We're experiencing the beginning of the end

My impression is that there are many, many, many people in Norway that has the same view of poker as Eriador.

On May 09 2008 15:51 Liquid`Drone wrote: i guess it is, but we all are so its okay. point is, I think doing nothing all day is cool and if it's something I can do while making lots of money, i'll do it however if everyone has that option, nothing gets done and society begins to suck. thus while I enjoy doing nothing productive, I don't think it's good to give me that option. poker is kind of like a really, really extreme welfare. however while welfare gives you enough to survive, it doesnt give you enough to thrive socially, in fact it puts you on the bottom rung of society, thus it's only something the laziest of the lazy and those without dreams will "do for a living", unless they really don't have much of a choice. internet poker gives people in their late teens/ early twenties the ability to be economically successful in a way that was impossible without inheriting money before. and well, it sucks, cause that's the period of time where those same people would have been motivated to do a great job in university so they could eventually attain economical success later. internet poker thus works as a de-motivator for the ones smart enough to master it ; to a large degree the ones who would otherwise make society progress. but its very important to note that the "villain" in my scenario is not poker, nor poker players, but internet poker institutionalized in a way that makes it possible to do nothing but play.

I've had these thoughts as well.

Oh well... Where my fishes at?

I remember having this same conversation with Skot.

I couldn't agree more with Maynard. But time will tell if we are right about that or not I suppose.

GL :D

On May 08 2008 04:32 Maynard! wrote: Show nested quote + On May 08 2008 04:28 byrnesam wrote: its probably over for americans... Yea I guess I haven't given a hard look to the Euro-sites. There's also a possibility of a big asian boom (that would be AMAZING). I just know that stars is getting somewhat rough. Good tables are now defined when a regular is tilting and you have position as opposed to having an idiot playing 40/30 spewing chips.

The big asian boom is gonna hit by late 2009-2010, so if you can hold out till then, you're gonna ride the asian wave. online poker is just starting to take off in the phlippines and HK; likely after mid-2009, Chinese visiting macau will no longer have visa restrictions (there are some areas of China where it is difficult to get a visa to come to Macau) and by 2010 all the mega casinos in Macau will be done and PS, just launched a poker room in Macau a couple of days ago.
So, just my personal opinon, have no fear people, the online poker companies are just as concerned as you to find new fish for the regular sharkies out there or in business speak, new markets to support and augment the exisitng player base. keke.

On May 09 2008 15:51 Liquid`Drone wrote: i guess it is, but we all are so its okay. point is, I think doing nothing all day is cool and if it's something I can do while making lots of money, i'll do it however if everyone has that option, nothing gets done and society begins to suck. thus while I enjoy doing nothing productive, I don't think it's good to give me that option. poker is kind of like a really, really extreme welfare. however while welfare gives you enough to survive, it doesnt give you enough to thrive socially, in fact it puts you on the bottom rung of society, thus it's only something the laziest of the lazy and those without dreams will "do for a living", unless they really don't have much of a choice. internet poker gives people in their late teens/ early twenties the ability to be economically successful in a way that was impossible without inheriting money before. and well, it sucks, cause that's the period of time where those same people would have been motivated to do a great job in university so they could eventually attain economical success later. internet poker thus works as a de-motivator for the ones smart enough to master it ; to a large degree the ones who would otherwise make society progress. but its very important to note that the "villain" in my scenario is not poker, nor poker players, but internet poker institutionalized in a way that makes it possible to do nothing but play.

this view holds true, if only you are under the assumption that a successful poker player, won't do much else and just play poker.
some people are using their poker "income" as a stepping stone to get into other areas of business and/or investing.
giving to charity is also another means to "give back" to society.

What really makes me wonder is how in hell did Rekrul manage to go broke ?
He had like 400K from online winnings + 400K from WSOP + being one hell of a good Poker player
How can u be stupid enough to bust 800K in 1 year ?

If there is a thread about this link me plz

On May 10 2008 03:42 PplusAD wrote: What really makes me wonder is how in hell did Rekrul manage to go broke ? He had like 400K from online winnings + 400K from WSOP + being one hell of a good Poker player How can u be stupid enough to bust 800K in 1 year ? If there is a thread about this link me plz

i was wondering this too....

he mentioned it... something like running really bad online (and possibly offline too?) + taxes + spending a lot without having any money coming in ever

oh ok

On May 08 2008 10:23 Maynard! wrote: Show nested quote + On May 08 2008 10:18 JonnyCosMo wrote: I think Maynard & HovZ need to bunk together and share thoughts on why they break even for retarded periods of time and blame other forces of nature for failing so hard. The line I've used before in this thread: Those in glass houses shouldn't throw stones. I've never played live. The way i utilize poker doesn't really permit this.

I'm missing something here, because afaik Jonny's house is anything but glass.

On May 08 2008 11:50 YoMeR wrote: Now they just need to repeal that gay poker law and open the floodgates of profit

System... overload... too much... irony...

The person doing the most to get the law repealed, Barney Frank, is gay.

Bill Frist introduced the UIGEA to pander to the Christian right.

Maybe we should replace the generic insults "gay" and "faggot" in the language as perhaps "religious" and "Christian".

On May 08 2008 13:25 tae-g wrote: New people are born every day...think about it.

aka P.T. Barnum's "There's a sucker born every minute".

On May 09 2008 15:51 Liquid`Drone wrote: i guess it is, but we all are so its okay. point is, I think doing nothing all day is cool and if it's something I can do while making lots of money, i'll do it however if everyone has that option, nothing gets done and society begins to suck. thus while I enjoy doing nothing productive, I don't think it's good to give me that option. poker is kind of like a really, really extreme welfare. however while welfare gives you enough to survive, it doesnt give you enough to thrive socially, in fact it puts you on the bottom rung of society, thus it's only something the laziest of the lazy and those without dreams will "do for a living", unless they really don't have much of a choice. internet poker gives people in their late teens/ early twenties the ability to be economically successful in a way that was impossible without inheriting money before. and well, it sucks, cause that's the period of time where those same people would have been motivated to do a great job in university so they could eventually attain economical success later. internet poker thus works as a de-motivator for the ones smart enough to master it ; to a large degree the ones who would otherwise make society progress. but its very important to note that the "villain" in my scenario is not poker, nor poker players, but internet poker institutionalized in a way that makes it possible to do nothing but play.

Professional poker players are in the entertainment business. The fish is not trying especially hard to win, nor does he expect to. He pays the pro for his services. It's not as fulfilling IMO as many jobs in entertainment (as a musician I can attest to that), but it still fits.

bottom line, we all need to do something for the greater good with a % of our monies to drown our bad conscience. i have done *some* good, but surely not enough. someone should re-open that thread from a while back where we donated to african kids. helps to ease your conscience so you can comfortably go back to grinding endless hours.

like 1% of professional poker players supply entertainment outside whatever internet community they frequent. it's not comparable to any other area of the entertainment business. (for example, football players who play in leagues that aren't aired on tv, generally need to have a part time job in addition. )

pokemyface ; I think it's difficult for a poker player to simply use poker as a stepping stone. those who manage to do it can in fact turn their pokering into something productive, but the problem is just that.. poker is so easy. like, once you're good at it I mean. it's a cushion cause once you're really good at poker, you know that you can make lots of money whenever you feel like it. it makes it hard to pursue an education, or a different career. "that guy" who started playing poker so he could fund his tuition to yale or whatever may feel free to prove me wrong. (frankly he wouldnt cause he'd just be an anomaly, but personally, I'm not sure he exists. )

stygg ; what would make me largely change my view on online poker is if a major non-profit organization, say red cross or whatever, created a poker site where the rake went directly to charity. right now that's almost the biggest "beef" I have with the whole industry, how both poker sites and players go to great lenghts to avoid paying taxes when they make shittons anyway.

Liquid`Drone is totally right with every post imo.

The major difference between poker players and other professional sportsmen is that the footballer is payed by people who want them to do their job, satisfying someone other than themselves.

On May 10 2008 03:42 PplusAD wrote: What really makes me wonder is how in hell did Rekrul manage to go broke ? He had like 400K from online winnings + 400K from WSOP + being one hell of a good Poker player How can u be stupid enough to bust 800K in 1 year ? If there is a thread about this link me plz

if you party hard enough you can easily bust 800k in a year i think.

On May 10 2008 08:12 Oly wrote: Liquid`Drone is totally right with every post imo. The major difference between poker players and other professional sportsmen is that the footballer is payed by people who want them to do their job, satisfying someone other than themselves.

I'm not sure if Eri misinterpreted what I wrote; Oly definitely did. I was not referring to entertaining spectators. I am saying that professionals are entertaining their opponents. The casual player gambles for fun, and pays the pro (and the rake) for the privilege.

On May 10 2008 08:13 Royal_Rumble wrote: Show nested quote + On May 10 2008 03:42 PplusAD wrote: What really makes me wonder is how in hell did Rekrul manage to go broke ? He had like 400K from online winnings + 400K from WSOP + being one hell of a good Poker player How can u be stupid enough to bust 800K in 1 year ? If there is a thread about this link me plz if you party hard enough you can easily bust 800k in a year i think.

Ofc its possible ... but ive always seen rekrul as a very smart and intelligent person.
I had never imagined hed be stupid enough to bust 800K and go completely broke

On May 10 2008 08:22 vltava wrote: Show nested quote + On May 10 2008 08:12 Oly wrote: Liquid`Drone is totally right with every post imo. The major difference between poker players and other professional sportsmen is that the footballer is payed by people who want them to do their job, satisfying someone other than themselves. I'm not sure if Eri misinterpreted what I wrote; Oly definitely did. I was not referring to entertaining spectators. I am saying that professionals are entertaining their opponents. The casual player gambles for fun, and pays the pro (and the rake) for the privilege.

Yes, I did not see your point that our opponents are paying for playing us, but I'm not sure I agree with that either because our fish opponents would certainly prefer us not to be there and we are not providing them with anything they would not have got anyway. What I am trying to say is that we do not, by playing poker, give anyone anything at all. The fish would have just as much fun without the pros. The fact that the pros are a consequence of the fish doesn't make us justified, just opportunistic.