Is the sky the limit?

Not sure that this is the right forum for this post but this is just something I've been thinking about lately.

Is it really possible to eventually make a living playing poker with the best of the best at the highest stakes available? I imagine that this is the ultimate goal of many of the players here but is it realistic? I mean don't you think there will come a point in your poker career where you just can't move up anymore and consistently beat the game? Sure you've grinded your way up and you've exercised proper bankroll management, but I mean eventually doesn't there come a point where everyone is just as good as each other and you can at best be a break even player? Think about it. Does it really make sense to move up to a $50/$100 NL game playing against the top pros when you know you're never really going to be able to "crush" that game? At a certain point I think moving up in stakes just becomes foolish and will reduce your hourly wage. I don't remember who said it but when talking about SNGs but they put it well. The good $50 sng players move up to play $100 sngs. The good $100 sng players move up to play the $200 sngs. The good $200 sng players play... $200 sngs because there are no higher stakes than this.

Just something I've been thinking about lately. Don't you think there will come a point where you can't get any better and you will hit a brick wall in trying to step up your game? Even the celebrity pros probably make the majority of their income off of endorsement deals as opposed to straight up poker. Just trying to keep long term goals realistic and in perspective. Discuss please.

Disclaimer: I am in no way suggesting its not possible to make a very good living playing poker. I am just questioning the idea that the sky is the limit for how much you can make doing it.

not for everyone.... to play at that level you have to be very intelligent and have great instincts....

if you can commit to building your bankroll and trying to improve your game you should be able to get to a pretty high level.... i think that wall you are talking about just depends on the person

and i think the communtity is not suppose to be poker related

{Moved from Community}

I can see the point you're making. What i think you may have missed is that 'pie in the sky' victory, for example at a WSOP event. If you win $2 million, that changes your life! So essentially poker has made your life. Thats something to consider. But as you say i think essenailly most people who are going to make a living either play mtts and win big prizes regularly or can absolutly destroy say 100NL and 200NL ring 5 tabling turning over a lot each day.
I'd like to think that i can get a norml well paid job from my education and play poker for example on an evening or at weekends and play in big MTT's hopefully cashing a few big prizes. That would be nice

Originally Posted by Miffed22001

I can see the point you're making. What i think you may have missed is that 'pie in the sky' victory, for example at a WSOP event. If you win $2 million, that changes your life! So essentially poker has made your life. Thats something to consider. But as you say i think essenailly most people who are going to make a living either play mtts and win big prizes regularly or can absolutly destroy say 100NL and 200NL ring 5 tabling turning over a lot each day.
I'd like to think that i can get a norml well paid job from my education and play poker for example on an evening or at weekends and play in big MTT's hopefully cashing a few big prizes. That would be nice

I think that is the most realistic gameplan for a lot of people. Why move up when you can get a second income from poker while having a nice job from your education.... I know a lot of people are playing poker to avoid the 9-5 job, but with the exceptions of those with the big MTT wins and so fourth, a lot of what andrew is saying is true... unless ur one of the few exceptions, like all the major online pros

Not that I've been there, but I imagine there are occasional fish at ultra high stakes as well.

A millionaire fish won't play 10NL, that's for sure..

http://www.jimgeary.com/poker/letters/BILLGPOK.HTM

Well, Bill Gates seems to enjoy 3-6 limit at the local B&M... so there we go

Originally Posted by bencathers

http://www.jimgeary.com/poker/letters/BILLGPOK.HTM

Well, Bill Gates seems to enjoy 3-6 limit at the local B&M... so there we go

And Andy Beal enjoys playing 100,000/200,000 against the best players in the world... I wouldn't quit call him a fish though.

And Bill Gates paid for some of microsoft due to poker winnings @ harvard - but was it hold-em?

All we seem to know about him is that he was calling a pre-flop raise out of position with Q7 and hit quad queens. luckbox!

Originally Posted by bencathers

And Bill Gates paid for some of microsoft due to poker winnings @ harvard - but was it hold-em?

All we seem to know about him is that he was calling a pre-flop raise out of position with Q7 and hit quad queens. luckbox!

that has to be proof that life is rigged!
Quad queens and $50 billion?
Im having words with God about this shit! :P

Originally Posted by Miffed22001

Originally Posted by bencathers

And Bill Gates paid for some of microsoft due to poker winnings @ harvard - but was it hold-em?

All we seem to know about him is that he was calling a pre-flop raise out of position with Q7 and hit quad queens. luckbox!

that has to be proof that life is rigged!
Quad queens and $50 billion?
Im having words with God about this shit! :P

LMAO! I hit quad queens once, and invested in some beta max stock. It's smaller god damn you! Isn't smaller better? That's what my ex wife used to say.

In reference to NL Hold 'em cash games, it really depends on your natural talent, and whether you are playing online or live.

Online, you will run into problems trying to go over 10/20 NL. The 10/20 NL on party is fairly easy, but 25/50 NL on Ultimate Bet is way way above it difficulty-wise and most people will never be able to make that level.

Live, you run into a problem at 10/20 NL. The major 10/20 NL game I know of is at the Bellagio and is full of pro's.. not exactly easily beaten! I think assuming you get past that point, the 20/40 or 25/50 NL scene isnt that much tougher than the Bellagio game. However the 50/100 NL scene from sidegames from major tourneys is tougher yet. Above that and you run into the likes of Phil Ivey, Doyle Brunson, and Jennifer Harmon!

Originally Posted by andr3w321

Not sure that this is the right forum for this post but this is just something I've been thinking about lately.

Is it really possible to eventually make a living playing poker with the best of the best at the highest stakes available? I imagine that this is the ultimate goal of many of the players here but is it realistic? I mean don't you think there will come a point in your poker career where you just can't move up anymore and consistently beat the game? Sure you've grinded your way up and you've exercised proper bankroll management, but I mean eventually doesn't there come a point where everyone is just as good as each other and you can at best be a break even player? Think about it. Does it really make sense to move up to a $50/$100 NL game playing against the top pros when you know you're never really going to be able to "crush" that game? At a certain point I think moving up in stakes just becomes foolish and will reduce your hourly wage. I don't remember who said it but when talking about SNGs but they put it well. The good $50 sng players move up to play $100 sngs. The good $100 sng players move up to play the $200 sngs. The good $200 sng players play... $200 sngs because there are no higher stakes than this.

Just something I've been thinking about lately. Don't you think there will come a point where you can't get any better and you will hit a brick wall in trying to step up your game? Even the celebrity pros probably make the majority of their income off of endorsement deals as opposed to straight up poker. Just trying to keep long term goals realistic and in perspective. Discuss please.

Disclaimer: I am in no way suggesting its not possible to make a very good living playing poker. I am just questioning the idea that the sky is the limit for how much you can make doing it.

Someone at 2+2 said this: Everyone in the big games think they have an edge - whether its skill, lack of fear, or who keeps their cool better after taking a bad beat.

On top of this, I can imagine something like having a HUGE bankroll can eventually break someone when you're willing to push 50/50 edges over and over again.

I for one do not even imagine playing at the highest stakes, my stomach just couldnt handle the pressure and the variance, like stated above everybody at the really high stakes are excellent players and as a poker player I do not see a reason to play in such games. You can win shit loads of money at smaller stakes with lesser variance.

I also agree that having a regular job and then playing some poker on your free time is the best option for most of us, the problems will arise when you work a lot and have a family and you may not find enough time to play...

finally:

"Putting their money where their mouths are, Gates and Buffet have alloted a $1 million grant to fund a junior high school program dedicated to teaching the game to teenagers. So far, however, it seems that their money isn't good enough, as they have no takers among U.S. schools. Sharon Osberg, Buffet's longtime playing partner and two-time world-champion bridge player, believes that it will be very difficult to get kids to stop playing poker and take up bridge, as its players are usually on the older side. As the average age of American Contract Bridge League members is 67, Osberg definitely has a point.

For now, poker's popularity doesn't seem to be waning at all, especially among American teens and twenty-somethings. With all the enjoyment and intellectual cunning that bridge might have to offer, this writer can't see it overtaking poker as a national pastime, at least until it gets the same type of television and media exposure. Gates and Buffet will have to dig a lot deeper into their tremendous pockets if they really want bridge to give poker a run for its money. On the other hand, if they'd offer me a million bucks, hey, I'll teach bridge to anyone."

What kind of a stupid douche walks into a teenage poker room and says "Aaaah hey guys, you wanna play bridge?"

I asked myself the same question and it certainly is possible because players have done it. I suspect it’s not an easy feat for many reasons.

Poker is like a pyramid scheme in that the sharks feed off the fish and because there are more fish than sharks, it’s easier to move up at lower limits. But, as you move up, the number fish goes down as does your winning rate before you likely reach a level that you can’t get by and now, you’re the fish. Also, as you move up, the games are tougher to find, which can cut into your efficiency and profitability.

I came up with this chart detailing the progression to become a poker millionaire:

Bankroll is the money you should have to play at that level. Buy-in is your bankroll divided by 30. SB is Small Blind. BB is Big Blind. Delta is the difference in bankrolls between the current level and the next level – the amount of money you need to profit to move to the next level. Delta Buy is the Delta divided by the Buy-in – the number of buy-ins you’d need to profit to move to the next level. You should never risk more than 5% of your BR (Bankroll) per day.

The first thing I notice is that the smallest NL buy-in at a casino I've seen is the $200 NL $1/$2, which requires a $6,000 bankroll. How many people at the casino playing No Limit actually have that capital? Probably not many.

If you can make it to level 15, you’re a poker millionaire. But, again, that’s no easy feat as for every dollar made for one person is a dollar lost by another person, so for a person to be making millions, someone(s) has to be losing millions. For one person to get those millions is economically possible, not probable.

Originally Posted by Jason

The first thing I notice is that the smallest NL buy-in at a casino I've seen is the $200 NL $1/$2, which requires a $6,000 bankroll. How many people at the casino playing No Limit actually have that capital? Probably not many.

Probably everyone who has a real job, so everyone.

"A sucker is born every minute"
-unknown

(If you think PT Barnum said this, that's an interesting bit of irony...)

But there is a sucker born every minute, and that is why you, whomever this maybe concern, make between $1000 and $2000 a month playing an online game from the comfort of your own home, setting your own hours, et cetera.
However, if this modestly lucrative endeavour doesn't satisfy you, and you strive to be a "poker millionaire"... Then you just might be on of the suckers when you give it all away.
Just some advice one of my mentors gave to me. Could be bullshit.