Printable View
I went from this - Poker Tournament Rankings & Stats | Current Internet Poker Player Winnings & Standings
(4 of the players above me in this list I beat at that final table, 1 apparently Mike Matusow, and 3 are now big time playas!)
To this - $0
I need lessons. Anyone?
My advice to you is that you should do something drastic. You need to play a game where the outcome truly matters. Sell all your belongings, round up as much money as possible, and go for it!
Sure, it's not very logical advice, but you're young and you're good enough (when you want to be).
Playing random games online where you could really care less about the result isn't going to get your blood pumping.
You have to play SCARED! Go for it!
Wow, NDN with some actual advice, that is only 50% crazy!
every single pro will disagree, but i love it!
I should borrow $10k of a loan shark
It can't be money from a loan, stake, etc...
It has to be money you have some sweat equity in, then you'll truly be passionate about the outcome of the game(s) you play when you are ready to "go for it."
Save up, sell stuff, and then take your shot!
Good idea.
Just got a free Xbox360 kinect. might sell it!
Hard fall, but if you can fight back up from that i bet youll never look back because you learned alot more since then and now
don't feel bad brit,I personally will be glad to forget this year.We shall get em next year.
This is how he got to $0 in the first place. Looks like you need a short course in bankroll management. No more than 5% of your funds into any one tournament. FullTilt Poker Academy has a 10 minute lesson by Chris Ferguson.
... Get Luckier?
LOL @ bankroll management post.
I'm pretty sure we both follow stricter guidelines than THAT! Good thing I'm not busto!Quote:
Originally Posted by eejit101
I follow no guideline... as palying $2 games would make me commit suicide.
And the actual guidelines, for the honouable poster above, is 5% into a cash game, 3% SnG, 1.5% tourney
The only advise I can give is to actually give a **** when you play. You are an outstanding player who can make loads, if you were to give a ****. You play big buy in games, get bored and then do something dumb and bust. That will hurt your roll more than anything else.
Disagree. In buyin games under $20ish, i will easily get bored. Over that I play like my chips are part of my body.
My thing is i havent been playing any games at all, let alone over $200
2 cashes? Not so much a downswing as you got lucky and won a big one once. ;)
Im pretty sure the only way to "make money" online is to play big field tournaments like you did and cash a couple times a year (ie get lucky, doesnt mean the people that do this are not skilled players, but they got lucky a fair share to win one of those things) or people who can like 12 table and average a few bucks profit on each table...
a lot of the stories about nothing to something Pros is just that stories...
I read a thing by Alan Boston, I quote "Pros are amateurs that got lucky in a tournament" I entirely agree w that... I would add people that have a significant amount of income from somewhere else and just recycle their money over and over, If you notice top players are listed by winnings, not by profit... (a slight % gain im sure is attainable, which is making money at a hobby, but not a main income source)
Noone can tell me the cards are "random" online, first technically a "random" draw by a computer is impossible... it doesnt mean it is "rigged" but online poker to me seems to be more like playing a WSOP game on PS3 for real money... which is an entirely different game then "live B&M poker"
The real skill in poker is the reading of body language and situations, and ya, I guess reading situations online can be done, however when I been playing on fulltilt lately, it just seems to me more often then not, I am playing a "got you game" w fulltilt rather than the other players at the table.
I have a no trusting nature, Im done putting money on any other site than Bodog or intertops, and really thats just cuz I can combine it w the sportbook... where I know Im not getting screwed for sure...
I dont know why I have been trying online anyways, Im a +Money player live, and ya their are swings, but thats poker... online isnt, its a video game
I could be wrong w this, but Im certian im not... I have common sense...
so many people get defensive when you bring stuff up like this, people with gambling problems or people that make a lil bit of profit and embellish... all I can say is... the argument that "they make money off the rake y would they risk their reputation" is the dumbest argument in the world... if you had any knowledge of past wall street frauds, corporate scams, etc... you would see that...
just remember greed and money rule the world... and the rule is, cash in while you can, for as much as you can, because things dont last forever.
Modern computers can seed RNGs based on shot noise, or quantum mirrors. Both of these methods produce truly random seeding for a shuffling algorithm. Now this doesn't mean that all poker sites that are claiming to use such a method are using such a method, or that cheating has never occurred in the online poker industry, but to say that it is impossible for a computer to create a random deck of cards is nonsense, because randomness is required for the field of cryptography, and as such random number generation has been highly researched by computer scientists. To be perfectly frank, modern RNGs can be more random than a live person shuffling cards, as a RNG is not biased by the previous position of cards in the deck like a live shuffle is. (This is how shuffle tracking works in blackjack)Quote:
Originally Posted by ScareCrowAKA
There are many reasons why online poker is harder to win at than live poker, and it's not because it's like playing a PS3 game. Well maybe it is, but not what you think. Online is harder because most skilled players are playing multiple tables at a time to increase their earnings and decrease variance. Imagine if at your live cardroom you had one or two highly talented players that you could never beat. You try to avoid playing at tables with them, or get position on them when you do, because it's so hard to beat them. Now imagine if they are now playing 12, 16 or even 24 tables at once! Hard to avoid them now, isn't it? All the while, the people who are losing the money are only playing one, or maybe 2 tables. Hard to find them now isn't it? THAT is why you're having a hard time winning at poker now. And all those guys at your casino, the ones who can barely keep the drool off their cards as they limp call all in with their 68 offsuit? They all think playing online is illegal (if they live in the US), or that it's "rigged", and won't play. One less guy you have losing money at the table. And Poker's a 0 sum game-For you to be winning, someone has got to be losing. And since the house is raking, no matter what, someone is losing!
And good luck with that whole "know I'm not getting screwed for sure" thing. Bodog has a reputation for dealing dual lines. This is illegal in Vegas and frowned upon everywhere else. Here's an example of what I mean. Bodog has a decent number of customers, who, for example, will just bet on the Lakers to win no matter what. So if Vegas sets the line for the Lakers game at -6 in their favor, most online books will match that to start. Bodog will identify their customers who only bet on the Lakers, and offer them a worse like, say -6.5 or -7, when every other book, and their other customers, will see the standard -6. So if you bet like that, Bodog will ABSOLUTELY screw you. Unlike pokersites, where as long as everything is on the up and up, you'll just have to deal with better players, coolers, and all the variance that comes with seeing thousands of hands at a time. There have been times where not everything has been on the up and up. Cereus and Pitbull poker have proven this. But to say that the entire idea of online poker is impossible to be on the up and up because you think that computers cannot generate a random deck of cards is simply absurd.
2 cashes?
$64k, $9k, $7k, $4k, $2k, $1.3k, $1.1k, $1k
Not bad?
The Bodog thing... Bodog is not screwing you, they dont make you bet any bet, its your job to look at the lines and compare w your own data to decide if you like the value of it
All computers use Algorithms, the Algorithms use the environmental noise within it, its still a formula and a computer and if someone has enough knowledge of the process, someone could predict outcomes, but really thats less of a point than ->
The sites have no regulation, they have a bottom line, like most companies do... poker blew up making them a healthy profit for several years now, however... is it a fade? maybe? probably? (how many people just deposit some cash and try it out then quit)... Most corporations in this position would make as much money as they can, while they can, and push the lines of regulation to do so... but hey fultilt I guess wouldnt, cuz they are on the Honor system
The multi-tabling, if you read what I said, I do believe people can make a profit at that, but to me its not "poker" its just basically playing the math, using tracing software, being forced to stay disciplined because of the fast pace, and management of funds (lot easier to win a dollar at 16 tables over a hour than average 16$ a hour on 1 table)
but hey... I did say I might be wrong, I play live ya, I mostly like to sit back and use the players retarded aggression against them to make a modest profit then leave, If their is not to much $ in the pot I will let people "bluff" me out, I will fold winning hands, limp w big hands if I know I can get into a favorable situation with a aggressive player, & most the money I make is off calling peoples bull-crap... this works well 4me live, mostly every session, but online it doesnt, every single time they connect with the flop, will try the bluff, I price them in and the draw comes... every single time.
and im thinking it cuz online is not set up to be random, in the sense that each card is random each draw... more in the sense that specific hands are gonna be dealt out to random players... say the computer knows its gonna deal trips, a boat, 2 pair, and a backdoor flush and straight draw out this hand, however its the hands themselves are dealt out randomly... Which would combat cheating and build the rake to the max amount on the majority of pots, (which believe it or not, *gasp* Fulltilt wants)... which isnt really poker
but hey they could be rigging it, no way to know they aren't for sure, you are not there, none is other than people making money from fulltilt.com
Which leads me back to my point about the retarded integrity argument... what? why would fulltilt do this, they make millions/billions of dollars, why would they risk their integrity to make more?... really?... thats like me saying Tim Donaghy makes a salary from ref-ing the game, why would he risk that to make some more $...
your response, the typical way over sensitive and defensive attitude of the "verbal diarrhea" comment, completely reinforces my suspicion about people w gambling problems and embellishing... its not a normal response to people voicing suspicion on a industry w no regulation
Let's be clear-you weren't casting suspicion on an industry will little regulatory oversight, you were trying to say that it was impossible for the deal of cards to be truly random because computers are deterministic. And indeed, shuffling algorithms do have to be, all modern programing languages are deterministic. But, a proper shuffling algorithm is a "black box" as far as the rest of the program, and the people running the servers is concerned. Because of this, if the input, the "seed" value for the RNG is non-deterministic, then the output of the black box is as well.
You go so far as to say that you feel that hands are set up so that the server knows in advance that one player will be dealt trips, one dealt 2 pair, blah blah blah, all in an attempt to maximize pot size and rake. Of course, this is a way that a poker site could cheat. But external tracking services like Poker Table Ratings track millions of hands from different sites. Sharkscope and OPR track millions of tournaments. If there were a pattern to the number of, or types of, hands that were dealt out, they would have discovered it! Or people observing the data would notice it! Don't think that that's impossible. That's how the superusers on Absolute Poker and Ultimate Bet were discovered. That's how Stoxtrader and Kinetica were discovered as colluding. The Chinese DoN Scandal was verified by using Sharkscope.
All major poker sites have a regulatory body that governs them. Pokerstars is governed by the Isle of Man. Full Tilt Poker is regulated by Alderney. These regulators require that the random number generators be audited by independent companies. Since Full Tilt Poker was the site you mentioned, I went and looked at their regulators website, and their website which contains their certification letters for their RNG. Cigital and Technical Systems Testing have both certified Full Tilt's RNG. Alderney has accepted these as certification that their RNG is truly random. Now, Full Tilt could have forged these letters of certification. But if they did that, could they keep 2 companies who are actively involved in testing RNG's quiet? They could have paid them off. But then they would likely have to pay off the Alderney gambling control commission as well. Sure it's possible that they would have taken a bribe, they're a small British Isle, with little revenue outside of gambling regulation. Reminds me of Kahnawake. They were certainly impotent as a regulator weren't they? And they were small and overwhelmed. But even then there still wasn't bribery or conspiracy was there? It's still believed that their RNG was fair, just as it was tested by the regulators and the independent agency, the cheating occurred because of an exploit built into the software at it's inception.
But one thing is clear to me. Bodog is clearly doing something to screw their customers. Full Tilt has been accused of it and has provided ample evidence to the contrary. And for some reason, you've decided to take the side of the operator who is clearly behaving unethically, and not the one that may or may not be? You make a lot of sense!