
How one guy turned his C&C skills into millions with online poker - jgilliam
http://www.nytimes.com/2011/03/27/magazine/mag-27Poker-t.html
======
danenania
If he a.) plays at stakes where he can lose over a million in a couple days
and b.) bases his decision to play someone (especially another pro) on emotion
and recent short term variance, it's pretty much guaranteed he will end up
broke eventually unless he actually has many many millions (like possibly in
the hundreds if we're talking about enough to cover the swings of heads up PLO
games at those stakes with Gus Hansen).

It's hard to fathom how much variance really exists in poker. Lucky and
unlucky streaks can and do last months to years for people who play thousands
of hands per day. Statistics dictates that there will always be a number of
outliers who, due to a combination of moving up aggressively and running hot
at the right times, become millionaires in a short time and draw a lot of
attention, but unless they're the real deal and sufficiently bankrolled to
cover the swings, it will all go back, often as quickly as it came. Most of
the famous players on TV actually fit this mold, go broke constantly, and only
make consistent money due to endorsements. Among real high stakes pros (mostly
math-oriented, highly self-disciplined nerds you've never heard of), a large
portion of the TV stars are considered fish. I've always found it interesting
how distorted the general perceptions are versus reality.

~~~
TY
Can't agree more.

I worked for an online gambling company for several years in the analytics
area. I saw young players rise meteorically, win millions (not exaggerating)
and eventually go broke.

Almost everyone is human. Once losses start to mount, it's hard to play with
according to the program and stay emotionally detached while your world is
crumbling with every lost pot.

Never underestimate the cheaters. Most online poker players don't understand
how rampant collusion is. Dumb colluders are easy to spot. Smart ones will
stay undetected until someone gets greedy. Almost everyone is human. It's hard
to maintain discipline.

I myself thought about playing online professionally. After I realistically
evaluated my chances and my stats, it became clear that I would make more
money on a guaranteed basis by being a consultant than a professional poker
player. When you have a family that depends on you, stable income becomes very
important.

Online gamblers live a very unfullfilling life: you are staring at several
computer screens many hours each day, you don't really create anything and you
have wild swings in your income. With exception of few lucky, hard working,
disciplined and possibly intelligently colluding players you will not make
good money in the long run.

In the short run, impossible is nothing. Play that tourney, enjoy a night in a
casino. It's good fun if it's not your job.

~~~
danenania
Yeah, I was a pro for about 5 years before I got good enough at programming to
do that instead. For the first couple years I was awed by the easy money (it
was waaaay easy back then). Before really learning, I stupidly blew about
$1200 doing all the stupid gambler things (was in college so that was like...
all my money).

Then I got serious about learning , put in another $200, and didn't deposit
ever again. Worked that up to around $20kish, kept that as a bankroll, and
played in the 5/10-30/60 range, whatever games were good. I mainly focused on
limit hold 'em, shorthanded and later heads-up.

I was consistently making in the 150-200 an hour range, but I'm not very money
driven and so didn't play that much. Maybe 20-30hrs per week around 6-8 months
of the year. So it was easy money and gave me lots of free time, which was
great, and the mechanics of the game are truly fascinating and I got very
absorbed early on, but you're completely right about how boring and
unrewarding it is ultimately.

After a few years I felt like a hamster on a wheel. It became a drag to play
so I avoided it and tried to reduce playing to the minimum necessary--which
ended up putting strain on the bankroll during bad patches. You're right: the
swings are very hard to stomach day in and day out. I didn't save or manage my
money at all--spent it mostly on food and travel, which I don't regret. Still,
I determined that I absolutely had to do something creative and contributory
rather than repetitive and predatory, went the clueless 20 year old failed
start up attempt route, learned how to program along the way, and now I'm much
happier with life, and though I still make a lot less per hour than those
days, it seems conceivable that in a few years I could eclipse it doing
something I dig.

~~~
nikcub
Interesting story. There seems to be a big overlap between poker and
hackers/developers. I considered going pro a few years back but couldn't
justify it considering the lifestyle (I spent a month in vegas for the WSOP
two years ago, it was insane) and the swings involved. Not worth it and you
have better opportunities in startup land.

The poker community is also crowded with degenerate gamblers, guys who pretend
to be your friends one minute and then would kill your parents for $100 the
next. They are difficult to avoid and their bad habits have a tendency to rub
off onto otherwise good people.

I don't mind playing semi-frequently, even on the live circuit, but I would
never make it more than a passing interest and hobby.

~~~
danenania
Yeah, the culture surrounding poker is quite seedy and materialistic. I much
prefer the hacker community.

It also doesn't feel great to think about where the money is coming from. Who
knows if that pot you just took off a degenerate gambler is his mortgage or
child support for the month. I'm not trying to accuse pros of anything
unethical--people are responsible for themselves and he's going to blow that
money anyway, so you might as well take it. Just the rules of the game. But
still, I feel better about creating value in the world than taking it away
from someone else, even if it's fair.

------
zecho
I played quite a bit of poker and blackjack to help pay for college; Some of
my "not-really-friends" friends dropped out to play professionally.

Playing 6+ simultaneous tables isn't as romantic (it's a boring way to play)
or hard (there's software to help you keep track) as this article makes it out
to be, when you're essentially asking the same question every hand, doing the
same calculation. It gets to be mind numbing. There are few situations in
poker that are truly interesting when you've played tens of thousands of
hands.

I'd liken the experience less to Command and Conquer and more to mining for
gold in World of Warcraft.

And that was the difference between me and the others in my circle that still
play full time: Mental stamina.

Seeing the chips as points and not money is really a defense mechanism to keep
you playing rationally. Where many good, but not great, online players lose it
is in the grind of constantly calculating pot odds.

------
vessenes
I would badly like to sit this guy down with 'young poker hotshot' expected
lifetime net worth graph, median lifetime net worth graph and 'likelihood you
will go broke' worksheet, and convince him to dump $3mm into T-bills.

Oh well. I wouldn't have listened either when I was his age.

------
rms
I recently started blogging at <http://www.rationalpoker.com>, there's an
intro post at
[http://lesswrong.com/lw/4yk/verifying_rationality_via_ration...](http://lesswrong.com/lw/4yk/verifying_rationality_via_rationalpokercom/),
if you're curious.

~~~
DevX101
I have several self-recognized cognitive biases that make me a terrible poker
player.

I hate to give up on something once I start. If I start reading a terrible
book, it burns me because I feel obligated to finish. This also means its
pretty tough for me to fold a hand after I've been had.

Given this bias, I've predicted that my highest EV move in poker is not to
play.

(By the way, take out the extra periods from your links)

~~~
gcv
You mean you would have a hard time forcing yourself to throw away a worthless
hand (in Texas hold'em) after you already committed some money to the pot?
Even if, e.g., you called in late position pre-flop with a bad hand just
because the pot odds required it?

------
ianl
Its very common for high level rts players to also play poker. During the time
of starcraft broodwar before starcraft 2 launched there was not much north
american/european interest in the gaming scene. Professional players use to
play poker by day to make money and starcraft by night to practice for their
next tournament.

~~~
sjm
In fact, one of the first foreign (non-Korean) StarCraft players to move to
Korea went on to become a pro poker player (Bertrand 'ElkY' Grospellier:
<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bertrand_Grospellier>)

From what I understand, many of the Korean pros get into online poker as well.

~~~
ianl
One of the most prestigious non-korean tournaments is sponsored by
Pokerstrategy.

[http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=205...](http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=205550)

------
brianbreslin
Semi related question: how do these guys keep their millions, from a banking
and tax standpoint. Is it no longer illegal to gamble online in the us?

If I was him I'd be socking away a % monthly for saving and rainy day funds

~~~
rboyd
Good question. I think it's pretty hysterical by the way, how it seems like
half of the online gambling articles published in the mainstream media are
about the shady underbelly of an illegal industry and the other half sort of
glamorize the top winners.

To answer your question though, online poker is in a kind of legal limbo. The
Unlawful Internet Gambling and Enforcement Act (UIGEA) was tacked onto the
SAFE Port Act of 2006 in a midnight rush job, making it illegal for banks to
facilitate transactions related to online gambling. It didn't specifically
make the act of playing illegal beyond what has been on the books since the
Interstate Wire Act of 1961. In theory, poker's ace up the sleeve is that it's
a skill game and can't fall under the same restrictions that regulate other
games of chance.

At a state level, there are states that have specifically made online poker
illegal, Washington (where it's a felony) and Kentucky are two, if memory
serves but I think there might be one or two more by now. Then you see other
states NJ/CA/NV moving to legalize and regulate intrastate network gaming.

Probably most of the players winning smaller amounts just don't bother to
declare, and the bigger players are filing Form W2-G the same as they would
for offline winnings.

------
nmaio
I used to bet on sports. I've made 13k in 13 days. I've wagered 10k on a
single game (numerous times). I've lost 14k in three hours. I've wagered my
entire bankroll on a single day of NFL games.

And guess what? It was never about the money. Sure, I always wanted to see the
number go up, but I had no intentions of withdrawing any of it. It was about
being right. It was about pushing the envelope. And most importantly, it was
about trying to figure something out.

I don't care if you make millions or go bust... or go back and forth between
the two. As long as you leave your emotions at the door, you'll be fine. And
to be honest, I was good at that (and still am). But it's probably not a life
you want...

I mean, yeah, it's fun trying to solve something and seeing if you're right or
wrong. But you're only doing it for yourself. You and no one else. And if that
tickles your fancy, go for it - I have nothing against it. But what if you
chose to share your passion for wanting to be right, for wanting to push the
envelope, for wanting to figure something out...

In my eyes, it wouldn't necessarily make you a better person, it'd just be
hard to call that bet a loss.

------
daimyoyo
I'm going to make a prediction and say that this kid is flat broke in the next
2-5 years.(if it takes that long) The article seems to gloss over the
sickening amounts of variance that poker can have. Just like you can run up
from nothing to millions in year, you can go from living in the penthouse to
sweeping the lobby over a few bad sessions. Especially at the stakes he's
playing at. Ask Mike Matusow about being a pro who's borrowing money to pay
bills.

~~~
zecho
It comes down to bankroll protection.

With midrange professional players, I don't think you really see those kinds
of crazy swings. Once you reach a certain level, you start doing dumb things,
like playing head-to-head games at ridiculous stakes against players you're
equally matched with.

Which is why poker doesn't scale well. Eventually you're not going to hit a
level where you don't have as clear an advantage over your opponents. Your
profits will eventually end up capping out. You either need to find a new
angle or start gambling like a degenerate to further advance.

Players like Matusow aren't going to scale down their stakes when their
bankroll starts to shrink dramatically.

------
eapen
C&C = Command and Conquer (game) for other curious folk

------
anagnorisis
ps...check out the mathematic models/programs that play out and distill
"variance", the "long term", and 'luck' in poker..It's remarkable stuff.

~~~
mellowgold
My first Django project was to create a simple variance simulator for poker
(<http://www.evplusplus.com/poker_tools/variance_simulator/>). The amount of
luck involved in poker is truly tough to comprehend.

Becoming a successful poker player not only requires you to be quite skilled,
but you also need to run well at the beginning of your career.

~~~
erikb
Actually not. You didn't understand how luck works. Beeing successful in Poker
is more about how you handle the bad streaks when they hit. Because they can
hit often and hard. Everybody is running well from time to time.

~~~
mellowgold
"You didn't understand how luck works"

I have written quite a bit of poker software and played close to 700k hands of
poker over the last 5 years so I understand how luck works better than most.

My point is, that if you imagine 10 hypothetical identical players (they make
the same move in the same situations) with $1000 starting bankrolls, all with
moderate a positive expectation of 1bb/100 hands many of those players will
lose a lot at the beginning, get discouraged and give up playing poker in the
first 10-20k hands they play because they ran poorly.

The people who were "lucky" and ran well at the beginning of there careers
(like me) have a chance to grow a larger bankroll and will be less likely to
go broke in the future as their risk-of-ruin decreases.

This is exactly what the simulator does. It takes identical players, under
identical game conditions and looks at possible outcomes. You can see for
yourself how wildly different the results can be for a player with a 1bb/100
win rate. (Note: the simulator of course is inherently flawed because games
conditions and the mental condition of the player are not accounted for)

------
anagnorisis
The prob with..every..mainstream story on (e)poker is the unflinching
marketing élan of the writers, and necessity to give a (stil truly) sub-
terranean slice of life immediate resonance to the audience.

Not too encroach upon anyone's character or existence, let alone the actual
people in the article...

Poker is an inexorable gambit; both in lifestyle (subjectively define by
'sanity', and career (objectively define buy debt and financial bottoming out.

Poker is a fairly pure, distilled hologram of the caprice/randomness, and
skill/will that resides over living and life itself, and a stripped bare
interplay of emotional and psychological alchemy that everyone has, and lives
with.

The greatest poker success carries little to not weight, in terms of
posterity. IMO, greatest difference between poker and "other jobs".

Even aject fail in other occupational pursuits almost always carries over some
tangible good productive benefit for you and your career. Whether it's
contacts, savings, reputation, experience itself.

Contra poker; even after enormous success, the above benefits are a double
edged sword at best, where your experience and connections (ability to get
back in) are as likely to be the underpinnings of cyclical, fixed failure.

At best, it's a totoal unknown; emoyrically, it's pretty obvious.

And either way, poker is devoid of true metrics...in the same way -- IMHO --
other businesses get/should be hinged upon.

Ironic, since poker is all about a scoreboard and 'statistics'. But the living
and breathing reality of metrics is a seperate (undomesticated) species from
standard business metrics.

One more thing, hopefully more concrete (I'm reticent to be too specific since
I know/knew a lot of the actual ppl involved),

The luck of poker, applied to people otherwise talented and able, is most
profound in the beginnings of their poker experience, most often at adolescent
ages where an underlying emotional caprice and aversion (or tolerance..) to
risk is extremely strong.

Majority of the "long"term winners, had remarkably pain-free beginnings, when
their emotional and psychological poker fortress got created. Still, many
dropped out of school after losing/borrowings appreciable sums, to persevere.

Pointedly, of the latter...most were in financial umbrella's of school and
family, and insulated from the psycholigical tumult n emotional traumas that
define any poker career.

This got too long n fumbling, but personal experience/a vacuum of time on the
treadmill/and a general interest necessitated.

~~~
Wolf_Larsen
The most important point that you made is that poker brings nothing to the
table for a player except money. You learn little that can be monetized away
from the table, and spend your time building a bankroll instead of building a
business that has value other than the money it brings in.

Poker doesn't scale. The goal is to increase your hourly rate. Spend your time
coding.

~~~
endlessvoid94
No. way.

Playing poker with PEOPLE, at least (not online) has enormous benefits.
Learning how to read people in-depth is incredibly valuable. Also learning how
to stand your ground and unflinchingly bluff (or deliberatly avoid
telegraphing your hand) is also a great skill to have.

There's so much more to poker than the money. Unless you're talking only about
online poker.

~~~
Wolf_Larsen
> Learning how to read people in-depth is incredibly valuable.

You think that playing poker teaches you how to read people past the poker
table? In what context? This sounds very delusional to me. In business, if you
are doing anything with a lot of money at stake (that is not illicit), then
the cards are always face up if you do enough work.

> Also learning how to stand your ground and unflinchingly bluff (or
> deliberatly avoid telegraphing your hand) is also a great skill to have.

You think this is a "great" skill? I think its valuable, but not as valuable
as learning code or understanding how the economy works.

Also, you didn't even mention discipline or emotional control. Those are real
values that poker will teach you. Bankroll management, dealing with long term
variance, and getting bad beats make you either toughen up or break.

How old are you? How long have you been playing poker? I don't mean it
derogatorily. I've played A LOT of poker and I've done a lot of other things.
Poker has given me less skills than organizing soccer games.

~~~
endlessvoid94
I'm 24. I'm certainly not a pro, either. I'm not arguing these skills are the
best skills anyone could have, I'm trying to convey that the intuition and
instinct built up over time playing with people has some value, and that value
isn't insignificant.

I failed to convey this, though. I totally agree with your points about
disciple and emotional control. I just can't help but feel the skills I've
gotten from playing poker with people are valuable. Who you play with matters
a great deal, of course. I've gotten job offers based on my poker game not
because I was a star or anything, but because I successfully illustrated my
ability to execute strategy well. Etc. Etc. I turned down the jobs, by the
way.

End of rant.

~~~
arbitrarywords
It also depends what you need to learn. Personally, as someone who avoids
conflict and always second guesses my decisions, I found poker helps a little
to train me out of these traits.

~~~
zecho
Yeah, there's not a ton I can say I've applied from my years gambling to other
parts of my life, but this was the biggest takeaway: Shit happens; Trust the
math; Don't let a big win get to your head, either.

If anything, I've learned not to get emotionally attached to day-to-day swings
and try to rationally focus on the bigger picture.

