vpFREE2 Forums

David Matthews' Gambling in Space LVA BLOG - 5 MAR 2009

#1

Love reading your stuff. Mickey.

Only the strong survive in any competitive endeavor, and poker is no
different. Sure, you see kids winning $1M and more in poker tournaments, but you
just don't hear about the hundreds who paid their big fat entry fee and got
creamed. I bowled tournaments competitively for about 25 years. There was a
house rake in those, too - a portion of the entry fees was skimmed off to pay
the house for the games, plus something for tournament expenses. Mickey's 10%
is remarkably accurate. About 90% of the bowlers would lose in the long
run, only the best could turn a consistent profit over the long haul. In poker,
the ongoing influx of wannabe's will feed the sharks well.

- Brian in MI

···

______________________________________

mickeycrimm writes:

Whose paying the prize money in all those events? The players are-minus
anywhere from 6% to 12% juice. If you play a $1000 event 10% to 12% of the
money is removed from the prize pool by the house. Only 10% of the field is
payed. It doesn't take a rocket scientist to figure out that alot of people are
going to lose in the long run.

**************A Good Credit Score is 700 or Above. See yours in just 2 easy
steps!
(http://pr.atwola.com/promoclk/100126575x1219957551x1201325337/aol?redir=http:%2F%2Fwww.freecreditreport.com%2Fpm%2Fdefault.aspx%3Fsc%3D668072%26hmpgID
%3D62%26bcd%3DfebemailfooterNO62)

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

#2

I agree that there is a dangerous lure of easy money when it comes to poker
and it appeals to a lot of young folks.
However, I have tempered this thinking a bit after looking at some of the
technology out there. There's little doubt that an effective way to get
better at poker is to see a lot of hands, a lot of boards, a lot of betting
patterns, etc. Previous to online poker, it was a relatively difficult
endevour to play, say 100,000 hands. With the availability of 24-hour poker,
multiple tables, multiples sites, etc you can do that in a very short amount
of time. You could play (and presumably, learn) about poker SO much more
faster than you previously could.. So, while I still agree that the learning
curve in poker is still very high, and most wont make money at it, the speed
at which one can learn is so much quicker now that we *should* be seeing
more (legitimate) poker pros in the future.

D

···

On Thu, Mar 5, 2009 at 1:14 PM, <Marksalot300@aol.com> wrote:

  Love reading your stuff. Mickey.

Only the strong survive in any competitive endeavor, and poker is no
different. Sure, you see kids winning $1M and more in poker tournaments,
but you
just don't hear about the hundreds who paid their big fat entry fee and got

creamed. I bowled tournaments competitively for about 25 years. There was a

house rake in those, too - a portion of the entry fees was skimmed off to
pay
the house for the games, plus something for tournament expenses. Mickey's
10%
is remarkably accurate. About 90% of the bowlers would lose in the long
run, only the best could turn a consistent profit over the long haul. In
poker,
the ongoing influx of wannabe's will feed the sharks well.

- Brian in MI
______________________________________

mickeycrimm writes:

Whose paying the prize money in all those events? The players are-minus
anywhere from 6% to 12% juice. If you play a $1000 event 10% to 12% of the
money is removed from the prize pool by the house. Only 10% of the field is

payed. It doesn't take a rocket scientist to figure out that alot of people
are
going to lose in the long run.

**************A Good Credit Score is 700 or Above. See yours in just 2 easy

steps!
(
http://pr.atwola.com/promoclk/100126575x1219957551x1201325337/aol?redir=http:%2F%2Fwww.freecreditreport.com%2Fpm%2Fdefault.aspx%3Fsc%3D668072%26hmpgID
%3D62%26bcd%3DfebemailfooterNO62)

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]