[ClydeFontaine]

Paging Shantystar,
Baseborn on aisle one.

[PAULYPOKER]

Shahbucks

GOOD POST#62

[TigerPawsSC]

I feel so much dumber having read anything Pauly has posted. Go get an education.

[ElCapitan]

If what Pauly is saying is not true how come the final table at the WSOP is not populated every year by a majority of "professionals"? I mean if there were a couple of new guys "getting lucky" and making it there I could accept that poker was mostly skill. If that was the case, then the final table should constantly be playing Howard Lederer, Phil Ivey, Phil Hellmuth, etc, etc. etc. Maybe there should be two to four unknowns and the rest should be regular staple "professionals". But every year it's a bunch of no-name guys at their first final table.

I've always said the same thing in regards to poker: all the knowledge and skill in the world will not beat good cards. As long as a player knows that a full house beats a flush and so on, you can not overcome the fact you are dealt shitty hands. Yes, yes, you may be able to bluff your way out of several situations where you should have lost but eventually the cards you are dealt will dictate your fate.

I mean go to the WSOP web site. Look at the top money earners. I recognize one name in the top 10. Now before you start going on about how the real money is made in cash games and the list doesn't show that and all that crap, aren't these guys supposed to be "professionals"? Shouldn't they be winning a majority of the tournaments?

What it comes down to is this: poker is a card game. Cards are dealt in a random order. Even if you are so skilled that you can guess what I have in my hand versus what you have in your hand at a better clip than the average person, it doesn't change the fact that you are still guessing and it comes down to luck.

[DrStale]

If what Pauly is saying is not true how come the final table at the WSOP is not populated every year by a majority of "professionals"? I mean if there were a couple of new guys "getting lucky" and making it there I could accept that poker was mostly skill. If that was the case, then the final table should constantly be playing Howard Lederer, Phil Ivey, Phil Hellmuth, etc, etc. etc. Maybe there should be two to four unknowns and the rest should be regular staple "professionals". But every year it's a bunch of no-name guys at their first final table. I've always said the same thing in regards to poker: all the knowledge and skill in the world will not beat good cards. As long as a player knows that a full house beats a flush and so on, you can not overcome the fact you are dealt shitty hands. Yes, yes, you may be able to bluff your way out of several situations where you should have lost but eventually the cards you are dealt will dictate your fate. I mean go to the WSOP web site. Look at the top money earners. I recognize one name in the top 10. Now before you start going on about how the real money is made in cash games and the list doesn't show that and all that crap, aren't these guys supposed to be "professionals"? Shouldn't they be winning a majority of the tournaments? What it comes down to is this: poker is a card game. Cards are dealt in a random order. Even if you are so skilled that you can guess what I have in my hand versus what you have in your hand at a better clip than the average person, it doesn't change the fact that you are still guessing and it comes down to luck.

My god people, this is not that complicated.

LONG TERM. Over time better players will win. You know why the best people dont win every year? Cuz its one fukkin tourney and there are a ridiculous number of entrants. If there were 10,000 NFL teams how many would make the playoffs year after year? None, but there would be teams that perform well every year.

If you can read people, understand pot odds and know solid table strategy you can win in poker. People that say "well who knows what card will come its completely random" need actually play some cards and take a Stats 101 class, unbelievable how stupid you sound.

[PAULYPOKER]

Poker is 80% luck and 20% skill. I have seen top pros play...and they play real bad when they are not running good. I have seen howard lederer make so many mistakes. FYI, I have been a successful poker player and I don't mind admitting that I have been lucky. Very few successful poker players admit it...but they know it. On the other hand you cant be really bad and expect to win purely on luck. You do need that 20% skill required...like reading people, analysing hands, calculating outs and odds etc... If I had to choose between risking my money on poker versus sports betting, I would choose sports betting as there is very less amount of luck involved....and you can consistently win money. Poker has lot of luck which involves lot of big swings in terms of money...one day you can be up by 10k and the other day down by 20k. The most important difference I see between the poker and sports betting is the TILT FACTOR. In poker you can go on tilt easily and loose all of your money in few hands. In sports betting, there might be some form of tilt..but not to the extent of poker. So, in conclusion..poker is more than 80% luck...no doubt about it. There is some level of skill level involved. But can you rely on poker for consistently making money over long term...HELL NO...there are major swings in poker all the time. I have seen gus hansen loose 2 million in 2 days and win back the same money in 1 day...and he is one of the biggest donks out there...anyone who has seen him play would agree. And he is a so called pro. On the other hand, can you rely on sports betting for consistently making money over long term...HELL YES. Very less amount of luck is involved here. I know you cant hit 90-100%

vyomguyI couldn't complete my previous post as I accidently pressed submit. I couldn't find the edit feature...so I am continuing it as an another post:-

On the other hand, can you rely on sports betting for consistently making money over long term...HELL YES. Very less amount of luck is involved here. I know you cant hit 90-100% of time while betting on sports...but if you are good, you can average around 65%-75%. You can hit that mark pretty consistently over long term.

Another thing in sports betting is the possibility of making large amounts of money with very small bets..i.e playing parlays. The odds range anywhere from 1:1 to 1:1500. I know its tough to hit those big parlays, but on any given weekend you can easily make 3-4 picks that you could parlay to 1:6 or 1:10 odds. Now. tell me how long will it take to multiply your investment 10 times in poker?....VERY LONG...you have to sit down in poker tables for days and maybe weeks to 10x your initial bankroll....and that too if you are on a good run.

I am not saying poker is not worth playing or that you should play sports betting all the time...that choice is YOURS. But understanding the pros and cons of each of them and understanding their ROI is very crucial if you want to make money over long time. Good Luck in whatever you decide to do.[/color]
LOL....If you are hitting around 55%...you are pretty much breaking even or making profit of less than 5% on your bets. This is because of the 10% juice you pay for the bookie. If you are hitting at a rate of 55%, you SHOULD stop betting on sports, cause its just not worth the time and effort.

Having said that, it is POSSIBLE to hit around 60%-70% consistently if you are a good handicapper. I see many people hit around this range consistently over many seasons.

wal66
Poker_Dummy, I think being unlucky is a larger factor than being lucky. I thought it was just me being nagative after a prolonged bad run so I actually started tracking it. I wen through a 6 month period prior to football season where I was no less than 55% in better than 85% of the hands I was involved in and won 8% of the time. I waited for my spots. I played my hands aggressively I gave every tell I could to let the other players know they were beat every step of the way but it didn't matter. I got drawn out on. It wasn't one player or one table or one day. The only constant involved was me. So in my world unlucky outweighs lucky all the time.
ElCapitanIf what Pauly is saying is not true how come the final table at the WSOP is not populated every year by a majority of "professionals"? I mean if there were a couple of new guys "getting lucky" and making it there I could accept that poker was mostly skill. If that was the case, then the final table should constantly be playing Howard Lederer, Phil Ivey, Phil Hellmuth, etc, etc. etc. Maybe there should be two to four unknowns and the rest should be regular staple "professionals". But every year it's a bunch of no-name guys at their first final table.

I've always said the same thing in regards to poker: all the knowledge and skill in the world will not beat good cards. As long as a player knows that a full house beats a flush and so on, you can not overcome the fact you are dealt shitty hands. Yes, yes, you may be able to bluff your way out of several situations where you should have lost but eventually the cards you are dealt will dictate your fate.

I mean go to the WSOP web site. Look at the top money earners. I recognize one name in the top 10. Now before you start going on about how the real money is made in cash games and the list doesn't show that and all that crap, aren't these guys supposed to be "professionals"? Shouldn't they be winning a majority of the tournaments?

What it comes down to is this: poker is a card game. Cards are dealt in a random order. Even if you are so skilled that you can guess what I have in my hand versus what you have in your hand at a better clip than the average person, it doesn't change the fact that you are still guessing and it comes down to luck.

MY QUESTION WAS ANSWERED
PAULYPOKER Thanks guys

[bigsassyster]

Poker is about investing. When is the best time to invest your money. Figuring that out is what seperates the great from the average, to the fish. You can invest in anything, but knowing what has the best chance of succeeding where the difference is. Bet accordingly.

[ElCapitan]

My god people, this is not that complicated.

LONG TERM. Over time better players will win. You know why the best people dont win every year? Cuz its one fukkin tourney and there are a ridiculous number of entrants. If there were 10,000 NFL teams how many would make the playoffs year after year? None, but there would be teams that perform well every year.

If you can read people, understand pot odds and know solid table strategy you can win in poker. People that say "well who knows what card will come its completely random" need actually play some cards and take a Stats 101 class, unbelievable how stupid you sound.

Funny, there are >10000 golfers that want to be "professionals". And a majority of the time I'm seeing about the same 50 names come up on the top money list. I wonder if luck has anything to do with golf? The fact of the matter is this, there is a random element in poker due to cards being dealt that one can not account for. There is no debating this.

And "winning in poker", and being a professional are two entirely different things. I think what we are bickering over is what qualifies a person to be labeled "professional".

[ElCapitan]

.but if you are good, you can average around 65%-75%. You can hit that mark pretty consistently over long term.

Another thing in sports betting is the possibility of making large amounts of money with very small bets..i.e playing parlays.

Ok, you lost all credibility. I withdraw my defense of you.

[PAULYPOKER]

Bottom line based on all info from this thread : anybody with a large enough bank roll $500k or more
could go to vegas enter the W.S.O.P. get lucky and win it get their bracelet and now there a pro. Instant professional poker player just add huge bankroll&luck. PERIOD DOT END OF THE STORY

[PAULYPOKER]

Ok, you lost all credibility. I withdraw my defense of you.

that my freind that was not my post it was vyomguy ] wal66 & yourself.

...

[ElCapitan]

Bottom line based on all info from this thread : anybody with a large enough bank roll $500k or more
could go to vegas enter the W.S.O.P. win it get their bracelet and now there a pro. Instant professional poker player just add huge bankroll&luck. PERIOD DOT END OF THE STORY

Wrong.

Because two things have to happen: you still have to be dealt the hands to get there and you have to play them.

If those two things don't come together, all the bankroll in the world ain't gonna get you that bracelet.

PERIOD DOT END OF THE STORY.

[ElCapitan]

that my freind was not my post

#76 was not posted by you?

[PAULYPOKER]

That post was to prove my point of original topic yourself vyomguy and wal66
which is all you three's own words.

[PAULYPOKER]

you can enter the wsop by fee
go back up there and read it again i said enter and win i didnt think i had to explain the process thats a given

[ElCapitan]

I stand corrected, Pauly. It was vyomguy who said that.

Apologies.

[Slim]

Poker is 80% luck and 20% skill.

Thats why I hate poker.

[Richkas]

? Ask yourself. How can luck and professional be as one?
Exactly they can't. But in poker you have to rely on luck to go along with great skills and I mean great. But one without the
other and you will lose the majority of the time.
So that makes professional poker a myth.

Sure there are so called professional poker players on TV and all
over the world with great skills but the only difference between
them and all experienced card players is that they hit that less than 1% streak of luck at the right time and hit that big game and got sponsored by the internet SITES SUCH AS
pokerstars,fulltilt,ultimatebet,Etc. in which I will go further on detail on this whole new can of worms later.
But first lets get some input on my take and belief's on this subject.
I would like to here from both WINNERS and LOSERS.
Me myself: I would say i am a loser. I am consistently in the top 10 % of 86% of the tournaments I enter but the prize is not worth the time invested. Why? it just does not pay the bills. I hit that less than 1% streak 3 times in the last three years always at the wrong time. meaning 1st place was something i could not retire on.SO YOU SEE WHAT I AM GETTING AT.Not only is it seldom few and far in between them less than 1% streaks it's also timing. Add that together and your *odds* are pretty dim.
Hope I did not piss on anybody's parade but that's the truth until I am proven otherwise and I am confident enough to debate with anyone on this subject.
This discussion is now open.
PAULYPOKER

PS I APPOLOGISE FOR MY TYPING SKILLS IN ADVANCE BUT I HOPE I GOT MY POINT ACROSS *also that odds link is not my doing*

You can be the best poker player in the world and if you dont get the cards you wont win. Period end of discussion. People like MF are idiots.

[jjgold]

I will shut everyone the fuk up now telling you why poker is not a pro sport, in real professional type occupations an amateur cannot even be on the radar the majority of the time in any line of business, now with poker the pros are no where to be found in most tourneys and amateurs with little experience beat pros . So if you think there is a such thing as a pro poker player your a fukkin asshole.

[poker_dummy101]

you boys are completely clueless.

jj, come back when you make sense.

[Shahbucks]

I tried to establish that professional is just a word. But their are people making money post #62

[mikemac21]

lol, guys like you pay my rent imo....

[Indecent]

I will shut everyone the fuk up now telling you why poker is not a pro sport, in real professional type occupations an amateur cannot even be on the radar the majority of the time in any line of business, now with poker the pros are no where to be found in most tourneys and amateurs with little experience beat pros . So if you think there is a such thing as a pro poker player your a fukkin asshole.

You might want to read closer. There's no debate about poker being a sport, it isn't.

[vyomguy]

Adding: Please explain Phil Ivey if there are no professional poker players.

Phil Ivey who?

The same Phil Ivey who got beaten by a film actor called "Don Cheadle"...the same Don Cheadle who didn't even know how to play poker until that game against Ivey. And guess what..he destroyed ivey heads up in NBC National heads up poker championship...in front of National TV.

Now tell me....could that happen in any professional sport where a person with almost zero experience and knowledge can beat a Pro???.....NO WAY.

[poker_dummy101]

Hey atleast we agree on one topic Indecent.

[DrStale]

you boys are completely clueless. jj, come back when you make sense.

You're right dummy, I'm done with this thread.

It feels like I'm trying to explain that the Earth revolves around the sun but to people that lived 2,000 years ago.

[poker_dummy101]

You're right dummy, I'm done with this thread.

It feels like I'm trying to explain that the Earth revolves around the sun but to people that lived 2,000 years ago.

I can see why advantage sports bettors don't help anyone out in players talk (including me) with threads like this.

[Shahbucks]

Yea this shit is pointless. I will continue to play and win money. I hope you guys keep playing too

[ElCapitan]

You can be the best poker player in the world and if you dont get the cards you wont win.

Short, to the point, and very, very true. That is the way you sum up this whole thread in one sentence.

Well done, Richie.

[Peep]

Now tell me....could that happen in any professional sport where a person with almost zero experience and knowledge can beat a Pro???.....NO WAY.

No.

But it happens in "professional gambling" all the time. Rookies win sports handicapping contests too. Doesn't mean that some are not better at it that others, or that some can't make a living at it.

To me, the correct definition of "professional" is "someone who makes a living by doing this activity". As is a "pro" is a working girl. Doesn't mean she ****s any better, she is just a pro because she supports herself that way.

[mcbaseball10]

No. But it happens in "professional gambling" all the time. Rookies win sports handicapping contests too. Doesn't mean that some are not better at it that others, or that some can't make a living at it. To me, the correct definition of "professional" is "someone who makes a living by doing this activity". As is a "pro" is a working girl. Doesn't mean she ****s any better, she is just a pro because she supports herself that way.

Amen, end of discussion.

[Sam Odom]

As a 'pro sport' poker probably has the most random luck involved

Most TV Poker Pros make more $$$ off of poker related income than table winnings

[pokernut9999]

And I thought a professional poker player was someone who made a living playing poker.

[tblues2005]

I know a few of them that lives by playing poker at the casinos. They don't like tournaments mostly. They really like playing just poker for live cash. The one that I know makes about $500 to $1000 a week. He is a pretty smart person on the table. I have seen him play before and he is tough.

[PAULYPOKER]

I know a few of them that lives by playing poker at the casinos. They don't like tournaments mostly. They really like playing just poker for live cash. The one that I know makes about $500 to $1000 a week. He is a pretty smart person on the table. I have seen him play before and he is tough.

and also have luck oozing out there ass which makes them a very lucky&skilled poker players and nothing more but if you take the ingredient luck away from this combination you have an addict COMPULSIVE GAMBLER but if just take the skill away you will have a lucky jack ass that will develop skill eventually and become your so called PROFESSIONAL POKER PLAYER. Not to be rude but if all you all can't understand this well I guess God must have put a stuper on you.END OF DISSCUSSION

PS PLEASE MAKE SURE YOUR POST MAKES SENSE BEFORE YOU POST IT BUT FOR POKER DUMMY WELL IT'S IN YOUR TITLE FROM WHAT IVE SEEN FROM YOUR POST'S MMM. HOW CAN I PUT THIS YOU SHOULD JUST OBSERVE AND KEEP YOUR OPINIONS TO YOURSELF.(SOME CONSTRUCTIVE CRITICISM NO OFFENSE)