PDA

View Full Version : Your Poker Winnings Online/Live



Trent Parker
02-02-2009, 10:08 AM
Yesterday arvo/night I played a $4.40 180 player Sit 'n' Go and eventually came Second... Scored myself $144 for my time. Was Chip leader for quite a bit..... but was probably leaning on the small stacks a bit too much... :uhoh: Final hand I had JJ against opponent's A 10 flop came KQ9 Turn A river 5 to bust me out.

Kaitlin
04-02-2009, 05:28 PM
my week ..beat your year... call Tel Aviv

antichrist
04-02-2009, 08:04 PM
My day beat your pay - call Beirut

antichrist
04-02-2009, 09:06 PM
HI Kerry, is it true that you won $15K on poker the other day? Can you loan me for a overseas holiday?

ER
05-02-2009, 08:19 AM
WHAT DO YOU GAMBLE WITH?

pax
04-05-2009, 03:32 PM
WHAT DO YOU GAMBLE WITH?
Money. What do you gamble with?

Or perhaps, a more pertinent question: what do you use to enter Chess tournaments?

Basil
04-05-2009, 03:35 PM
I think JAK's question was more sublime - at least that's how I took it. For example, whose money? Your children's? Money = Future? Is the money disposable?

pax
04-05-2009, 04:27 PM
I think JAK's question was more sublime - at least that's how I took it. For example, whose money? Your children's? Money = Future? Is the money disposable?

Whose money do you play chess with? Are you denying your children a future by playing chess?

What's the expected value of $100 spent playing chess?

My point is that a winning poker player can reap considerable financial rewards with very little or no risk if they know how to manage their money properly (admittedly, many don't).

Basil
04-05-2009, 04:37 PM
Whose money do you play chess with? Are you denying your children a future by playing chess?

What's the expected value of $100 spent playing chess?

My point is that a winning poker player can reap considerable financial rewards with very little or no risk if they know how to manage their money properly (admittedly, many don't).
I appreciate your point. I'm not buying [/pun]. Gambling has the addictive/ can't stop/ chasing aspect that I think JAK was referring to. Perhaps not! And I'm outta here :P

pax
04-05-2009, 05:31 PM
I appreciate your point. I'm not buying [/pun]. Gambling has the addictive/ can't stop/ chasing aspect that I think JAK was referring to. Perhaps not! And I'm outta here :P

I'll agree that there is an addictive aspect to gambling. There is also an addictive aspect to competitive activities such as chess (speaking as one who has spent many hours playing bullet and blitz chess online).

Poker differs from other forms of gambling in that it is possible to make bets with positive expected value. If you play slot machines, or roulette, or Lotto for long enough, you will eventually go broke because the expected outcome of each bet is negative. In poker, a player who makes correct decisions consistently will win money long term since each bet has a positive expected value. If a winning player can also manage their bankroll properly, then they can play with no risk to "real world" money.

In my own case, I have never risked a cent of my own money (except in the sense that I risk money that I have won playing poker previously).

that Caesar guy
05-05-2009, 04:53 PM
Well said, that is why you could say that poker shouldn't be classified with gambling. Unless, of course, you don't understand what a full house is, and whether ace is high or low :lol: :lol: :lol:

JM

pax
05-05-2009, 06:14 PM
Well said, that is why you could say that poker shouldn't be classified with gambling. Unless, of course, you don't understand what a full house is, and whether ace is high or low :lol: :lol: :lol:

I actually do think that poker is gambling - I've changed my mind on this point. It's just that it is gambling where you can control whether you are betting as a favourite or as an underdog.

In poker, it is just as important to exercise responsible gambling. That is, you must never bet money that you cannot afford to lose. I like to make bets with positive expected value, but I am not putting my house on the line even if I am a 10-1 favourite to win.

Desmond
05-05-2009, 10:10 PM
Problem gamblers will always tell you about their wins, but they don't tell you about how many loses it took to get those wins.
They might not be aware of it themselves.
A good way to get a problem gambler to realise that they are one is to get them to keep a diary of all wins and loses. They will see that over time thier highs are really not all that much to crow about.

Sunshine
06-05-2009, 10:27 AM
Poker differs from other forms of gambling in that it is possible to make bets with positive expected value.

This is only the case where you have the best possible hand yourself - which is a rare event. Otherwise it is just where you believe you have the better hand - which will not turn out to be true all the time.

It is similar to most other forms of gambling (horses, sports) where people believe a skill or knowledge factor provides them with better odds than the other gamblers. They always believe in the "positive expected value" and are able to explain away the losses believing they that it means future wins are even more likely.

Over time there will only be a small percentage of people who make any reasonable gains.

pax
06-05-2009, 11:09 AM
This is only the case where you have the best possible hand yourself - which is a rare event. Otherwise it is just where you believe you have the better hand - which will not turn out to be true all the time.
Well, obviously. You are acting on partial information, because you don't know your opponent's cards and you don't know the cards yet to come. But you can still make an optimal decision based on the range of possible cards your opponent could have based on the actions he has taken so far. Sometimes he will have the nuts, and will win the pot. But poker is a long term game, so if you make the correct decision you will make a long run profit. If you think this is guesswork, you are very much mistaken.



It is similar to most other forms of gambling (horses, sports) where people believe a skill or knowledge factor provides them with better odds than the other gamblers. They always believe in the "positive expected value" and are able to explain away the losses believing they that it means future wins are even more likely.

It is possible to gamble profitably on sports (not that I would ever attempt this), because the bookmakers can only estimate probabilities (unlike lotto or casino games). If they get it wrong, a smart gambler can gain an edge (usually with a comprehensive knowledge of the odds that other bookmakers are offering).



Over time there will only be a small percentage of people who make any reasonable gains.

This is certainly true. But in poker, it is indisputably true that the best players are profitable because of skill, not luck.

pax
06-05-2009, 11:10 AM
A good way to get a problem gambler to realise that they are one is to get them to keep a diary of all wins and loses. They will see that over time thier highs are really not all that much to crow about.

Almost all top poker players keep meticulous records of their profits and losses.

Desmond
06-05-2009, 11:32 AM
Almost all top poker players keep meticulous records of their profits and losses.I'm sure they do, but I wonder about the merits of a thread devoted only to winnings.

pax
06-05-2009, 01:58 PM
I'm sure they do, but I wonder about the merits of a thread devoted only to winnings.
It doesn't seem to be particularly "devoted" to winnings to me!

Desmond
06-05-2009, 02:12 PM
It doesn't seem to be particularly "devoted" to winnings to me!:hmm: Did you read the thread title?

pax
06-05-2009, 02:28 PM
:hmm: Did you read the thread title?
Did you read the content? :hmm: :hmm: :hmm:

Note that there *is* a thread devoted to bad beats..

Desmond
06-05-2009, 02:39 PM
Did you read the content? :hmm: :hmm: :hmm:

Note that there *is* a thread devoted to bad beats..mmmkay so a what a thread is devoted to is determined not by its title and opening post and thread creator's intention, but rather by some off topic stuff (general gambling discussions) that came later.

pax
06-05-2009, 06:57 PM
mmmkay so a what a thread is devoted to is determined not by its title and opening post and thread creator's intention, but rather by some off topic stuff (general gambling discussions) that came later.

Would you say that a thread containing >20 posts including precisely one thread about winnings is devoted only to winnings?

Perhaps we should have a mandatory warning attached to every post where someone brags about a win?

p.s Just to keep this thread on topic, I came second (out of >200 runners) in a $11 R&A the other day! Since gambling is evil, I won't tell you how much money I won. [WARNING: gambling is addictive - for every post about winnings, there are 99 people who don't tell you about their losses]

Desmond
06-05-2009, 07:08 PM
Would you say that a thread containing >20 posts including precisely one thread about winnings is devoted only to winnings?

Perhaps we should have a mandatory warning attached to every post where someone brags about a win?

p.s Just to keep this thread on topic, I came second (out of >200 runners) in a $11 R&A the other day! Since gambling is evil, I won't tell you how much money I won. [WARNING: gambling is addictive - for every post about winnings, there are 99 people who don't tell you about their losses]Do you have issue with my use of the words "devoted to"? Could just as easily have said:
a thread about only winnings.
a thread whose raison d'etre is only winnings.

This thread is for posting winnings. As I said, problem gamblers will focus on wins and not losses. A way to solve the problem is to break that mentality.

Anyway I'm not sure what your frigging problem is, pax, perhaps the topic of problem gamblers is a touchy one for you.

pax
07-05-2009, 10:20 AM
Anyway I'm not sure what your frigging problem is, pax, perhaps the topic of problem gamblers is a touchy one for you.

Whoah, where did that come from? Last time I checked, you were the one coming in here posting your off-topic moralising. Give us a break.

Desmond
07-05-2009, 11:06 AM
Whoah, where did that come from? Last time I checked, you were the one coming in here posting your off-topic moralising. Give us a break.Not really, the thread had already drifted towards a general discussion about gambling before i posted in it. In fact your responses to me have been rather salient, including talking about what records top players keep in response to my comment about problem gamblers, your reference to the bad beat thread (you can lose a hand badly and still win money that day, can't you?). And what is moralising about keeping records about both wins and losses?

So, I repeat, was it the "devoted to" phrase that caught your attention?

pax
07-05-2009, 12:00 PM
So, I repeat, was it the "devoted to" phrase that caught your attention?
What caught my attention was your implication that there is something wrong with poker players talking about their wins.

Desmond
07-05-2009, 12:10 PM
What caught my attention was your implication that there is something wrong with poker players talking about their wins.Lame. If that were the case why would you bother disputing that that was what the thread was for? Why not say "Yes that's what the thread is for and so what".

pax
07-05-2009, 02:46 PM
Lame. If that were the case why would you bother disputing that that was what the thread was for? Why not say "Yes that's what the thread is for and so what".

You asked what caught my attention. I also thought it was a strange use of the phrase "devoted to", when there was but a single post describing winnings.

Right now, I'm just wondering what it is about this topic that has you so worked up.

Desmond
07-05-2009, 03:28 PM
You asked what caught my attention. I also thought it was a strange use of the phrase "devoted to", when there was but a single post describing winnings.Yeah I thought that might have been it, maybe you could have just said that when I asked in post #23. I note that you used "devoted" yourself in the same context in #20. Seems to be a fairly standard use of the word, but I can see how you made a mistake in interpreting its meaning.

Right now, I'm just wondering what it is about this topic that has you so worked up.What makes you think I am? I find you quite amusing.

pax
07-05-2009, 05:34 PM
What makes you think I am? I find you quite amusing.

Well something has got you spending inordinate amounts of time in a thread in which you have apparently no interest whatsoever.

gman
31-08-2009, 07:17 PM
I know this toutney. it's the 180 4.40 buyin on PS. I played it a few times, finished seconed twice for 144$.

george
31-08-2009, 11:41 PM
Hi All,

In the 1970's I was hooked on three things in way of gambling - manila,snooker and the ponies. Manila and snooker especially snooker I won much money at and it would take many lifetimes for me to lose what I had won but ponies - that is something else.

Down at the track I would win a lot , lose a lot but I figured why did I keep betting on the ponies when I was losing much more than I was winning and I was actually quite lousy at picking winners. Having studied Psych and having a degree in Sociology I decided to make a case study of myself but it took me a year to work out the answer and once I had it i gave up the ponies so easily it frightened me. I enjoyed the "buzz" of losing as much as I enjoyed the "buzz" of winning - the emotional heightening of awareness low or high was what I was hooked on - it wasnt the adrenelin rush as such but the emotional feelings being heightened. Feeling something was better than nothing.

So, I found a substitute for that rush:) so I didnt need the ponies anymore and apart from a bet on Melbourne Cup I havent bet on the fourlegged "one arm bandits" since the 1970's. It wasnt religion drugs or anything like that but rather the love of another person.

Kindest Regards to ALL

Redmond Barry
08-09-2009, 10:56 AM
It wasnt religion drugs or anything like that but rather the love of another person.

was it kerri anne kennerly ?

george
09-09-2009, 09:12 PM
Hi Ace,

It was my wife of last 31 years who got me off the ponies.

Just didnt have time to go to the track or study form guide - someone elses form was more exciting to study at the time:) .

That simple really.

Redmond Barry
15-09-2009, 06:11 AM
Hi Ace,

It was my wife of last 31 years who got me off the ponies.

Just didnt have time to go to the track or study form guide - someone elses form was more exciting to study at the time:) .

That simple really.

glad things worked out.

known a few heavy gamblers in my time so its good to hear of people finding an avenue away from it.

KingPrawn
18-06-2010, 02:59 PM
No gambling problem yet (and of course until I die there will always be the risk that I will develop one).

I stumbled upon this thread because I was researching who this Kerry Stead guy is that is kicking butt right know in Las Vegas in the H.O.R.S.E. event. Turns out he's a good chess player too. Not surprising!

For the record, I started with $25 online and have never reloaded. Starting with 1c/2c games online, I've built that sum into 10s of 1000s of winnings through mini-investments based on millions of little complex evaluations. No gambling for me, just a lot of study and thinking about the game. Sure, in the short term there is variance determined by my focus at the time and lady luck, but long term it is simply a case of playing in games with less skilled opponents, no matter how good or bad you are.

I'm just curious - a year on from the last post are the poker folks with a strong chess background all big winners on the felt. I would certainly expect so.