<<< Steve, concerning the blackjack post, I think you made a reference to if certain cards were removed a player could win. I borrowed the book from someone so I will try to reference that next time I see it. As for my research, I’ll look more into it when I get back on campus and can use some of my more computer savvy friend’s brains >>>
Thanks Brian - I had deleted that request because I thought maybe this thread was getting a little out of control - but if you find the information it really would be appreciated.
Brian and Boo (if still interested) Look guys, I just like to stick to the facts. If I saw "proof" of people making money playing online poker then I would still advise against it, but I would amend my statements to say something like, "Don't play online poker because it is a very difficult game to beat and most people lose at it." I have surfed literally thousands of websites regarding gambling topics. Sure, anybody can say anything they want about winning at gambling, but in reality let's face it...we don't know most of these internet posters from Adam so I'm simply not going to believe any comments about winning until I see proof.
To illustrate one example and I realize this is just one example, when my article "The Fallacy of Online Poker Gambling" was first being posted at various websites, a few members of poker forums picked up on it. I honestly had never lurked at a poker forum - I told a few poker forum members that I will not post at any poker forum because that is their domain and I respect that - as I have clearly stated, I am not against gamblers. In fact I root for gamblers - I wish all gamblers would break the bank of every casino that exists.
This one poker player e-mailed me and told me of a poker forum, I can't remember the name, whereby they were burying my article - I didn't like that of course but I have no problem with different opinions - in fact I welcome different opinions because all I want to know is the truth. So I was just curious and lurked at this poker forum a few times over about a week. There was this poster there who kept claiming he was winning many, many thousands of dollars - and all the forum members kept heartily congratulating him - well it was so blatantly obvious to me that this guy was lying and that he was just a youngster. I swear, a few days later he posted and said that it was discovered, I forget how, that he was underage and he was now barred from the gambling websites. Then the kid went into this post about how he played literally the tiny nickle/dime Texas Holdem games and had actually lost I think he said it was about $70 over a few months and that he was glad that he got caught. He said he still plans on playing when he is of legal age. But no one questioned the fact that this kid had been lying through his teeth about winning all those many thousands of dollars. Again - just one example of a "Tall Tale" told at a poker forum, but I strongly believe that there are many more tall tales being told on these forums - this is because I know gamblers - most of my friends were gamblers and I have associated with thousands of gamblers over the years - gamblers just love to throw around the BS - LOL.
So again, until I start seeing proof - I ain't gonna believe any statements from people claiming to win money playing online poker - it's that simple. If I had won say $50,000 playing poker and properly reported it to the IRS - why would I be afraid of posting the tax return? Naturally I'd just block my name out. Be careful though - I am not a lawyer but I believe that displaying a false 1040 return is a federal crime - I think - so please don't makeup a phony 1040 and post it - besides there would also have to be a letter from a reputable CPA, and the credit card transactions to back up the 1040 because it is widely recognized that some people put on their tax returns "gambling winnings" when in fact the money was really made through illegal activities. Read the story about the Al Capone prosecution - you'd better report even illegally earned money (and just lie that it was gambling winnings - some gambling winnings are untraceable) before spending it or you're probably going to go to prison.
But this is becoming way too long of a post - I'll wrap it up just by saying that there is just way too much luck involved with poker to overcome the house cut in the long-run...and it's really not even close.
Always good chatting with you Brian - I always enjoy it - check out my new article in a few weeks and let me know what you think - blast it or praise it - any which way is okay...I mean that.
Oh yea...getting back to your question about the bet...I "know" I'd win that bet Brian - my guestimate that the odds of me winning are over 1,000 to 1 - and I used to be involved in making odds - I think you probably understand what I mean by that. I suffered the consequences of gambling but I have been clean now for over 34 months coming up to three years. Things are going well for me now and I don't need to and I don't want to take Boo's money - his family and son need it infinintly more than I do. I really have lost my desire to gamble but I still enjoy the topic and happy to discuss it anytime. Note if this long boring post (LOL) didn't answer your question ask again and I'll try to answer again.
PS: Love your 1965 Topps set - almost complete. I was tempted to bid on some of your recent ebay cards as most of my 1965 set is high grade but most are raw. Some of those 7's were really nice but I'm just so focused right now on upgrading my 1962 set as well as working on the monster 1952 set - I've got a long way to go on that one
<<< You cannot mathematically prove that it’s impossible to beat, like you can do so for table games – this is my concern. >>>
Brian - believe it or not there are people working on trying to devise a formula to beat poker. There definitely is not one now. I'm not sure that it's ever really possible. We all know that the best hand doesn't always win. The best hand can be bluffed out. I swear this is a true story - I once bluffed out a guy in a private Texas Holdem game, decent size pot, who had a nut straight - no other hand could possibly beat him - only push. Obviously he misread the hand and didn't think he had the nuts, and he folded and showed his cards. So in this case this guy lost, not only having the best hand, but the best possible hand! How can a software program ever be written to account for that? - LOL
So there is no formula for proving that it is possible or impossible to beat online poker. So the other scientific way would be through observation - seeing the documentation discussed in the other post and observing all the beautiful mansions and luxury cars that online poker players would buying if they were winning. Since there are none of these then I believe it is correct to state that it is impossible to win money in the long-run playing online poker.
I have stated in previous articles that if a player would quit cold after winning a jackpot poker tournament, then at least there would be an example of a permanent winner. But every tournament winner always believes that he/she can win many more tournaments and so keeps on gambling until the winnings are lost back and more money is lost because of that house cut grinding them out. Therefore again...no winners. I'd be happy to change my statement if shown the proof - wouldn't bother me one bit to do so...but it simply ain't going to happen. Millions of online players gambling for many years now and still no proof? Again...it ain't gonna happen. My statement stands that "It is impossible to win money in the long-run playing poker against a house cut."
It's not impossible to win money if you are consistently better than the other players you are going against. The same holds true in betting on horse racing or other sporting events. That is tougher in online poker than in in-person poker, because the advantage you can get from reading other players' body language, etc. is gone. Also, online poker leaves you vulnerable to being tag-teamed (i.e., other players secretly working together and communicating about their hands) in a way that in-person poker doesn't.
Now, with this being the case, why on earth would a successful player ever want to teach other people everything they know about the game? If you wanted to eliminate your edge, that would be the way to do it.
BTW, I have a hunch that with the current popularity of poker, that there are sufficient bad players in online games that it will be possible for good players to make substantial money for a while.
"Things are going well for me now and I don't need to and I don't want to take Boo's money - his family and son need it infinintly more than I do."
I just discussed this with my wife, and she's all for it-- so don't back out on account of my family.
To sweeten things up I'll offer you +125 on this bet. Thus, I'll put up $1000 and you put up $800. Again, we can set it up so that the money goes to a charity of your choice.
If you're not going to take this deal then you should probably quit sounding off about online poker. No, I'm not going to hang tax returns, etc., on a public forum. But I will do anything else you can think of to prove the game can be beaten. You just name it.
"My statement stands that "It is impossible to win money in the long-run playing poker against a house cut."
Like Brian said-- if you think it's impossible then this isn't a 'gamble'; at least not as far as you're concerned. Take my bet, and consider it a free $1000 going to your local woman's shelter, or local youth group.
I'm making a claim--that online poker can be beaten-- and I'm willing to back that claim up. If you're not going to do the same then gracefully remove yourself from the discussion.
Boo - You can rant and rave all you want about a bet that I clearly stated for various reasons ain't going to happen. Be careful with yourself out there, in my opinion you're starting to talk like an addicted gambler. I believe you might be. And I do understand the signs of gambling addiction very well. You may want to seek some help and counseling. I know you'll laugh or curse and say I'm wrong about that, and I hope that I am - I wouldn't wish that on anybody.
Besides, you've provided absolutely nothing but hearsay regarding any examples of the possibility of winning money at online poker in the long-run whereby I have provided solid facts through observation. You keep harping on the "bet" and I suspect since you can't show any proof that you'll probably keep harping on that. That "bet" wouldn't be proof anyway even if the extreme, EXTREME longshot chance happened that you were up some money after 10,000 hands. It would still only be one random sample and just one sample like could not be considered proof.
Millions of online poker players for many years and still no proof? That says it all no matter how any poker article or book tries to spin it.
"Be careful with yourself out there, in my opinion you're starting to talk like an addicted gambler. I believe you might be. And I do understand the signs of gambling addiction very well. You may want to seek some help and counseling."
LOL--Thanks for your concern.
Again, I'm not offering to put up records detailing my finances. But-- and I'll say this again-- I'll do anything short of that to prove the game can be beaten. If you think tax records are the ONLY way to prove the game can be beaten then you suffer from a serious lack of imagination.
<<< you suffer from a serious lack of imagination. >>>
You're right Boo - When it comes to gambling I do not want any imagination. Just the facts.
Imagination is unfortunately a big part of what gambling addiction is all about. For example an addicted online poker player who has lost everything or almost everything that he/she has, despite all the facts around him/her that nobody displays documented proof of winning, that no online poker players are living the life of luxury in Beverly Hills or on the French Riviera...this player still "imagines" that one day they could win a super jackpot like the World Series of Poker. Could it happen? - of course - that's what helps keep the addiction alive. Gambling addiction is a brutal addiction to overcome - you correctly stated that in one of your previous posts and I applaud you for that.
So could it happen? - possibly...Yes. But will it ever happen? Will an online poker player ever strike lightening and win a super jackpot tournament such as Chris Moneymaker did? Realistically...No, of course not! Having "imagination" such as thinking that the next $100 wagered to enter an online poker tournament could eventually windup in winning the WSOP, while constantly entering these tournaments and blowing money to online poker gambling websites, is all part of the addiction.
SteveK, here is the source of my info on baccarat being 50-50. Maybe I read it wrong. I've never played baccarat. Anyways, I still disagree with your poker theories. To say that every professional is sponsored by somebody else in their tournaments is just absurd. Are the sponsors paying their house payments too? Or feeding their families? Where is their money coming from? Your basically saying that every professional poker player is lying about saying that they do it for a living. Why hasn't 60 Minutes picked up on this yet? They would love to break a conspiracy like that. Every single "pro" poker player on TV is lying? That's just a blanket statement to support your viewpoint and you don't have any proof to back up a statement like that. Your saying that unless somebody can prove you wrong, then your statements are the die hard truth. What about UFO's? Do you have any hard solid facts on those too?
Every player is not sponsored in tournament play. I agree that some are, however for example Erik Seidel paid his way but he also had a portion of Mike Matusow's buy-in and Matusow took 9th and won one million dollars so he netted a chunk of that as well.
Buying 1957 Baseball PSA 8 or higher. Especially Checklists, and Contest Cards. Topps1957psa8set@aol.com
The guy that cam in 2nd Steve H lives near me. He put up 5k and his buddy put up 5k. 4.5 Million is not a bad return for a weeks work. Some locals that play poker with him say his skills are average, but he played the mind games with everyone and that gave him an edge. There were almost 6000 entries, and about half to 2/3rds were entries that were won.
<<< SteveK, here is the source of my info on baccarat being 50-50. Maybe I read it wrong. I've never played baccarat. Anyways, I still disagree with your poker theories. To say that every professional is sponsored by somebody else in their tournaments is just absurd. Are the sponsors paying their house payments too? Or feeding their families? Where is their money coming from? Your basically saying that every professional poker player is lying about saying that they do it for a living. Why hasn't 60 Minutes picked up on this yet? They would love to break a conspiracy like that. Every single "pro" poker player on TV is lying? That's just a blanket statement to support your viewpoint and you don't have any proof to back up a statement like that. Your saying that unless somebody can prove you wrong, then your statements are the die hard truth. What about UFO's? Do you have any hard solid facts on those too? >>>
I guess you thought I wasn't going to click on that link - LOL. The information shows the "loss per hand" which of course represents the casino's house edge. So how can you keep claiming baccarat is 50-50 in a casino when you provided the link which clearly shows otherwise? Learn to understand basic, fundamental aspects about gambling before attempting to comment on other aspects.
Also - I have never stated anywhere in my life that it wasn't possible to win money playing poker in private cash games. There are a number of professional poker players out there who make a living playing poker. They don't make a living playing poker online or in a casino. Hey - believe whatever you want to believe...the choice is yours.
The top nine places at the 2005 World Series of Poker were:
Place Prize Money
1st Joseph Hachem, Melbourne, Australia $7.5 million 2nd Steve Dannenmann, Severn, Md. $4.25 million 3rd John Derick Barch, McKinney, Tx. $2.5 million 4th Aaron Kanter, Elk Grove, Calif. $2.0 million 5th Andrew Black, Dublin, Ireland $1.75 million 6th Scott Lazar, Studio City, Calif. $1.5 million 7th Daniel Bergsdorf, Umea, Sweden $1.3 million 8th Brad Kondracki, Kingston, Pa. $1.15 million 9th Mike Matusow, Las Vegas, Nev. $1.0 million
<<<The guy that cam in 2nd Steve H lives near me. He put up 5k and his buddy put up 5k. 4.5 Million is not a bad return for a weeks work. Some locals that play poker with him say his skills are average >>>
Yep - your local guy put up $10,000 and "hit the lottery." Very fortunate for him. I had read where he is actually only considered the 4th or 5th best player in his local neighborhood poker game.
Hi I've enjoyed reading this thread. I've lived in Las Vegas working as a construction professional most of the time since 1986. A few observations on playing poker... I've played recreationally some part of every weekend at the various casinos mostly 4-8 to 10-20 Holdem, Omaha Hi or Omaha Hi/Lo games for the last 19 years. I'm not a great player but I can hold my own in any of these games and I like playing. I enjoy matching wits with the low level "pros" who attempt to grind out a meager living but I've never envied that lifestyle. After a session you can count on your clothes, hair and body to stink of the smoke etc in the air.... first stop after playing is the shower and clothes to the washing machine. The thought of being in a casino every day breathing the residual smoke, eating the tourist food, and sitting at a table getting fat is not pleasant. It is a miserable way to try to make a living. Also the average grind-it-out pro has no health insurance or other perks of employment. Glamorous it ain't!
Online poker is nice because you don't have to go to the casino, but it's boring not being able to people-watch.
I like playing cards and the current holdem fad brings a lot of new money to games, but as a lifestyle, Yuk.
Completed 12 bb & fb sets during 1956-61 from nickel packs...
Well, like I said maybe I read it wrong. It looks like to me that 1:1 is a 50-50 bet, but honestly I don't know what I'm looking at. Also, as for home games being the only way to make a living at poker, I doubt guys like Phil Hellmuth and Johnny Chan are still making the home game circuit breaking up $50 kithchen table tournaments.
<<< Well, like I said maybe I read it wrong. It looks like to me that 1:1 is a 50-50 bet, but honestly I don't know what I'm looking at. >>>
That's okay - there are a lot of misconceptions out there about gambling.
<<< Also, as for home games being the only way to make a living at poker, I doubt guys like Phil Hellmuth and Johnny Chan are still making the home game circuit breaking up $50 kithchen table tournaments. >>>
Don't know if you saw the popular movie "Rounders." There's a lot of basic truth in that movie even though the movie was fictional. Notice in that scene in a poker room in AC that there was no implication that these pros could make money there against the house. They were only there because they were bored and wanted some action - typical gambler behavior. Yes that scene showed them eating a few fish - pros do beat the other players in a casino but pros also know the house cut will eventually grind them out.
The "pros" who play poker regularly at casinos - here's what makes up the majority of them. Retirees gambling away social security and pension checks, people gambling disability checks and welfare checks, college students gambling their parent's money, young people gambling inherited money or money received from a trust fund, and of course people from all walks of life gambling away their paychecks and bank accounts. And these people from all walks of life whereby playing poker in a casino is either a bad habit or addiction.
The occassional casino patron will rarely go to the poker tables - usually they play the other gambling games. As one poster illustrated - the poker regulars at a casino look dreary, smell bad and if you think any of these regulars are actually making a living playing poker in a casino...ask them to show you their homes and cars. They'll be cheap homes that they might not even own - probably rentals, and also apartments they rent. Ask them to show you their cars...you'll see a lot of 1993 Buicks and Oldsmobiles that look like they are in bad need of some paint and body work. Yes, these are the so-called "pros" who play poker on a regular basis in casinos.
Real pros make good money traveling around various clubs and private games. Making the rounds. That's exactly where Hellmuth and Chan made their bankrolls. Yes, they both have won some big poker tournaments, but they were simply fortunate - they got the right cards at the right time. There have been cases of people even hitting a super jackpot lottery twice - yes, twice - it just happened recently. These casino tournaments with real pros are about ego with these guys and yes of course they also want the money. Some of them windup getting too caught up in these tournaments and at an average casino cut of the entry fee of 3% to 10% or more, entering too many tournaments will grind them out - and all the real pros fully know that. Look at the winners at this year's WSOP - How many "big names" do you see at the final table? How about none!
So yes, Hellmuth and Chan ain't playing in "kitchen table" games anymore - but unless they go back to beating players in private games, if they keep on playing in tournaments, they will windup dead broke.
PS: If you don't want to take my word for it, find some high stakes poker games in your area where the real pros play. Unfortunately though unless you hang with a "gambling crowd" these games aren't always easy to find. But they can be found, a number of them are actually legal. You'll spot who the pros are if you have any intuition at all about gambling. They're not going to divulge any family secrets to you but ask them about how well they are doing playing in casinos - they will give you a stare and a quirky smile for they would consider that a dumb question because you should have already known that real pros don't play poker in casinos.
"if you don't want to take my word for it, find some high stakes poker games in your area where the real pros play. Unfortunately though unless you hang with a "gambling crowd" these games aren't always easy to find. But they can be found, a number of them are actually legal. You'll spot who the pros are if you have any intuition at all about gambling. They're not going to divulge any family secrets to you but ask them about how well they are doing playing in casinos - they will give you a stare and a quirky smile for they would consider that a dumb question because you should have already known that real pros don't play poker in casinos."
This is so utterly wrong on so many different levels that I don't even know where to begin. To Steve's credit, he makes a few good points-- he is right when he says that making a living from playing poker is very difficult, and that most of the 'tournament pros' are, in fact, average to slightly above average players who have simply hit the high end of a variance curve. But it's obvious that Steve doesn't understand that the rake impacts small, middle and high limit games in different ways. Only a fool would say that a three dollar drop in a 2-4 game is going to have the same affect on win rates as a three dollar drop in a 50-100. True, there are no 'real pros' playing playing 10-20 or smaller. You cannot make a living playing these limits in a casino, since you will not get to see enough hands per hour. But if you play 15-30 or higher you will see people who consistently beat the game.
Note that I did not say 'pros'. The idea of the 'poker professional' is largely a fiction. For one, while you can gamble at an advantage at the poker tables (yes, Steve, even in games that feature a rake) your variance relative to your expectation is huge. As a result most poker players, even if they are long term winners, are not adequately bankrolled for the limits they're playing, which means one huge down turn will break them. Second, the kind of people who are smart enough to beat the game going forward are also usually too intellectually curious to want to spend 40 hrs. a week pushing pots with degenerate gamblers. The overwhelming majority of long term winners are people who have successful and meaningful careers outside of poker, and who only play to supplement an already healthy income.
Steve, I recognize that you spent a fair bit of time in gambling houses, and it's clear that that time wasn't very well spent. But you don't seem to understand the distinction between experienced gamblers and knowledgable gamblers. You, for instance, would obviously fall into the former catagory, although it's becoming more and more clear that you would fail any test for admission into the latter catagory.
<<< Steve, I recognize that you spent a fair bit of time in gambling houses, and it's clear that that time wasn't very well spent. But you don't seem to understand the distinction between experienced gamblers and knowledgable gamblers. You, for instance, would obviously fall into the former catagory, although it's becoming more and more clear that you would fail any test for admission into the latter catagory. >>>
Boo, you truly are clueless as to what gambling and real poker is all about, and that is clear from your posts. You should spend some time playing in lots of private cash games before spouting off about what you think I know. You sound like someone who has only ever experienced Little League Baseball trying to explain what the Major Leagues are all about. You'll keep trying to fool people with your clever articles about how money can be made playing online poker. You'll keep trying to fool people into clicking on to those sucker's game websites that you have links to and you'll receive your commissions. But you'll never fool experienced private game poker players.
Comments
Thanks Brian - I had deleted that request because I thought maybe this thread was getting a little out of control - but if you find the information it really would be appreciated.
Brian and Boo (if still interested) Look guys, I just like to stick to the facts. If I saw "proof" of people making money playing online poker then I would still advise against it, but I would amend my statements to say something like, "Don't play online poker because it is a very difficult game to beat and most people lose at it." I have surfed literally thousands of websites regarding gambling topics. Sure, anybody can say anything they want about winning at gambling, but in reality let's face it...we don't know most of these internet posters from Adam so I'm simply not going to believe any comments about winning until I see proof.
To illustrate one example and I realize this is just one example, when my article "The Fallacy of Online Poker Gambling" was first being posted at various websites, a few members of poker forums picked up on it. I honestly had never lurked at a poker forum - I told a few poker forum members that I will not post at any poker forum because that is their domain and I respect that - as I have clearly stated, I am not against gamblers. In fact I root for gamblers - I wish all gamblers would break the bank of every casino that exists.
This one poker player e-mailed me and told me of a poker forum, I can't remember the name, whereby they were burying my article - I didn't like that of course but I have no problem with different opinions - in fact I welcome different opinions because all I want to know is the truth. So I was just curious and lurked at this poker forum a few times over about a week. There was this poster there who kept claiming he was winning many, many thousands of dollars - and all the forum members kept heartily congratulating him - well it was so blatantly obvious to me that this guy was lying and that he was just a youngster. I swear, a few days later he posted and said that it was discovered, I forget how, that he was underage and he was now barred from the gambling websites. Then the kid went into this post about how he played literally the tiny nickle/dime Texas Holdem games and had actually lost I think he said it was about $70 over a few months and that he was glad that he got caught. He said he still plans on playing when he is of legal age. But no one questioned the fact that this kid had been lying through his teeth about winning all those many thousands of dollars. Again - just one example of a "Tall Tale" told at a poker forum, but I strongly believe that there are many more tall tales being told on these forums - this is because I know gamblers - most of my friends were gamblers and I have associated with thousands of gamblers over the years - gamblers just love to throw around the BS - LOL.
So again, until I start seeing proof - I ain't gonna believe any statements from people claiming to win money playing online poker - it's that simple. If I had won say $50,000 playing poker and properly reported it to the IRS - why would I be afraid of posting the tax return? Naturally I'd just block my name out. Be careful though - I am not a lawyer but I believe that displaying a false 1040 return is a federal crime - I think - so please don't makeup a phony 1040 and post it - besides there would also have to be a letter from a reputable CPA, and the credit card transactions to back up the 1040 because it is widely recognized that some people put on their tax returns "gambling winnings" when in fact the money was really made through illegal activities. Read the story about the Al Capone prosecution - you'd better report even illegally earned money (and just lie that it was gambling winnings - some gambling winnings are untraceable) before spending it or you're probably going to go to prison.
But this is becoming way too long of a post - I'll wrap it up just by saying that there is just way too much luck involved with poker to overcome the house cut in the long-run...and it's really not even close.
Always good chatting with you Brian - I always enjoy it - check out my new article in a few weeks and let me know what you think - blast it or praise it - any which way is okay...I mean that.
Oh yea...getting back to your question about the bet...I "know" I'd win that bet Brian - my guestimate that the odds of me winning are over 1,000 to 1 - and I used to be involved in making odds - I think you probably understand what I mean by that. I suffered the consequences of gambling but I have been clean now for over 34 months coming up to three years. Things are going well for me now and I don't need to and I don't want to take Boo's money - his family and son need it infinintly more than I do. I really have lost my desire to gamble but I still enjoy the topic and happy to discuss it anytime. Note if this long boring post (LOL) didn't answer your question ask again and I'll try to answer again.
PS: Love your 1965 Topps set - almost complete. I was tempted to bid on some of your recent ebay cards as most of my 1965 set is high grade but most are raw. Some of those 7's were really nice but I'm just so focused right now on upgrading my 1962 set as well as working on the monster 1952 set - I've got a long way to go on that one
Steve
Brian - believe it or not there are people working on trying to devise a formula to beat poker. There definitely is not one now. I'm not sure that it's ever really possible. We all know that the best hand doesn't always win. The best hand can be bluffed out. I swear this is a true story - I once bluffed out a guy in a private Texas Holdem game, decent size pot, who had a nut straight - no other hand could possibly beat him - only push. Obviously he misread the hand and didn't think he had the nuts, and he folded and showed his cards. So in this case this guy lost, not only having the best hand, but the best possible hand! How can a software program ever be written to account for that? - LOL
So there is no formula for proving that it is possible or impossible to beat online poker. So the other scientific way would be through observation - seeing the documentation discussed in the other post and observing all the beautiful mansions and luxury cars that online poker players would buying if they were winning. Since there are none of these then I believe it is correct to state that it is impossible to win money in the long-run playing online poker.
I have stated in previous articles that if a player would quit cold after winning a jackpot poker tournament, then at least there would be an example of a permanent winner. But every tournament winner always believes that he/she can win many more tournaments and so keeps on gambling until the winnings are lost back and more money is lost because of that house cut grinding them out. Therefore again...no winners. I'd be happy to change my statement if shown the proof - wouldn't bother me one bit to do so...but it simply ain't going to happen. Millions of online players gambling for many years now and still no proof? Again...it ain't gonna happen. My statement stands that "It is impossible to win money in the long-run playing poker against a house cut."
Steve
Now, with this being the case, why on earth would a successful player ever want to teach other people everything they know about the game? If you wanted to eliminate your edge, that would be the way to do it.
BTW, I have a hunch that with the current popularity of poker, that there are sufficient bad players in online games that it will be possible for good players to make substantial money for a while.
Nick
Reap the whirlwind.
Need to buy something for the wife or girlfriend? Check out Vintage Designer Clothing.
I just discussed this with my wife, and she's all for it-- so don't back out on account of my family.
To sweeten things up I'll offer you +125 on this bet. Thus, I'll put up $1000 and you put up $800. Again, we can set it up so that the money goes to a charity of your choice.
If you're not going to take this deal then you should probably quit sounding off about online poker. No, I'm not going to hang tax returns, etc., on a public forum. But I will do anything else you can think of to prove the game can be beaten. You just name it.
Like Brian said-- if you think it's impossible then this isn't a 'gamble'; at least not as far as you're concerned. Take my bet, and consider it a free $1000 going to your local woman's shelter, or local youth group.
I'm making a claim--that online poker can be beaten-- and I'm willing to back that claim up. If you're not going to do the same then gracefully remove yourself from the discussion.
Besides, you've provided absolutely nothing but hearsay regarding any examples of the possibility of winning money at online poker in the long-run whereby I have provided solid facts through observation. You keep harping on the "bet" and I suspect since you can't show any proof that you'll probably keep harping on that. That "bet" wouldn't be proof anyway even if the extreme, EXTREME longshot chance happened that you were up some money after 10,000 hands. It would still only be one random sample and just one sample like could not be considered proof.
Millions of online poker players for many years and still no proof? That says it all no matter how any poker article or book tries to spin it.
Steve
LOL--Thanks for your concern.
Again, I'm not offering to put up records detailing my finances. But-- and I'll say this again-- I'll do anything short of that to prove the game can be beaten. If you think tax records are the ONLY way to prove the game can be beaten then you suffer from a serious lack of imagination.
You're right Boo - When it comes to gambling I do not want any imagination. Just the facts.
Imagination is unfortunately a big part of what gambling addiction is all about. For example an addicted online poker player who has lost everything or almost everything that he/she has, despite all the facts around him/her that nobody displays documented proof of winning, that no online poker players are living the life of luxury in Beverly Hills or on the French Riviera...this player still "imagines" that one day they could win a super jackpot like the World Series of Poker. Could it happen? - of course - that's what helps keep the addiction alive. Gambling addiction is a brutal addiction to overcome - you correctly stated that in one of your previous posts and I applaud you for that.
So could it happen? - possibly...Yes. But will it ever happen? Will an online poker player ever strike lightening and win a super jackpot tournament such as Chris Moneymaker did? Realistically...No, of course not! Having "imagination" such as thinking that the next $100 wagered to enter an online poker tournament could eventually windup in winning the WSOP, while constantly entering these tournaments and blowing money to online poker gambling websites, is all part of the addiction.
Steve
I guess you thought I wasn't going to click on that link - LOL. The information shows the "loss per hand" which of course represents the casino's house edge. So how can you keep claiming baccarat is 50-50 in a casino when you provided the link which clearly shows otherwise? Learn to understand basic, fundamental aspects about gambling before attempting to comment on other aspects.
Also - I have never stated anywhere in my life that it wasn't possible to win money playing poker in private cash games. There are a number of professional poker players out there who make a living playing poker. They don't make a living playing poker online or in a casino. Hey - believe whatever you want to believe...the choice is yours.
Place Prize Money
1st Joseph Hachem, Melbourne, Australia $7.5 million
2nd Steve Dannenmann, Severn, Md. $4.25 million
3rd John Derick Barch, McKinney, Tx. $2.5 million
4th Aaron Kanter, Elk Grove, Calif. $2.0 million
5th Andrew Black, Dublin, Ireland $1.75 million
6th Scott Lazar, Studio City, Calif. $1.5 million
7th Daniel Bergsdorf, Umea, Sweden $1.3 million
8th Brad Kondracki, Kingston, Pa. $1.15 million
9th Mike Matusow, Las Vegas, Nev. $1.0 million
<<<The guy that cam in 2nd Steve H lives near me. He put up 5k and his buddy put up 5k. 4.5 Million is not a bad return for a weeks work. Some locals that play poker with him say his skills are average >>>
Yep - your local guy put up $10,000 and "hit the lottery." Very fortunate for him. I had read where he is actually only considered the 4th or 5th best player in his local neighborhood poker game.
I've enjoyed reading this thread. I've lived in Las Vegas working as a construction professional most of the time since 1986. A few observations on playing poker... I've played recreationally some part of every weekend at the various casinos mostly 4-8 to 10-20 Holdem, Omaha Hi or Omaha Hi/Lo games for the last 19 years. I'm not a great player but I can hold my own in any of these games and I like playing. I enjoy matching wits with the low level "pros" who attempt to grind out a meager living but I've never envied that lifestyle. After a session you can count on your clothes, hair and body to stink of the smoke etc in the air.... first stop after playing is the shower and clothes to the washing machine. The thought of being in a casino every day breathing the residual smoke, eating the tourist food, and sitting at a table getting fat is not pleasant. It is a miserable way to try to make a living. Also the average grind-it-out pro has no health insurance or other perks of employment. Glamorous it ain't!
Online poker is nice because you don't have to go to the casino, but it's boring not being able to people-watch.
I like playing cards and the current holdem fad brings a lot of new money to games, but as a lifestyle, Yuk.
That's okay - there are a lot of misconceptions out there about gambling.
<<< Also, as for home games being the only way to make a living at poker, I doubt guys like Phil Hellmuth and Johnny Chan are still making the home game circuit breaking up $50 kithchen table tournaments. >>>
Don't know if you saw the popular movie "Rounders." There's a lot of basic truth in that movie even though the movie was fictional. Notice in that scene in a poker room in AC that there was no implication that these pros could make money there against the house. They were only there because they were bored and wanted some action - typical gambler behavior. Yes that scene showed them eating a few fish - pros do beat the other players in a casino but pros also know the house cut will eventually grind them out.
The "pros" who play poker regularly at casinos - here's what makes up the majority of them. Retirees gambling away social security and pension checks, people gambling disability checks and welfare checks, college students gambling their parent's money, young people gambling inherited money or money received from a trust fund, and of course people from all walks of life gambling away their paychecks and bank accounts. And these people from all walks of life whereby playing poker in a casino is either a bad habit or addiction.
The occassional casino patron will rarely go to the poker tables - usually they play the other gambling games. As one poster illustrated - the poker regulars at a casino look dreary, smell bad and if you think any of these regulars are actually making a living playing poker in a casino...ask them to show you their homes and cars. They'll be cheap homes that they might not even own - probably rentals, and also apartments they rent. Ask them to show you their cars...you'll see a lot of 1993 Buicks and Oldsmobiles that look like they are in bad need of some paint and body work. Yes, these are the so-called "pros" who play poker on a regular basis in casinos.
Real pros make good money traveling around various clubs and private games. Making the rounds. That's exactly where Hellmuth and Chan made their bankrolls. Yes, they both have won some big poker tournaments, but they were simply fortunate - they got the right cards at the right time. There have been cases of people even hitting a super jackpot lottery twice - yes, twice - it just happened recently. These casino tournaments with real pros are about ego with these guys and yes of course they also want the money. Some of them windup getting too caught up in these tournaments and at an average casino cut of the entry fee of 3% to 10% or more, entering too many tournaments will grind them out - and all the real pros fully know that. Look at the winners at this year's WSOP - How many "big names" do you see at the final table? How about none!
So yes, Hellmuth and Chan ain't playing in "kitchen table" games anymore - but unless they go back to beating players in private games, if they keep on playing in tournaments, they will windup dead broke.
PS: If you don't want to take my word for it, find some high stakes poker games in your area where the real pros play. Unfortunately though unless you hang with a "gambling crowd" these games aren't always easy to find. But they can be found, a number of them are actually legal. You'll spot who the pros are if you have any intuition at all about gambling. They're not going to divulge any family secrets to you but ask them about how well they are doing playing in casinos - they will give you a stare and a quirky smile for they would consider that a dumb question because you should have already known that real pros don't play poker in casinos.
Steve
This is so utterly wrong on so many different levels that I don't even know where to begin. To Steve's credit, he makes a few good points-- he is right when he says that making a living from playing poker is very difficult, and that most of the 'tournament pros' are, in fact, average to slightly above average players who have simply hit the high end of a variance curve. But it's obvious that Steve doesn't understand that the rake impacts small, middle and high limit games in different ways. Only a fool would say that a three dollar drop in a 2-4 game is going to have the same affect on win rates as a three dollar drop in a 50-100. True, there are no 'real pros' playing playing 10-20 or smaller. You cannot make a living playing these limits in a casino, since you will not get to see enough hands per hour. But if you play 15-30 or higher you will see people who consistently beat the game.
Note that I did not say 'pros'. The idea of the 'poker professional' is largely a fiction. For one, while you can gamble at an advantage at the poker tables (yes, Steve, even in games that feature a rake) your variance relative to your expectation is huge. As a result most poker players, even if they are long term winners, are not adequately bankrolled for the limits they're playing, which means one huge down turn will break them. Second, the kind of people who are smart enough to beat the game going forward are also usually too intellectually curious to want to spend 40 hrs. a week pushing pots with degenerate gamblers. The overwhelming majority of long term winners are people who have successful and meaningful careers outside of poker, and who only play to supplement an already healthy income.
Steve, I recognize that you spent a fair bit of time in gambling houses, and it's clear that that time wasn't very well spent. But you don't seem to understand the distinction between experienced gamblers and knowledgable gamblers. You, for instance, would obviously fall into the former catagory, although it's becoming more and more clear that you would fail any test for admission into the latter catagory.
Boo, you truly are clueless as to what gambling and real poker is all about, and that is clear from your posts. You should spend some time playing in lots of private cash games before spouting off about what you think I know. You sound like someone who has only ever experienced Little League Baseball trying to explain what the Major Leagues are all about. You'll keep trying to fool people with your clever articles about how money can be made playing online poker. You'll keep trying to fool people into clicking on to those sucker's game websites that you have links to and you'll receive your commissions. But you'll never fool experienced private game poker players.
Steve