So my brother wants to play poker full-time

[korme]

My brother is 22, works with my dad, smart kid. Doesn't want to go back to school (went two years), and doesn't really know what he wants to do. But he's damn good at poker. He has gone to the casinos like 15 times and he told me there hasn't been one time when he walked away losing money. This past week he went 3 days, and walked away with $1000 after starting with $200 on the first day.

So he told me he is considering putting a certain amount of money away and to start going to the casinos every day for a year playing $5/$10 tables, and to see what kind of bank he can earn.

I am actually am all for him doing it. Yeah, it's very risky, but at the same time he's a pretty good player and he hasn't lost yet, and he's young, so if it doesn't work out he has plenty of time to do something else.

What do you guys think? Stupid?

[rkmsuf]

If you can do it, go for it.

If he can go through that kind of grind and stay on an even keel that is.

If he's starting with 200 and play 5/10 he is severely underfunded though for sustained play.

[MacroGuru]

Well, my 3 of my brothers friends walked away from their jobs to play poker online full-time.

But the difference here is they have the money to bankroll themselves for quite a while. Basically, Engineer, Lawyer, and Software Developer. However, they have been bringing down close to 15K each, monthly, from playing online and preying on the fish out there.

[KevinNU7]

My advice would be to enter the casino everyday with a set amount of money (maybe $100) and only allow yourself to lose that set amount of money each day.

[rkmsuf]

Also, make him aware he will have losing days/weeks. It will happen no matter how good you think you are.

[Hammer755]

I would tell him to finish school, then go the poker route if he still wants to. At that point, if he can't make a decent living player cards, he still has a degree to fall back on. From my experience, 99% of people who 'take a break' as an undergrad never go back to college.

[Anthony]

i think it's stupid shorty. too much of a risk to be worth it, and if/when he fails he'll have lost a year of work experience that would have gone a lot further towards helping him out in whatever career he chooses. you can't necessarily put "full time poker player" on your resume, dig?

there are no easy outs in life man. no one wants to go to school and no one sure as hell wants to work, so if your brother can find a way to avoid both without having to risk losing money to people like indorsoccersim's friends who prey on people like your brother who think they know what they're doing tell him to let me know.

[GoldenEagle]

I think he has to play online as well. It is just too profitable not to do so.

Translation for you 2+2ers
"The internet is +EV."

[rkmsuf]

I'm hesitant to endorse this based on the tone of "hey, I never lose when I go." That's a recipe for something bad to happen or an unrealistic view of the game.

Now if he bankrolls himself adequately, is sound fundamentally in his play, is patient, even tempered and has the means I say give it a shot.

Any other delusional thoughts I'd say no way.

GE - good point on the internet. It's definately the way to go.

[korme]

He plays on Absolute like every day when he gets home from work. He's a good player, he knows all the odds to most hands, all his outs, never plays on tilt, etc.. very controlled.

But I did take $10 off him the other night in 2 hands. Boo-yay, I could do this!

[rkmsuf]

You should put him to the test to see if he has what it takes under pressure. You and him, heads up. Loser gets teabagged.

[gottimd]

I'd like to poker full time.

[rkmsuf]

Originally Posted by gottimd

I'd like to poker full time.

You must pass the shorty teabag match first.

[gottimd]

I may have to get back to you on that, my nuts are handcuffed.

[sabotai]

If I remember what Vegas Vic (our resident pro poker player) said once, the action at tables during the week in a casino are a fraction of what they are during the weekend. I'm pretty sure VV said that he plays at the casino during the weekends, and spends his weekdays playing online. I would suggest your brother do the same.

[QuikSand]

I don't claim to know you, your brother, or anyone else involved.

Originally Posted by Shorty3281

He has gone to the casinos like 15 times and he told me there hasn't been one time when he walked away losing money.

But I do know that there are a lot more people who tell people about how they win with mind-boggling regularity than there are people who actually do so.

There is a very common mentality among gamblers that they talk more about their wins than their losses. No shock. If he does it when he's bragging to you, it's one thing. If he does it to himself when he should be making reasoned decisions about his own skills and results - then he's making a big mistake in contemplating such a commitment.


With that, assuming he really does have this game beat and has a significant positive expectation while playing (which certainly may be true, though 15 visits anywhere don't prove it by any stretch of the imagination):

If I were in your brother's situation, I would keep on doing more or less what I'm doing - but just incrementally move the mix a little more towards poker as an income source. If he could keep working, making enough to cover his essentials, and then play either online or at casinos to supplement that income -- that sounds more reasonable that diving in 100%.

And the younger, the better, agreed.

[korme]

Originally Posted by QuikSand

I don't claim to know you, your brother, or anyone else involved.



But I do know that there are a lot more people who tell people about how they win with mind-boggling regularity than there are people who actually do so.

There is a very common mentality among gamblers that they talk more about their wins than their losses. No shock. If he does it when he's bragging to you, it's one thing. If he does it to himself when he should be making reasoned decisions about his own skills and results - then he's making a big mistake in contemplating such a commitment.


With that, assuming he really does have this game beat and has a significant positive expectation while playing (which certainly may be true, though 15 visits anywhere don't prove it by any stretch of the imagination):

If I were in your brother's situation, I would keep on doing more or less what I'm doing - but just incrementally move the mix a little more towards poker as an income source. If he could keep working, making enough to cover his essentials, and then play either online or at casinos to supplement that income -- that sounds more reasonable that diving in 100%.

And the younger, the better, agreed.

My brother is a quiet, modest guy. I talk to him every day, whenever he gets back from a casino, I ask him how he did. If he lost money, he'd tell me. He's lost before, online, live with me, it just hasn't happened yet at the casinos. So I don't think he's feeding me any BS.

But thanks for the opinion, I tend to agree that since he is working and still finds time to play the casinos, he should just keep doing what he's doing.

[Galaxy]

Just make sure he claims his winnings when tax time comes.

[MO542]

Originally Posted by Shorty3281

My brother is 22, works with my dad, smart kid. Doesn't want to go back to school (went two years), and doesn't really know what he wants to do. But he's damn good at poker. He has gone to the casinos like 15 times and he told me there hasn't been one time when he walked away losing money. This past week he went 3 days, and walked away with $1000 after starting with $200 on the first day.

So he told me he is considering putting a certain amount of money away and to start going to the casinos every day for a year playing $5/$10 tables, and to see what kind of bank he can earn.

I am actually am all for him doing it. Yeah, it's very risky, but at the same time he's a pretty good player and he hasn't lost yet, and he's young, so if it doesn't work out he has plenty of time to do something else.

What do you guys think? Stupid?

I play poker part time, programmer by day. A couple things:

1) If he was playing with $200, then I would say that he was playing lower stakes, which means that he was probably playing against very bad players.

2) The competition is much harder at the 5/10 games, i.e. making 4BB/HR is doing very well. The games during the week will be much harder because most of the players are professionals / very good players; at the 5/10.

3) He needs to learn bankroll management. You cannot be successful without it.

4) How experienced is he? Has he gone through bad swings? Does he know how to deal with bad swings?

5) Is he ready for the hours? The best time to play is weekends / nights because that’s when the bad players are out. Is he willing to sacrifice some of his social life for poker?

He needs to do a lot of research before he thinks about playing for a living. There is a lot more to being a professional than just being a good poker player.

[lynchjm24]

What does one do when the poker fad dies out and they are 30 and that's the only experience they have?

[Glengoyne]

Originally Posted by lynchjm24

What does one do when the poker fad dies out and they are 30 and that's the only experience they have?

Sales?

[Raven]

He is 22. I don't think it's much different than taking a summer to live down the beach, or moving away somewhere just to "try something different". He has the rest of his life to work, and should take advantage of being young while he still can.

But, he should also make sure he doesn't give up everything to try this out. He should always be working on something else on the side. Whether that's a full time job, a part time job, or just going to school part time. He should always have a backup plan, and not wait until this fails before he gets that backup plan in motion.

[sabotai]

My other advice is for him to learn other forms of poker as well (to maximize his ability). I've found that the vast majority of players have no ability at playing Hi/Lo games. I play a lot of Stud Hi/Lo ring tables as a result. I can't tell you how many people out there don't know how to play for Lo or spot when someone is doing it. I've grabbed a ton of half pots because of it.

[korme]

Originally Posted by MO542

I play poker part time, programmer by day. A couple things:

1) If he was playing with $200, then I would say that he was playing lower stakes, which means that he was probably playing against very bad players.

2) The competition is much harder at the 5/10 games, i.e. making 4BB/HR is doing very well. The games during the week will be much harder because most of the players are professionals / very good players; at the 5/10.

Well, uhh, when he played with $200.. he only played 5/10. It won't be a step up for him. Heh, I guess this is a good thing since you thought he was making OK bank at lower stakes.

[RPI-Fan]

Originally Posted by Shorty3281

Well, uhh, when he played with $200.. he only played 5/10. It won't be a step up for him. Heh, I guess this is a good thing since you thought he was making OK bank at lower stakes.

Whether or not he is a good player, he is EXTREMELY lucky to have never lost $200 playing 5/10 (if he's played 15 times). The odds of not losing a 20BB bankroll are 15 sessions is close to statistically impossible.

[MO542]

Originally Posted by Shorty3281

Well, uhh, when he played with $200.. he only played 5/10. It won't be a step up for him. Heh, I guess this is a good thing since you thought he was making OK bank at lower stakes.

Well $200 is not enough to cover the 5/10 games. You can buy in with that amount but I really think you have to be lucky to be effective with 20BB at a ring game. Being successful (money wise) in poker is a lot more than just having the talent to play well.

[Flasch186]

Im done playing poker. I read an article about a guy who sets up bogus accounts, bots out, and kills people over and over ith new names every week. Usually I dont believe that stuff is so widespread eventhough he said it is but the kicker was when the big poker sites said that they try to catch these people but they simply cant stay on top of all of them all the time!!! The guy said his accounts will sometimes last for months before being caught. So Im sticking with live play from here on out, where I usually fair well.

[Calis]

bots out?

[QuikSand]

Originally Posted by Flasch186

Im done playing poker. I read an article about a guy who sets up bogus accounts, bots out, and kills people over and over ith new names every week. Usually I dont believe that stuff is so widespread eventhough he said it is but the kicker was when the big poker sites said that they try to catch these people but they simply cant stay on top of all of them all the time!!! The guy said his accounts will sometimes last for months before being caught. So Im sticking with live play from here on out, where I usually fair well.

I hear this argument from time to time.

Let's say that it's true. So what?

If I'm winning 2BB/hour playing at a give site, at a give level -- why would I care whether my opponents are robots or people? I am beating the game. I don't care if people are on phones with each other, if they are using patern maps (*ducks*) or using superbots to play for them 24 hours a day -- if I am winning where I play, why should those specifics matter to me?

Sure, if I suspect a certain player of cheating, or something of that sort, I'd prefer to avoid his table -- but why would I quit online poker?

There are a lot of people who are convinced they are good at poker, and who can't manage to beat the online games. They frequently resort to the "it's rigged" variety of arguments to explain why they aren't playing any more. That's fine... but there's a deep logical flaw there.


Not to single you out Flasch - I wich you luck in whatever you decide to pursue. I just have an issue with this general argument, it doesn't hold water to me.

[Samdari]

Originally Posted by KevinNU7

My advice would be to enter the casino everyday with a set amount of money (maybe $100) and only allow yourself to lose that set amount of money each day.

That is good advice for the casual gambler, horrible advice to one looking to make a sustained income over time.

[QuikSand]

Originally Posted by Samdari

That is good advice for the casual gambler, horrible advice to one looking to make a sustained income over time.

Agreed, at least on the latter part.

[Flasch186]

Originally Posted by QuikSand

I hear this argument from time to time.

Let's say that it's true. So what?

If I'm winning 2BB/hour playing at a give site, at a give level -- why would I care whether my opponents are robots or people? I am beating the game. I don't care if people are on phones with each other, if they are using patern maps (*ducks*) or using superbots to play for them 24 hours a day -- if I am winning where I play, why should those specifics matter to me?

Sure, if I suspect a certain player of cheating, or something of that sort, I'd prefer to avoid his table -- but why would I quit online poker?

There are a lot of people who are convinced they are good at poker, and who can't manage to beat the online games. They frequently resort to the "it's rigged" variety of arguments to explain why they aren't playing any more. That's fine... but there's a deep logical flaw there.


Not to single you out Flasch - I wich you luck in whatever you decide to pursue. I just have an issue with this general argument, it doesn't hold water to me.

no offense taken, Im up overall for the last year but the swings have been enormous and I dont miss not playing at all. BUT the key for me is that I like to fish too, who doesnt? But if a bot is playing, and in this case the sites admitted that they are out there, and the bots own 5 out of the 9 seats, the odds of me making a odds mistake is greater than theirs...so Im at a disadvantage from the start. I dont like that one bit. Im not crying or whining Im just saying Id rather play live since I can guarantee that it is my brain versus theirs.

[Samdari]

Originally Posted by Flasch186

Im done playing poker. I read an article about a guy who sets up bogus accounts, bots out, and kills people over and over ith new names every week. Usually I dont believe that stuff is so widespread eventhough he said it is but the kicker was when the big poker sites said that they try to catch these people but they simply cant stay on top of all of them all the time!!! The guy said his accounts will sometimes last for months before being caught. So Im sticking with live play from here on out, where I usually fair well.

Well, bots will generally kill the stupid, loose folks out there who want to be Gus Hansen on every hand.

So, if you're not one of them, bots are no worse than playing against an above average player.

[QuikSand]

If there's any endeavor that really, really calls for cold, clinical thinking -- it's the assessment of long term gambling. It's all about a precise understanding of expected value, right? That's why I have a greivance with this thinking:

Originally Posted by Flasch186

But if a bot is playing, and in this case the sites admitted that they are out there, and the bots own 5 out of the 9 seats, the odds of me making a odds mistake is greater than theirs...so Im at a disadvantage from the start. I dont like that one bit. Im not crying or whining Im just saying Id rather play live since I can guarantee that it is my brain versus theirs.

This is a game of numbers. Period. Unelss you are playing for recreational purposes (which is fine) your objective is to earn money. And if so, then the question -- the only question -- is "what is my expected return from playing this game." (Yes, there are matters of variability and so forth, but they are not germane here)

All the talk about bots and so forth is just smoke. If you are capable of beating the game, the game is good. If it ceases to be beatable for you (due to bots or any other reason) then change your strategy. But if you are good enough to beat the game at a level you find acceptable -- the rest of the story just doesn't matter.

You are right to seek out advantages and avoid disadvantages -- and if the real reason you don't want to play online any more is really that you don't enjoy it, or you don't like the wild swings, then that's prefectly sound and consistent reasoning. But don't blame it on bots, no matter how much of a factor they may be.

[Calis]

I guess I didn't realize bots were that prevalent online now.

Not to mention worth a damn.

[Gary Gorski]

Im in the camp too of saying big deal about bots. Its not like the bot can change the cards its dealt. Even if its programmed to make the statistically correct play every time there is nothing that is preventing you from making the statistically correct play each time as well. However if you are playing against a bot that always makes the statistically correct play then screw with the statistics for the hand - you as a human have the ability to change your game whereas the bot is going to play how its programmed.

Plus its not like there are bots on every table of every site. If you feel one site has too many then play a different one or a different table. I would think in an online setting the concern would be whether or not the cards are coming out randomly as opposed to whether or not its a human opponent.

[Samdari]

Originally Posted by Gary Gorski

Im in the camp too of saying big deal about bots. Its not like the bot can change the cards its dealt. Even if its programmed to make the statistically correct play every time there is nothing that is preventing you from making the statistically correct play each time as well. However if you are playing against a bot that always makes the statistically correct play then screw with the statistics for the hand - you as a human have the ability to change your game whereas the bot is going to play how its programmed.

Plus its not like there are bots on every table of every site. If you feel one site has too many then play a different one or a different table. I would think in an online setting the concern would be whether or not the cards are coming out randomly as opposed to whether or not its a human opponent.

Collusion is a big deal too.

A friend and I used to chat while playing the same table. We are honest people so did not give any information to the other while they were still in the hand, but could have easily. Chip dumping is also a common occurrence (or so I understand).

[QuikSand]

Just to add on -- if a site where I am playing is eventually overrun by bots who make smart, calculated decisions all the time, then I'd expect that my results would show that. And it would be the results that cause me to leave the game, not just the fact that there may be bots.

Just trying to be clear, lest any of you attack me now for hating Frank Thomas.

[Anthony]

Originally Posted by Samdari

Collusion is a big deal too.

this is why i wouldn't even bother with online poker. if people are resorting to poker to make money (as a major part of their income), i wouldn't want to throw caution to the wind and think they woulnd't do whatever was necessary to make sure their bills were paid on time. in life the way i look at things is if it's possible to be thought of, someone is already doing it somewhere.