How many "poker stars" are degenerate gamblers?

[spartanFan801]

They market them as if they are talented chess players, but how many are just good because they live in the casino? I mean how hard is it to compete against someone that lives 24/7 in a casino?

I've heard that many of the winners, i.e. poker stars, have blown their winnings gambling.

The celebrated Jennifer Harmon, who often shows up in commercials as a poker star, went broke and left poker.



And Joe Cada's wikipedia says he won $500,000 online....yet says he was so broke that he couldn't afford the $10,000 fee to get into the WSOP and had sponsors who took a cut of his winnings.

It's interesting how they play up poker as if it's 90% talent, when it's obvious it's really gambling no matter what.

It makes you wonder how many people paid the $10,000 into the WSOP that really couldn't afford it because they thought they were poker stars in the making.

[canoe86]

Originally Posted by spartanFan801

It makes you wonder how many people paid the $10,000 into the WSOP that really couldn't afford it because they thought they were poker stars in the making.

I wonder how many freshman, every year, go to State and blow about $15,000, don't go to class and drop out. Not to mention every other university in the country. Just saying, there are many ways to blow money is sad sad ways.

Gamblers are gamblers. Most lose. Those who win have knowledge AND discipline. Gamblers who win don't play slots.

I

[Touchdown MSU]

The good pro poker players that make a living off of it must be smart as a whip in mathematics and statistics or else they'll just phase out as the odds will catch up to them. You play long enough and it becomes a statistical battle.

[canoe86]

Originally Posted by Touchdown MSU

The good pro poker players that make a living off of it must be smart as a whip in mathematics and statistics or else they'll just phase out as the odds will catch up to them. You play long enough and it becomes a statistical battle.

I think in poker the odds aren't as important as other games. Poker has a human element, which doesn't follow a set of statistical rules.

Slots, roulette, craps etc etc etc. Over the long haul, those odds beat a person. I just love when I hear of a person who 'wins all the time' on slots. Sorry, just not true.

[Cym Jim]

I dont think any of them are, because every gambler I've ever met has been up, a lot.

[canoe86]

Originally Posted by Cym Jim

I dont think any of them are, because every gambler I've ever met has been up, a lot.

Reminds me of a line from a Jackson Browne song....the Road....

"You forget about the losses, you exaggerate the wins."

[LakeMilakokia]

Originally Posted by spartanFan801

They market them as if they are talented chess players, but how many are just good because they live in the casino? I mean how hard is it to compete against someone that lives 24/7 in a casino?

I've heard that many of the winners, i.e. poker stars, have blown their winnings gambling.

The celebrated Jennifer Harmon, who often shows up in commercials as a poker star, went broke and left poker.



And Joe Cada's wikipedia says he won $500,000 online....yet says he was so broke that he couldn't afford the $10,000 fee to get into the WSOP and had sponsors who took a cut of his winnings.

It's interesting how they play up poker as if it's 90% talent, when it's obvious it's really gambling no matter what.

It makes you wonder how many people paid the $10,000 into the WSOP that really couldn't afford it because they thought they were poker stars in the making.

Link?

[Touchdown MSU]

Originally Posted by canoe86

I think in poker the odds aren't as important as other games. Poker has a human element, which doesn't follow a set of statistical rules.

Slots, roulette, craps etc etc etc. Over the long haul, those odds beat a person. I just love when I hear of a person who 'wins all the time' on slots. Sorry, just not true.

Oh it sure does have a statistical set of rules. Let's say you are holding 2 clubs in a game of hold 'em and there are 2 more on the table with just the river card yet to be revealed. You know for a fact that there are 13 clubs in a deck of cards. You've seen 4 of them already and there are 9 more out there. 9 out of the remaining 40 cards are clubs or 23%. So there is a 23% chance of the 5th card coming up club. Your opponent bets $100 to make the pot $200. Do you call $100 in this case? I know I wouldnt. Why would you risk 2to 1 for something that has a 4 to 1 chance of happening? I would want close to 4 to 1 pot odds to make that call. Wouldn't you?

[dougseh142]

Originally Posted by spartanFan801

They market them as if they are talented chess players, but how many are just good because they live in the casino? I mean how hard is it to compete against someone that lives 24/7 in a casino?

The more experience you have at something the better you are at it. This goes for practically every profession.

I've heard that many of the winners, i.e. poker stars, have blown their winnings gambling.

I'm sure some have at the craps tables and such, but many? Source please.

The celebrated Jennifer Harmon, who often shows up in commercials as a poker star, went broke and left poker.

Source plz. Again, I highly doubt this.

And Joe Cada's wikipedia says he won $500,000 online....yet says he was so broke that he couldn't afford the $10,000 fee to get into the WSOP and had sponsors who took a cut of his winnings.

What's your point? How many people out there make $100k a year, but are still 'broke' because they can't control their spending?

It's interesting how they play up poker as if it's 90% talent, when it's obvious it's really gambling no matter what.

In the short term, poker is more luck based, yes. In the long term, poker is 100% skill. If I go all-in vs you and I hold AA and you have JJ, I'm an 81% favorite. If we run the cards, you will win 19% of the time. If we do this once and you win, you are lucky. You got the money in as an underdog and won. There's absolutely nothing I can do. However, if we do this 1000 times, it is impossible for you to end up on top overall. Statistics reign supreme and the law of large numbers will never allow you to win. This is poker. I get the money in good because I know math, I can put you on a hand, and I know how to best extract money from you as a favorite. You may get lucky every now and again, but I'll win sooner or later. This is extremely oversimplified of course, but hopefully you get the point.

It makes you wonder how many people paid the $10,000 into the WSOP that really couldn't afford it because they thought they were poker stars in the making.

Yes, 90% of players that enter the main event leave with nothing... many buy-in with their own money. People play for a variety of reasons, but I'd never advocate that somebody plays if they can't afford to lose

[goosinator2005]

Originally Posted by Touchdown MSU

Oh it sure does have a statistical set of rules. Let's say you are holding 2 clubs in a game of hold 'em and there are 2 more on the table with just the river card yet to be revealed. You know for a fact that there are 13 clubs in a deck of cards. You've seen 4 of them already and there are 9 more out there. 9 out of the remaining 40 cards are clubs or 23%. So there is a 23% chance of the 5th card coming up club. Your opponent bets $100 to make the pot $200. Do you call $100 in this case? I know I wouldnt. Why would you risk 2to 1 for something that has a 4 to 1 chance of happening? I would want close to 4 to 1 pot odds to make that call. Wouldn't you?

theres a lot more to the game than just stats when you get above playing for pennies

[Touchdown MSU]

Originally Posted by goosinator2005

theres a lot more to the game than just stats when you get above playing for pennies

I never said it was ALL about the stats and odds. But you need to have a firm grasp of the odds if you're going to make a living off of it.

[AvgMSUJoe]

Originally Posted by canoe86

I think in poker the odds aren't as important as other games. Poker has a human element, which doesn't follow a set of statistical rules.

Bad Poker has a human element.

Bad Poker ='s "Lucky at Slots"...

[chachi]

It is a job when it comes to the daily grind. You will see the same players in the same rooms all of the time if you play regularly. They calculate their income as an hourly wage... at least the ones who win and to win you have to be patient and being patient means winning takes time which impairs your real ability to bank hourly, regularly.

Sure, some of these guys you see on TV hit it big but buy ins are expensive and they enter in debt prior to the big hit or get play happy after and burn through it..

The big tourneys have become so overcrowded that you need more luck than ever as opposed to raw skill... guys like Chan and Hellmuth were basically smart enough to get the early, lucrative sponsorship deals and for Phil, write books.

[chachi]

Originally Posted by AvgMSUJoe

Bad Poker has a human element.

Bad Poker ='s "Lucky at Slots"...

I disagree. You have to be good at stats, counting pots, calcing odds... but when you do pick up a read or get the feel for a table you can exploit the **** out of that. IT still takes patience, but takes a lot less luck.

"Stat Robots" are the most predictable players on the planet. I would rather play against tight-passive waiters than loose cannons any day. They are more predictable.

[paper_wasp]

You're wrong on Cada. Sorry I'vemet and know the guy, he bought his first house in cash. He was sponsored for all the events, not just the main. So when it's 4k per it get's pretty expensive and someone offered to sponsor him for them all so he could go and play with out too much risk to himself. Get your facts straight before you start bashing people.

[Peplowski_Rules]

Harmon: She's broke? Hmmmmmmmmmmm, why did I see her in Bobby's Room last week? And met her on Face the Ace a couple months ago? And see her on High Stakes Poker?

[paper_wasp]

And as for Harman, she has been placed on broke twice ever. Once was because she had left poker to try to start her own business and it didn't work. The other was having a bad year but got a loan and has never looked back since. Shtick.

[AvgMSUJoe]

Originally Posted by chachi

I disagree. You have to be good at stats, counting pots, calcing odds... but when you do pick up a read or get the feel for a table you can exploit the **** out of that. IT still takes patience, but takes a lot less luck.

"Stat Robots" are the most predictable players on the planet. I would rather play against tight-passive waiters than loose cannons any day. They are more predictable.

I think the vast majority of players any of us will go against will NEVER get to the point where the human element trumps the statistics...

If you get to the final table at some huge buy-in tourny, sure... but in the basement with the drinking buddies or at the local bar's poker room, thinking you are "reading" a table means you watch too much TV.

[LakeMilakokia]

Originally Posted by Peplowski_Rules

Harmon: She's broke? Hmmmmmmmmmmm, why did I see her in Bobby's Room last week? And met her on Face the Ace a couple months ago? And see her on High Stakes Poker?

Was thinking the same thing.....still waiting on that link.

[paper_wasp]

Originally Posted by AvgMSUJoe

I think the vast majority of players any of us will go against will NEVER get to the point where the human element trumps the statistics...

If you get to the final table at some huge buy-in tourny, sure... but in the basement with the drinking buddies or at the local bar's poker room, thinking you are "reading" a table means you watch too much TV.

[Cym Jim]

Originally Posted by paper_wasp

You're wrong on Cada. Sorry I've met and know the guy

Which is it?

[chachi]

Originally Posted by AvgMSUJoe

I think the vast majority of players any of us will go against will NEVER get to the point where the human element trumps the statistics...

It never does. You have to be able to do both which is why the vast majority of players are... drumroll... LOSERS!

Reading a full table at Greektown is hard... gotta play the cards and odds almost all of the time until you find someone(s) to pick on and others to avoid. That said, playing three players at 4AM? Totally different story.

[shane476]

Originally Posted by spartanFan801

They market them as if they are talented chess players, but how many are just good because they live in the casino? I mean how hard is it to compete against someone that lives 24/7 in a casino?

I've heard that many of the winners, i.e. poker stars, have blown their winnings gambling.

The celebrated Jennifer Harmon, who often shows up in commercials as a poker star, went broke and left poker.

And Joe Cada's wikipedia says he won $500,000 online....yet says he was so broke that he couldn't afford the $10,000 fee to get into the WSOP and had sponsors who took a cut of his winnings.

It's interesting how they play up poker as if it's 90% talent, when it's obvious it's really gambling no matter what.

It makes you wonder how many people paid the $10,000 into the WSOP that really couldn't afford it because they thought they were poker stars in the making.

There is so much wrong with this it is fun....but since a lot of it has been covered, ill paraphrase:

Some poker players are degenerate gamblers....as are people from all walks of life

Poker players dont "live in a casino 24/7"

Jennifer Harmon is almost certainly not broke, and plays mostly mixed games, and gets lots o sponsorship monies

The wikipedia Joe Cada shows $500k in tournament earnings really means nothing. First off, he is mostly a cash game player and makes most of his $$$ from that, secondly he could be up $400k in profit from that $500k in earnings, or $0.

He was backed because bankroll management is the most important part of a successful poker player remaining successful, and not being a degenerate. To play $10,000 buy in events on your own dime, you need a POKER ONLY BANKROLL of around $1mil....im pretty sure most players do not have this, esp Cada, thus the need for backers.

A lot of people buy into big events because they think they are good. This is what drives the poker economy.

This post is stupid

[ninowesco]

the answer is - all of them

they are all degenerate gamblers

[DITKA ®]

Does the OP have any links for all of his claims?