My typical day

I haven't read every post, but here's my take on the situation.

Bring your child to day care 2 days per week. My daughter is 4 in preschool and she really looks forward to going. I think part of the reason she likes it so much is because it's not every day.

Schedule more of your poker time for the night hours. This should probably increase your general winrate. Also when comparing poker winnings to day care cost you should obviously benifit here as well because you won't be paying so much. The key to this idea is if you are able to schedule in more night time playing comfortably, without neglecting hubby too much. During the days the child is at home with you, take a nap with him/her at naptime. It will help get you through some of the later night playing. A 2 hour nap could get you through 3-4 hours of prime time night games reasonably.

I don't think you're wasting your life. You may have a little guilt running through you because of the situation. If you can pull off the above idea succesfully,I think you'll feel a lot better about your circumstance.

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
But what if our poor player is so bad that there are no + or neutral EV 5-10 (let's say) games for him? What should he do? Drop down a level or two, of course! But he doesn't. If he did, he would no longer be a losing 5-10 player, but an even or winning player at some lower level. That's not who we are talking about.

Why doesn't he move down? Because the 3-6 game doesn't have high enough stakes to get him excited. So he stays in a -EV game despite the fact that he is destined to lose in it. He is choosing a -EV game because he wants excitement. In other words, he is, consciously or unconsciously, buying entertainment.

He had a choice to move to a + or neutral EV game, and he chose not to. He must now accept the consequences of that choice.


[/ QUOTE ]

I'm very pressed for time here, so unfortunately I can't give this debate the time that it deserves.

My reaction, though, is that there is no reason why the higher stakes game has to be -EV. Were there no pros, the fish would simply inhabit every level, their choice depending on their bankroll. Sure, it's exciting to play higher stakes. But you don't need to sacrifice expectation to play higher stakes, or at least, not by definition. To continue the casino analogy, the EV of a roulette table is the same whether you're playing at the $5 or the $100 tables. The excitement comes from moving up to stakes that are meaningful for the bettor, but the casino doesn't start paying out 30-1 on the numbers just because the stakes are higher, as if that's the higher stakes "fee" gamblers have to pay.

That the higher stakes games are -EV is not what makes the game exciting, it's an unfortunate trade-off for the excitement that the fish would rather do without. It's not "exciting" to be playing against better players: some TAG who lurks to your left, folds for 20 hands, raises to isolate you, and then grinds you down with aggressive play doesn't make the game fun. The stakes can be fun, but they will be considerably more fun if everyone is there to gamble and enjoy themselves. Someone who is there to suck up their money diminishes the experience considerably.

[/ QUOTE ]

The main value of multi-tabling pros is not to offer entertainment, but to increase the game liquidity and significantly shorten the wait time for a game, especially at the higher level. without the pros, the fish may need to wait 15-20 minutes before a 200+15 SNG table can fill up. in the off-peak hours, a fish may not even be able to find a game. this is why a poker site would encourage people multi-tabling even though the people running the poker site know almost all the multi-tabling people are sharks.
it is similar to the stock market, you can trade your stock at anytime because there are lots of day traders who provide the market liquidity and on average they make money off you.

[FlFishOn]

" Out of a lot of "random strangers" the laws of probability suggest that some should be rather adept at taking care of children. "

Some will also be pedophiles.

Enjoy!

[FlFishOn]

No one with day care raised children can easily admit they may have chosen poorly. It's human nature to refuse to admit you may have taken the selfish path at the expense of your children.

[Innocentius]

[ QUOTE ]
" Out of a lot of "random strangers" the laws of probability suggest that some should be rather adept at taking care of children. "

Some will also be pedophiles.

Enjoy!

[/ QUOTE ]

This is part of the reason why I suggested doing some research before you select a day care center...

[Innocentius]

[ QUOTE ]
No one with day care raised children can easily admit they may have chosen poorly. It's human nature to refuse to admit you may have taken the selfish path at the expense of your children.

[/ QUOTE ]

And, by the same reasoning, the same goes for those who raise their children at home.

[fallout1234]

Thank you, I really appreciate it.

Not to try to defend myself from all the posts against my decision, but I need to point out my baby is quite happy in daycare. I care about him enjoying his life.

I put a lot of pressure on myself to earn enough money each month to make me feel I am on the right path. My husband has always suggested I don't have to care so much about how much I earn.

[MrBlueNose]

Forget everything about daycare, how much you earn etc, the key thing from your first post is:

[ QUOTE ]
Whenever I have a losing streak I want to start looking for a job

[/ QUOTE ]

This is a horrendous attitude to have, and you should quit playing poker on a serious level before you blow all your money. You don't have the mental ability to play.

[jrz1972]

[ QUOTE ]
No one with day care raised children can easily admit they may have chosen poorly. It's human nature to refuse to admit you may have taken the selfish path at the expense of your children.

[/ QUOTE ]

The problem with arguments like these is that they cut both ways. I could just as easily turn around and argue that stay-at-home parents can't easily admit that they made a mistake in setting their children behind academically. But that argument would be unfair since it automatically assumes that people who happen to disagree with me are incapable of objective, rational thought.

Generally, trying to psycho-analyze people who disagree with you just ends up making you look like a dick while simultaneously undercutting your credibility.

[Dennisa]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
LOL, i just reread the thread and noticed only one person wasn't living in 1950 still. Children that are put in daycare between the ages of 3 and 5 develop better reading skills, speech skills, social skills, and are more ready to adapt to changing social environments. There are always crack house day cares, and there are always daycares that do fabulous things for children. The fact that a child is alowed to interact with other children on a daily basis in an academic environment is very positive. You can't reproduce this environment through networking with other parents. Anyone with kids who have them as their "top priority" should consider a good day care if it is affordable. I have two kids and have a good network of parents. We all put our kids in daycare, even though most of us don't need to.

[/ QUOTE ]

IMO most day care places are zoos. They are not teaching kids values and dicipline. I dont ship my kid off to some random stranger if she can be with me. Call me crazy but I trust myself to give her the proper direction a lot more than a random day care worker.

[/ QUOTE ]

I think most parents agree that "shipping" children off to "random strangers" isn't a very good idea. Therefore, I'm not going to call you crazy. However, you could do some research, visit a couple of different day care centers, and talk to the people working there. Find out what education they have, what kind of education and environment they offer for the children, and then decide which day care center to "ship" your kids off to. Out of a lot of "random strangers" the laws of probability suggest that some should be rather adept at taking care of children. Some of them may even be better at it than you.

[/ QUOTE ]


I have a boy 12 and girl 9. Try getting a letter from the State of Colorado saying that one of the sons of you daycare provider is being investigated for Child Molesting. I received this letter about my daughters daycare. She was 3 months when she was at this daycare. I doubt if anything happened, and she was long out of the site as my wife and I decided to live on one income and no kids in daycare when she was 6 months old. A parent or grandparent will care for a child much better than an institution.

We did put our children into a preschool program for about 15 hrs per week. The preschool was fine, religious based and operated 9 months out of the year.

But to say warehousing kids at a daycare 40 hrs is better than having a parent bring up a kids is insane. Next thing you will say is single parents familys are just as good as dual parent familys.