Yes
No
More yes than no
More no than yes
I have no friggin idea
I really want to direct
If you had to it all over, would you have started along the AP path? I don't think this is an easy question based purely on results. There are negatives, like travel. (This can also be a positive for a time.) There are positives, like learning experiences related to human behavior, and the underlying math. (There might even be negatives here.) There are relationship negatives and positives.
"I don't think outside the box; I think of what I can do with the box." - Henri Matisse
It depends on when. If I was in my twenties at college, that yes, absolutely, provided that I had started with enough of a bankroll to make it worthwhile. In those days conditions in my country were much better than it is today. And I should have obtained that initial bankroll initially by internet bonus hustling which was also much more lucrative in those days.
If I was a 40-year-old senior staff member in my day-job profession then no. I would need to be betting $50-100 minimum to approach an EV comparable with my salary - and that would be to all intents and purposes unviable in the modestly sized casino near where I live.
I.... feel so right doing the Wong thing!!! 9-5! 9-5! 9-5! Every king that screws her makes me feel alive!!
Absolutely. Read "The Professor, The Banker, and the Suicide King." Even the "top" poker players are degenerates, going through bust cycles and needing to borrow money for cohorts, and betting on anything and everything that comes along.Originally Posted by stopgambling
Most poker players are probably degen, but at least poker players can readily make bank promoting themselves when they get good enough. Variance free cash ftw in my opinion. Plus, they get some form of respect and social acceptance, whereas APers need to be hush hush about their activities. Poker players also, in my experience, are generally friendlier and more willing to help newbies than are APers, because they don't immediately associate new poker players with the competition. There's good and bad enough for both groups, IMO.
To answer the poll, I'd probably concentrate more on poker and less on APing, but something tells me that even if I devoted myself to poker I probably wouldn't be able to break past decent 20-40 NL tables (i.e. I'd never be good enough for nosebleeds anyway) and might just wind up concentrating on APing anyway.
I was listening on the conversation between 2 so called "good" poker players . It was hilariously . They sounded like 2 ploppies with some understanding of variance and risk. How they had to play "this game or that game" while waiting for a poker game. Different skill sets that is for sure. A lot of people are delusional ,.....then it gets me THINKING.
I believe there are far too many who went on the path, lost all their money (because they never had the bank roll or knew little about spreads, variance, etc., knew little more than counting cards and hugely over betting). They would not be on any forum anymore to answer that they regret going on this path.
If I had the chance to do it all over again, I wouldn't have tried to pursue AP at all, period. This may be bias based on my personal experience but it's effected my life more negatively than positively.
I enjoy the game, learning, and making some extra money but it's made me incredibly cynical. I guess if I could go back in time I would have done it only part time as a hobby and not as a profession.
I read Revere's book over 30 years ago, and even though I was intrigued about card counting, I did not pursue it seriously until many years later after I had retired from work, my kids were grown, and my body told me to slow down with young man sports.
I love AP as a retirement hobby. However, even though BJ conditions were better years ago, I'm glad I did not pursue CC until I did because it would have been a big distraction to my career, my family life and my weekend warrior activities.
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
Bookmarks