5 ms·
I'm well aware that poker is a zero sum game, at least as far as the exchange of money is concerned. That being said, that doesn't mean that playing professiona
by avalaunch 13y ago
I'm well aware that poker is a zero sum game, at least as far as the exchange of money is concerned. That being said, that doesn't mean that playing professionally provides no value to society. As with any game or sport, there's a certain entertainment value provided to those that play as well as those that watch. Even those players that never make it on tv help to provide the foundation for the ecosystem needed to provide the entertainment on a global level, in the same manner that minor league sporting athletes help support the majors.
All that being said, the entire reason I was devoting time and effort to my side projects was the belief that I could derive more meaning from life doing something other than poker. I was already trying to transition to something new. Black Friday just gave me a giant kick in the ass.
Also, poker is not gambling, at least not the way I play.
- shawabawa3 13y ago> Also, poker is not gambling, at least not the way I play. What you did that night was definitely gambling (buying in with 100% of your bankroll). Glad it worked out for you though
- avalaunch 13y agoI understand the spirit of what you're saying. Typically risking your entire bankroll is a bad move because you're risking more than you can afford to lose. I'd argue that, in this instance, that wasn't the case. If anything, I was on a "free roll" of sorts. Winning that night would significantly improve my situation (allow me to pay my bills) where losing would not significantly worsen my situation - I'd still be screwed. There just wasn't much difference between having 1k and having 0 and I didn't have enough time to build slowly.
- levosmetalo 13y agoWell, in that case I can only congratulate you for getting rid of the poker. I'm glad that you had a rational approach and kept kalm that allowed you way out. And about poker being not gambling, well I don't agree. However smart you play, as much as you count on the statistics, in the end of the day, there's still luck involved. Even if it were only pure skill game, you can't always know skill level of your opponents :)
- oneeyedpigeon 13y ago"However smart you play, as much as you count on the statistics, in the end of the day, there's still luck involved." I guess absolutely everything we do in life is gambling, then :)
- alxndr 13y agoNot everything I do involves competing with someone else for both my own and their money.
- bmelton 13y agoAt the end of each day, yes, luck is a big factor. At the end of a career, statistical probabilities remain supreme, and you'll find that the hand you're supposed to play 60% of the time will win about 60% of the time. You're not wrong to be critical of the OP for gambling with his lunch money, but at the same time, it's wrong to conflate statistics with luck. If "the way he plays" is "by the numbers", then luck really isn't a factor. Sure, it may bear on any given hand, but in a long enough game, luck is all but eliminated as being relevant.
- avalaunch 13y agoI agree entirely with everything other than the lunch money comment. Having 1k was no better to me than having 0 - in either case, I wouldn't have enough to pay my bills - so I wasn't really risking anything significant. Really, I only stood to benefit by taking the risk. If I had enough time I would have rebuilt my bankroll slowly but I simply didn't have enough time.
- bmelton 13y agoJust for the record, that's exactly what I assumed. I didn't say 'lunch money' as to imply something necessary. Rather, it was intended as something trivial. Either way, kudos on the hot streak.
- avalaunch 13y ago
- icelancer 13y ago>Also, poker is not gambling, at least not the way I play. Yes, it is. No matter how you play. I question how "professional" you are if you don't even understand this basic concept of advantage gambling.
- deleted 13y ago[deleted]