The variance is also what allows poker to thrive and pro players to have an income though. Since poker is zero sum (really negative because of the casino's take) there has to be a steady supply of losing money playing. That means bad players have to believe they have a shot. If they never or very rarely won against higher skilled players, they'd dry up.
Imagine casinos that had cash chess tables or basketball courts. Would you have enough dead money willing to risk playing? I'd wager no. You'd get occasional fish willing to try but they'd get dunked on and go home. Without enough new money, the game would dry up as the best players and the casino accumulate all the rest.
This is true for newbie investor after reading a book and investing in Wall-Street. They almost always lose the money and again Wall Street releases a new easy book on investing.
I find a huge co-relation between how poker and wall street is aligned.
The difference between poker and the stock market is that the odds are in your favor in the stock market. This plays out to between 6-8% per year. Visit this highly upvoted HN link to learn more and not lose: https://training.kalzumeus.com/newsletters/archive/investing...
the term you are looking for is a donkey or a fish. A fish that has a lot of money is called a "whale". Back at pokerstars I was always amazed by some unknown out of a middle eastern country (UAE or SA) -- this is when they still display your country -- and they'd be playing with the pros 100/200$ blinds. I always thought, are they good or too much oil money?
Imagine casinos that had cash chess tables or basketball courts. Would you have enough dead money willing to risk playing? I'd wager no. You'd get occasional fish willing to try but they'd get dunked on and go home. Without enough new money, the game would dry up as the best players and the casino accumulate all the rest.