Topic: [AMA] The Life of a Professional Gambler - page 3. (Read 2452 times)

No threat was ever decent. Kidding! And I agree with you 100%.


The list is surprisingly long. And what's on the other end of the seesaw? Is it only this:


Is it therefore worth it?

Based on the list of disadvantages, I feel that you are constantly pressured not just mentally but also socially, financially, and even emotionally. You're living on a financial edge and seem alone and lonely in your 24/7 duty because friends and family are ignorant about what you are doing. I hope I'm wrong but that's what this list evoke in me. How could you even share your joy in winning a game when the other people around you are clueless?

And I'd like to get enlightened more on "Bullying from authorities."

@tyKiwanuka. What are your best recommendations for books to read to become a better gambler on sportsbetting and other gambling games?

Also, when will you start your own tipster thread hehehe?

Looks like you guys ran out of questions So I will ask myself some questions, that I think are important and/or of interest.


Straightforward answer: I can’t.

The assumption for a a bet Is always that a game/match/race is played a million+ times under the same circumstances and you have to judge what is the probability of each outcome. Now in sports a match can’t be played under the same circumstances a million times. Circumstances include everything that can influence the outcome of a match. This groes from form, suspended and injured players, motivation to things like weather, spectator riots, tiredness or the star player going through a divorce.
All these things considered leads to the odds being  published and probably adjusted by the market, if the market thinks differently. But we will only play that one game under these exact circumstances. If there was the exact same matchup a day later, lots of circumstances might have changed.

Lets assume the odds reflect a possibility of 80%/13%/7% for 1X2 in football. Now you yourself have some good insight and think home win has 85% and place a bet accordingly. The home team loses and you lose your bet. A lot of people would now think, that the bet didn’t have any value, because it lost - but they are wrong. Your 85% for home win also included maybe 10% for draw and 5% for away win and thus it’s normal for these probabilities to come real too. Bad luck. But if this game is played another 99 times under the same circumstances, you could see a home win 60 times in a row then for example and after 100 games you could have seen 85 home wins, 10 draws and 7 away wins. But you will never know, since this game is only played once under these circumstances.

So, for a single bet, you will never know, if it actually carried value or not. The only thing you can do, is, to see if you are able to play valuable bets on a regular basis. And this is pretty easy  to judge. If you played 500 or 1000 bets and have made a profit, you are able to spot and play valuable bets. Over a big enough sample size, the luck factor is eliminated and the outcomes should more or less reflect the probabilities.

I have played all odds in my career, from 1.01 to 1000. I usually don't care about the odds, as long as they have value, this might be a 3.00, but also a 1.05 can have value.

I like to play some higher odds, so I am mostly playing odds above 2.00. For prematch bets in H2H or over/under markets, I would stay in the 1.80 to 2.00 range though. I shifted my focus more on inplay trading now and there I am looking for high odds (lets say above 3.00) and try to hedge myself out of the market or reduce my liability, if it moves in favour.



Another user was asking a bit of the same before and I struggled to give him an answer, since I don't know what he is looking for with his betting.

So you would have to answer (yourself) these questions first:

Do you just want to bet for fun or make a living out of it ? With what amount would you be satisfied ?
How many bets do you (plan to) play on average (per day or week or month) ?

With a bank of $5000 you can already generate quite a good turnover. A 2% flat stake money management would allow you to stake $100 per bet. The NBA season is running for around 7 months, so lets make that 210 days and there is lots of games every day. If you are doing 5 bets a day on average (prematch and live), this would lead to a turnover of $105,000. Now I don't think you can have a huge yield with NBA, it's just too hard of a market to have a big edge, so you would probably work with a 1.5% yield. With the mentioned turnover and yield, you would make $1,575 per season. I disregarded compounding in this basic example, which would let you stake a bit more in the proceedings, if you win.

If you found a niche or specialized in some smaller league, you would probably be able to work with a 10% yield. This would result in a $10,500 profit then. But you might not be able to have those 5 bets per day in that niche.

Lots of things to consider in the end as you see

---

You should never stop just because you have won amount X or lost amount X. You should stop, when there is no valuable bet no more.

This is a great thread to watch, I've been reading some of the comments but haven't read most of it actually.

I have a question, since we are talking about bankroll management here, and we know without a decent bankroll, we will never win big.
I like to give a figure, for example I have a bankroll of $5000 use for the entire NBA season, how much can I expect to win that would satisfy me as a gambler, or should I stop when I am already winning or should I end the season?

I am just thinking that along the way we could be greedy, so I would appreciate to hear your experience on this.

and by the way, what odds do you normally take? do you take 1.90 below or 2.00 up only?

I've noticed that it works the other way round as well. If you fold several hands in a row, your opponents might have an impression that you play only very strong hands, and because of that you can easily get away with bluff afterwards.


I think it's not only you, but any pro gambler should think this way. That's what makes the lives of some gamblers miserable, they hope to become a millionaire with their gambling.

I have added a little glossary to the first post now.

---

I will list some disadvantages of being a professional gambler, without explanations for the time being. If you have questions about a particular disadvantage, feel free to ask.

• Not contributing to society (Discussed already starting here)
• Living on the financial edge (Discussed a bit here already)
• Ignorance from friends and family
• Being on duty 24/7
• No paid vacations
• No social insurance
• People don't understand what you are doing and are not interested due to not understanding
• Working in an often shady considered business and a grey area
• Huge mental pressure
• Bullying from authorities

First question answered here and third question answered here. I should maybe add some kind of glossary to the first post and I put it on my to-do list now.

For your second question: Not really. This unpredictableness (and with it not being able to plan anything longterm) is really annoying, I can unequivocally confess that. I am always a bit jealous of people, that regularly get their paycheck at the end of the month, can pay for everything with that money and all they have to do, is go to work five times a week. But they give up a good amount of their life and freedom for it, so in that regard I am then not jealous anymore.
During a heavy losing streak, thoughts of quitting and getting rid of the pressure go through your mind, but in the end it is what you love to do and hard work really pays off in betting. These thoughts vanish and vanished pretty fast in the end.


Adding to society is maybe more of a philosophical topic in the end, but I have to disagree with this part. Because not everyone is giving me that money freely. Recreational players know that this is just another hobby that costs some money like so many other hobbies do and more importantly they know when to stop. I don't have any numbers, but I think a huge amount of my money actually comes from addicted players and for these people gambling is no hobby anymore but a sickness. They don't play for fun and know they will most likely lose, they HAVE to play to feed their addiction. And while going after their addiction, they might feel some satisfaction, but every other moment, they are "not fine with that". So taking advantage of fun players is fine with me, taking advantage of other peoples sickness not so much. But what can you do. You will never know, since you don't see from whom that money actually comes and I am glad it is like that.


I don't plan my retirement in regards to gambling, why should I, it's fun Everybody better have a hobby, especially when you are retired. Just going to doctors and watching TV is not what I plan when I am old. I can imagine myself still betting with like 80, if still alive, because I love it.

Your question was probably more directed towards me retiring and doing things rich people do, because I got financially independent with my winnings from betting. I don't think I will ever be able to make (such) a fortune with betting and retire from "being a pro". As stated in the OP, I am no highroller and never was. And I have to regularly withdraw money to pay for my expenses, so compounding is not always easy (to up my stakes then accordingly). And it's the same for the people in my network. They maybe bought a little house, a little flat or a nice car, but other than that, they are not able to throw money around, but have a good income with a job they love.

The biggest misconception is really, that everyone thinks, pro gamblers are always filthy rich. And I have no idea where this illusion comes from tbh - these poker pros you see in TV are not the norm. There are basically no limits on how much you can earn with pro gambling, but there is also no limits on how much you can lose (well, when you are broke). Making your money with betting really isn't an easy task and there is lots of obstacles. And the golden times in betting are over, because the markets have matured so much. Lots of pro betting people are struggling nowadays. The longer a market exists, the more perfect it gets.

In big markets, where you can stake a lot of money, you only have a very little edge, if any. You will probably operate with a yield of 1.5% at best. So you would first have to turn over 1,000,000 to make 15,000. And all that with a proper money management.
In my cycling/winter sports days, I operated with 20-30% yield, but I could only stake peanuts compared to what you can stake in the big markets. So getting a huge turnover is not possible, you operate with a higher yield then and compensate the lower turnover with it. Being successful in these markets then leads to limits and you being shown the door.

I will take any bet, that I rather will (have to) quit betting at some point than becoming a millionaire with it.


I skipped the questions about the kids, since I don't want to talk about that in public, sorry

Well, the strategy is clear and can be found in this thread and all over the internet - value. So the basics everyone has to get familiar with on their own. As to my gambling style, my knowledge about certain sports and their dynamics, money management, tips and tricks, I am willing to share that with everyone, who wants to give it a try with pro betting. But people have to understand, that THEY have to do most of the work. I was always a fan of "learning by doing" and some lessons are only learned by doing (mistakes). I won't - and actually can't - give them a golden recipe and a rule book and they will be successful. You have to learn that from scratch and also find your own way, since my way might not suit them. So being kind of a mentor to someone only works to a certain extent.

First of all I want to congratulate you. This is the first ever decent threat that I ever saw in this 100% spam board.

I didn't read everything yet, but I will.


I have a few comments about this subject.

There are many professions which do not contribute anything to the society.
Many bureaucrats for example, they only drain from the society. Specially here in brazil and other poor countries. But most of those bureaucrats think that their job is important,  while nobody would care if they just vanished.

Being a gambler is different because you certainly don't think that you are doing something important.
However,  when I read your comment and you said your money comes from other players I thought:" well , this guy is contributing to the society after all"

People are freely giving you money just to have some fun.  They are playing a game , which they will probably lose because they are amateurs,  but they are fine with that.

I have some friends who visited Las Vegas to have fun. They separate a stack of money to gamble and that's it. They were happy to have someone to play with and they were gambling that money.

So, somehow your contribution to the society is in this "fun" industry.

---

Now I will make you a question ( I don't know if it was answered already)
You said you are doing this for 15 years. So you are not a kid anymore.

Do you have plans for you retirement? Do you have kids? Do plan on having them? Would it be possible to save for retirement and to grow kids in your gambling style and strategy?

It's a necessity, I can't imagine anyone out there being a winning player in any stakes without bluffing. Not only is it great when you actually get it through but there is value in being caught in a bluff as well. They are less likely to believe you the next time you actually have a winning hand and might call down with something weak. I believe that's why some people think it's a good idea to show the bluff at times when it gets through.

The trick is picking good spots and evaluating more the cards you think your opponent has rather than the opponent themselves for the most part. Obviously a tight player who only comes in with say AQ+ or TT+ is easy to bluff on a board that has 2 6 8 9 8 as they have probably missed their top pair and if they've checked down you could have bet the turn or river. This isn't most opponents though, you generally have to hope they understand what you are likely to have and if the cards fit that range push the action. Sure sometimes you get caught but like I said there is value there as well in your table image.

It can be nerve racking to bet 2 streets on a pure bluff but it can also be effective, as long as you are only using it a smaller percentage of the time. A lot of people loose their nerve on a bluff and don't fire on the river or they don't play the hand the same way they would if they actually had a good hand and that's where it falls apart.

I have three (3) questions regarding the gambling life, in general:

First, how did your family react when they found out that you using gambling as your profession and main source of income?
Second, was there any point in your gambling life that you almost quitted this profession due to its risky and unpredictable stream of income?
Lastly, are there any advice that you would like to say to gamblers who aspire to use it as their main profession?

I used to gamble back in the days with my brother and I mainly viewed it as a form of entertainment to improve my relationship with him. I would very much appreciate to see on your point-of-view on how you chose this life.

Well, what is a bluff in the end ? Part of poker is also reading your opponent. If you are good at it and have some indication, that your opponent has a rather weak hand (while you yourself have 72o), and you outplay him, I wouldn't call it a bluff per se. You just played the hand of your opponent in that case and didn't care about your hand.

At the final table in a tournament you might be down to 5 players and of course you loosen your range a bit then. An ok-ish hand like T9 is much more valuable against 4 players than it is against 8 players.

And position play is also a huge factor. Imagine you sitting on the button and everyone folding in front of you. You have Q8 and your opponent at SB has the exact same hand. You make a raise of 3BB to a) steal the blinds and if that doesn't work, you b) still have a playable hand. The small blind will most likely fold then, besides having the exact same hand. Now if you switch positions, you would be the one folding. You need a strong(er) hand to counter aggressiveness than you need to have to be the aggressor. Being aggressive with average to weak-ish hands is not bluffing then (for me), it's just taking advantage of the psychological dynamics and/or your ability to read your opponents.

But in the very end, you often have to pretend to have a strong hand while you maybe have not and we can call that bluffing, yes. And it's needed to win in poker, you can't have good hands all the time.

Maybe @Steamtyme could chime in and share his thoughts about bluffing.


Mixing your game is always good of course, because it makes it harder for your opponents to read you. The problem is, if you are a naturally born tight player, it's hard to be an aggressive player too AND be good at it. That is why I often say, you should mainly do the things you are comfortable with, but try to improve other areas step by step.


Yes, sure. Being financially well positioned helps with a lot of things. Not only poker, betting, working in general, but it gets you rid of a lot of mental headache as well.

That's what I've noticed too. Overly aggressive players rarely make it to the paid places. They may stay at the top for about first 30 minutes of tournament, but then they are out after losing a couple of all-ins to players with really good hands. It's a known fact that over-aggressiveness can be exploited.

 

True, but without bluffing at all you can't win the game, right? I tried many times to raise only with a really good hand, and it just doesn't work. Your chips keep disappearing before your eyes, until you decide to play with worse hands than before, but it's too late already.

Imo, mixing the two, aggressiveness and firmness, is a good idea. What do you think?



Agreed. Yet, being helped mentally is a good advantage, when it comes to poker, right?

Just saw your edited questions.


Yes, my stakes are lowered with every bet I make. Every bet is considered a loss for the time being and the stake placed, will be deducted from my betting bank (I do this via an excel sheet). So a betting bank of 1000,- with a bet placed for 20,- Euro (2% per bet f.e.), will lower my bank to 980,-. Next bet will only be staked with 19,60 then. If the first bet is already decided by the time I place my next bet, I will recalculate my bank beforehand and if I maybe won that bet (lets say I had a net win of 25,- with it), my bank for the next bet will be 1025,- and the next stake will be 20,50 accordingly.


There is no fixed number for that. As anticipated by you, it's more a gut feeling that makes you feel you better take some time off and come back with a fresh mind afterwards. And hopefully better results

I started my pro career while still being a student. I had a little student job and still lived with my parents, so didn't have to pay for accomodation and everything that comes with it. I kept this job through many years after finishing my studies, since I liked it and gave me at least a bit of steady income and some variety.


This is a good question and I actually have thought about it often times and talked to my fellow punters about it. Since nobody asked so far, I wanted to do a post on my own about disadvantages about being a pro gambler anyway - and not contributing to society would have been one aspect - but will answer this very aspect right now then.

Being a pro gambler really adds nothing to society in the end. I am mainly doing sportstrading nowadays, so in your view, I at least add some liquidity to the markets, but this doesn't add anything to society too in my book. And on top of that, I am not taking any money from casinos (bookmakers in my case), but actually I take money from other people. It's not the bookmakers that pay me, but I get my money from other peoples losses (a lot of them probably addicted gamblers, i.e. sick). Not very nice.

I always adore doctors, firemen, nurses, social workers etc., because they do actually add a lot to society and are able to help people in need; often on a very low wage and with a lot of idealism. But this is my job now, I love to do it, I am happy with it and can't think of any other job, that would give me such joy (and freedom). And I have to be a little selfish in this case, because there is no point in doing a job that adds to society, but makes me unhappy. I would probably be a burden to society then and by being a pro gambler I don't contribute to society, but I am also no burden.

So I live with this disadvantage, but it doesn't bother me to the extent, that I ever considered quitting. I try to compensate, by striving to be a good, honest and reliable person, be there for my family and friends, help people in need out and do some donations from time to time (I am not rich though - people always think pro gamblers are rich, but most of them are not; it's a normal job).


As mentioned above, I think it's a good question and not inappropriate at all Everybody should take a moment of silence from time to time and think about what he is doing in this world, what could be improved and if there is any reason to change things. This world has gotten so fast and sophisticated, so digital and cold, so money-driven and competitive, that humaneness is just a phrase in the vocabulary of many people and I can't exclude myself from this as well. Unfortunately. But I am aware and try to give my best.

That is a tough (and maybe inappropriate) question. I am sure the vast majority of us dont have a job that adds any contribution to the society because this solely depends on how you define the society itself (are you talking about all people around the world, only poor people, ...).
So his profession may not bring any contribution to poor people  but he is able to feed his kids (thats a plain assumption that he has kids ), pay his bills and maybe gives him the opportunity to spend money twice a year for eg. a cancer research institute.

---

Thanks for the elaboration, sounds plausible to me. Do you have any fixed intervall for lowering your stake, eg every second loss?
Additionally, you mentioned that you may take a few days off on a losing streak. Is there any fixed number of consecutive losses which makes you pause or are we talking about a gut feeling which tells you that you should rather stop playing for a while?

I'm not OP and thus can't speak for him, so it is up to him to reply to your question as he sees appropriate

However, I tend to think that you are following a very narrow approach to this matter ("taking money from the casino"). Essentially, you are looking only at one side of the equation, the "take" part of it, to be exact. We don't know how OP manages his money which he wins through his gambling activities. And technically, it is not just about money

Indeed, he makes a living out of it but if it goes beyond that (which seems to be the case here), we should also consider the "give" part, i.e. how he spends his income other than for mere sustenance. In other words, yes, it is another story but the one which could make all the difference as far as "contribution to the society" is concerned

This is very true and probably the reason I never looked any deeper into turning into a poker pro. Grinding online as a poker pro is a very robotic way of making your money and the fun element is taken out of the game to a good amount. It's different for live poker then again.

I always had the idea of some algorithm for cycling/winter sports, that I just feed with data and maybe some additional information (athlete doesn't like altitude or whatever) and that algorithm then throwing out the bets for the day and I come back in the evening to see how it unfolded and collect my money. But this is boring to me in the end. I am doing this because it really gives me joy and happens to bring me some money too.

I certainly agree with the OP. The only venues to make money in the gambling industry are sportsbetting, poker and I would add blackjack, yet I don't think counting cards is viable anymore as most of the decks are continuously shuffled.

My question is what income did you have before sustaining yourself solely from gambling?
Also doesn't it bother you that your "job" doesn't add any contribution to the society? I mean you're taking money from the casino and that's it - playing your edge. At least a trader provides liquidity in the markets for the hedgers while a gambler doesn't have much impact unless you do something significant with the profits which is another story I guess.

I'm studying up from a lot of what the boom brought out. It became a game of solvers and pure math for many of them, also online made it possible to rack up a lot of hands combined with HUD's for reads. The materials I see mostly point out to playing x hands this way pre-flop because over 10 000 hands it's +ev, or making this re-reaise or bluff here for the same reason. Tournaments get trickier as they talk about all the moving pieces as the levels progress and stack sizes change, not to mention Itm pressure. When it comes to cash they say it's more straight forwards and it's about getting stacks in when the numbers say you are +ev. They don't deny that there are still moments where you can exploit a player, but that overall you should have a range and play it the same way each time thinking of the long term.

I found that with the wealth = aggressive play is more prevalent making your way through a micro stakes tournament. I used to only play those as they were fun and I could get a lot of time out of the 1$ or less buy-in. It lost it's fun factor though when re-buys became more prevalent as so many people would spew off or jam all-in and say chill out it's only an 1$ tournament. I have always assumed that higher stakes don't really run the same, as most are there trying to play a higher level... unless you watch the Triton cash games  
Watching some cash game vlogs you definitely see some though that are willing to bluff jam for 100's if not 1000's just because, all you can hope for is to have them beat I guess.