You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
psychologically easier poker or trading?
- Thread starter tradingcards
- Start date
Quote from ElCubano:
over the course of 100,000 hands and a good bank roll you should be aiight...when given the CORRECT ODDS to call/bet or put ur money at risk you will make money in the long run even when you lose the hand...positive expectancy..
Playing 100,000 hands shouldn't take long online, probably 2-5 months depending on how many tables you play. I've also seen pros run bad for 100,000 hands (getting it all in with the best of it and losing).
With that said, it would take forever to play 100,000 hands live, probably 10 years. (I haven't done the math, too lazy). In live poker, one can potentially run bad their entire life. Live tournaments are okay though since the payoff is huge if you win, and one win offsets all the small losses.
This is why game selection is so important live. You must have some really donkish players to pay you off big, since you don't get to see as many hands as online poker.
Quote from cashmoney69:
Trading is easier because you are in total control of your money, as where in poker, you're not.
As others have said, this is not correct.
Only other thing is - blowing up in both games involves the same kind of psychological breakdown. Those multimillion dollar institutional losses we read about in trading are the result of guys not being able to do what they know they're supposed to, in the face of withering losses. In poker those losses may result from a bad mistake or a bad run, but the results are the same.
I was intrigued by the respondent here who said that you can run bad 'your entire life' in live poker. What a concept. It's happened to me for a few weeks, but in those bad runs, I always identify some bad play as well. However, I have heard of pros talking about running bad for 'years'.
In poker, you're forced to throw more chips on the table if you want to stay in the game (blinds and raises)...not so with trading.
Quote from traderNik:
As others have said, this is not correct.
Only other thing is - blowing up in both games involves the same kind of psychological breakdown. Those multimillion dollar institutional losses we read about in trading are the result of guys not being able to do what they know they're supposed to, in the face of withering losses. In poker those losses may result from a bad mistake or a bad run, but the results are the same.
I was intrigued by the respondent here who said that you can run bad 'your entire life' in live poker. What a concept. It's happened to me for a few weeks, but in those bad runs, I always identify some bad play as well. However, I have heard of pros talking about running bad for 'years'.
I don't want to dispute it but then you have no chance to find out whether you are a good player or not (over the span of many many years).
Quote from traderNik:
I was intrigued by the respondent here who said that you can run bad 'your entire life' in live poker. What a concept. It's happened to me for a few weeks, but in those bad runs, I always identify some bad play as well. However, I have heard of pros talking about running bad for 'years'.
Running bad means getting it all in with the best of it and losing, or running into better hands often like KK vs AA or set over set situations. There is no way you can avoid losing in these situations unless you had a spot on read which is almost impossible even for a pro. It is actually a mistake mathematically to fold these hands, majority of the time.
Visit the 2+2 forums and you'll often see pros post graphs of their database consisting of 100,000+ hands, showing how bad they are running. It's simple math. If they are running so bad for 100k hands online, just figure out how long it would take to play 100k hands live. It would take years. I think in live poker, it's hard to average over 25 hands per hour.
Although you MAY run bad for years on end in live poker, the chances are if you lose constantly for 5-10yrs you are just a bad player. Prolly 95%+ ur a bad player 1-5% you are an outlying statistical anomaly or somewhere in these regions.
Also poker is more difficult psychologically because there is NO way to play +ev poker and limit your variance in high stakes games. You might be earning $100-200/hr playing 2 tables of 25/50NL sat with $5000 on each table.
In an hour you might swing $15k either way. Big swing compared to your $100 an hour long term win rate eh?
I am guessing there are trading setups that can be profitable and limit ur variance considerably.
I am 'guessing' because I have been a high stakes poker player for last 3 yrs and now i am looking to trade to get a better return on my capital. Returns diminish alot in poker, at the moment i have a large capital base but i cant put it to good use unless i play really high stakes where the players are too good and so your edge is tiny/zero.
Also poker is more difficult psychologically because there is NO way to play +ev poker and limit your variance in high stakes games. You might be earning $100-200/hr playing 2 tables of 25/50NL sat with $5000 on each table.
In an hour you might swing $15k either way. Big swing compared to your $100 an hour long term win rate eh?
I am guessing there are trading setups that can be profitable and limit ur variance considerably.
I am 'guessing' because I have been a high stakes poker player for last 3 yrs and now i am looking to trade to get a better return on my capital. Returns diminish alot in poker, at the moment i have a large capital base but i cant put it to good use unless i play really high stakes where the players are too good and so your edge is tiny/zero.