Originally Posted by AxelWolf View Post
Originally Posted by accountinquestion View Post
Polk and Berky could clearly support themselves off poker. While maintaining their current quality of life? Doug - no. No idea about Berky. They've made money off plenty of other stuff. It is absurd to think they couldn't "support themselves". If they can't no one else can either.

As far as fading near-parity it just depends on the limits and game selection. You can play 1/3 in plenty of places with 1-2 other good players. The hourly isn't great but probably fairly easy to hit $50 an hour if you are good. I'm guessing it can go higher fairly easily but requires selective games. Once you go higher (2/5) the public games get a lot tougher and your edge goes down tremendously relative to the field. The problem is people have come to realize how much game selection matters. So the more cunning guys with good social skills run their own games. The fish like playing against a easier field as do the handful of pros who get in. I've heard people bribe the game-runners but not sure how common that is.

The higher-stakes public games will have 1-2 donators and everyone basically sucks their dick in high-limit games. Telling them how nice their hair is and shit... literally. Public games 1-2 donators, private games 1-2 pros. Anyway, this is just my impression and some observations.

I find full-ring no holdem really boring. It is a shame though as there is ok money in it. Maybe once the weather isn't as nice I'll try to hang out more in cardrooms. Thats all it is though and some plo here and there.
?
Jbjb suggested none of those guys are good enough at poker to win much.

Tableplay gave his impression of current poker world. Something I know a decent amount about.

So i was bored and commented on both posts without the quoting.

Live poker is probably as good as ever. These streams bring in a lot of players. It has likely lowered the grinder/rec ratio significantly. All that solver crap is a waste of time in almost all live games.