly-eyed.

[kahntrutahn]

[ QUOTE ]
Hi Ed,
I've read your book. I still have bad results.

How about this challenge. You and 2+2 personally train me. I'll pay you a percentage of my 200K a year for the rest of my playing life.


[/ QUOTE ]

If there were some way to hold you to this, I'd do it [img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img] Alas, any way I could come up with, I find an easy way to get out of for an unscrupulous person (not saying you are!).

You could make only 1.0BBs per Hour AND play only 4 hours a day...
The trick is to 4 table it!

I don't do it, but I have 4 tabled $2/4 and absolutely crushed the heck out of it on all 4 tables at once, so I see how an expert player could
do the same at 30/60, providing the spread of games was large enough (allowing for the expert to "select" the 4 best 30/60 games to play in...).

My goal is to be there in a couple months time...I only lack the bankroll and experience (of playing that high/dealing with the swings and not going nuts/pulling my hair out...)

Joe M.

OH, and if said player wins (or places top 5 in 1 or 2 or several) just 1 decent sized Multi-table in that year, just 1! Then that could account for
a HUGE boost to their winnings...(provided they are not dumping lots of cash buying into and never cashing in these tournaments! lol).

[tipperdog]

This is what I'm talking about. Ilovebadbeats, I wish you the very best. But know that your goals seem very farfetched. I'm quite sure that you could crush the 2/4 tables, but you'll find that the 30/60s are a bit different.

I've played 30/60 before and I know very well that it's a "bit different." lol

I also know that this it is a beatable game and there are ppl. that beat it
for more than 1BB per hour...and they don't have to play 40 hours a week to make
large sums of money...I don't do it - I don't have the proper bankroll and I
probably wouldn't be able to handle the swings there (that you'd be sure to encounter with sustained play at that limit)(without letting my emotions take over, etc.)

Thank you for your encouragement. And for your warning...I know that for every guy that can sustain a good win rate there there are countless
others who have busted out or are simply -EV players there...The trick is to
be in that top tier who can hack it...and to not lose your life savings trying to
find out whether you are good enough or not. lol