Why Current Online Win Rates Won't Persist

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". [img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img]

[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...... [img]/images/graemlins/grin.gif[/img] [img]/images/graemlins/blush.gif[/img] [img]/images/graemlins/cool.gif[/img]

[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?