In Response to Re: Is There Money To Be Had? : Fair point in that case. However, I'd maybe then refine my point that players who do play for real cash still aim to win money as a primary goal underlying their play (and fun). Posted by swanstu
I don't think this is 100% true. I deposited £20 about 7 years ago and am still playing on that £20. It's been into 3 figures and down to more or less starting stack numerous times but as long as I don't have to re-deposit, I'm happy. If I did "go broke", well what other hobby can you enjoy for hours and hours almost every week in 7 years without it effectively costing you a penny?
Having fun and learning are my primary goals when playing. Aiming to win per se is a nice bonus, winning each game once I'm in it is a target but that's about all you can say.
lol - I think I need to be playing all the players who profess to having no worries about winning/losing money on here.
Before hhg starts going on again about this, as a poker player I know what people say is not always their true underlying motivations - so many winning players on here have been banging the 'it's only for fun' angle, funny that...
To return it back to topic (again) the question was also how the money angle does affect those players who do notice and care whether they've won money or lost it.
Even players who are directly trying to either (a) win all the chips in a tourney, (b) increase their bankroll or (c) trying to get a steady ROI curve os Sharkscope are not necessarily playing primarily for the money side of it. All these things for some people are merely a measure of how they performed playing a game which they enjoyed. A bit I guess like trying to get a birdie during a hole at golf, shooting a score for 18 holes in under X amount of strokes or maintaining a certain handicap over the year.
People can love the challenge of trying to do the above, whether it is realistic or not. Then there is the social aspect of the game to think about. Poker is afterall a social activity (we need to mix with others) and an activity that people can get hours of entertainment out of for very little outlay.
If you really want to know if you just play for money or not then ask yourself the following question. If Bill Gates popped his clogs tomorrow and left you £50m-£100m... Would you still play poker? I mean the money would be of no practical consequence to you apart from being a barometer of game performance.
For me the answer would be yes, I would keep playing. I have met so many interesting people playing poker and enjoy the company of so many, even some who prattle on about concrete/cement I would still want to win every cent/chip in play; I would still dream of winning a few bracelets at the WSOP but not for financial gain. I would just do this because I am a competative so and so who likes to socialise with people.
Look at Barry Greenstein, does he not donate all his winnings to charity?
If you really want to know if you just play for money or not then ask yourself the following question. If Bill Gates popped his clogs tomorrow and left you £50m-£100m... Would you still play poker? I mean the money would be of no practical consequence to you apart from being a barometer of game performance. For me the answer would be yes, I would keep playing. Posted by markycash
That's why I've pointed out (though hh choses to ignore details in postings) I'd never say most players play only for money either - they play for both, fun and money. There may be varying degrees, but I'd say almost all players play for both.
Think this has become just debating semantics at this point.
Yes many play purely for the enjoyment of the game. However remove the money element of it and how many would continue to play?! The money gives the game edge, excitement, highs, lows and the challenge. They, money and enjoyment, are both connected and you cant have one without the other.
In Response to Re: Is There Money To Be Had? : That's why I've pointed out (though hh choses to ignore details in postings) I'd never say most players play only for money either - they play for both, fun and money. There may be varying degrees, but I'd say almost all players play for both . Posted by swanstu
If I had £50m-£100m as in the hypothetical situation I mentioned then I certainly wouldn't be playing "for money" but purely for the challenge, socialisation and fun element. I would only be looking at money or ROI etc to monitor how I was doing in my challenege/hobby. I.E. to keep score.
Financial remuneration would not be the motivating factor drawing me to the felt in the above example but merely a handy tool to keep track of how I performed in the game I was enjoying.
In Response to Re: Is There Money To Be Had? : If I had £50m-£100m as in the hypothetical situation I mentioned then I certainly wouldn't be playing "for money" but purely for the challenge, socialisation and fun element. I would only be looking at money or ROI etc to monitor how I was doing in my challenege/hobby. I.E. to keep score. Financial remuneration would not be the motivating factor drawing me to the felt in the above example but merely a handy tool to keep track of how I performed in the game I was enjoying. Posted by markycash
But we do have to remember that your example is not exactly what's happening to real players, lol, I wish.....
Most are people who (presumably) are not millionaires. Though from many answers here I'm starting to believe I am playing against loads of them!
In Response to Re: Is There Money To Be Had? : But we do have to remember that your example is not exactly what's happening to real players, lol, I wish..... Most are people who (presumably) are not millionaires. Though from many answers here I'm starting to believe I am playing against loads of them! Posted by swanstu
Nice thread and I admire your persistence swanstu ;-)
I think Marky's made a very good point, I'm sure a survey of real money poker players would reveal that most would carry on playing, even if the money meant nothing to them.
In Response to Re: Is There Money To Be Had? : Poker is primarily a gambling game, like betting on horses - people I'd argue in general get into it to try to win money, simple as that, not just for fun. IMHO of course. there's also the fact that poker is spoken of as a game of skill , so people think they can make money. Posted by swanstu
Do you think your normal sports bettor thinks they will win long term? I think everyone knows they will most likely lose, they would like to win of course but its a bit of fun, an added sweat during a game.
In Response to Re: Is There Money To Be Had? : Do you think your normal sports bettor thinks they will win long term? I think everyone knows they will most likely lose, they would like to win of course but its a bit of fun, an added sweat during a game. Posted by MattBates
I think a lot (most possibly) believe they could become a winning bettor - obv they may be self-decieving in that belief.
Poker is an even more extreme example though - it's represented as a game of skill, which enhances this point.
I've slept on it and he is right. Every single poker player in the history of poker plays chiefly for the money and to try be a winning player. Anyone who says their primary goal is to enjoy themselves is talking garbage, because swanstu said so.
Please forgive me for having the audacity to think you talk out of your backside.
In Response to Re: Is There Money To Be Had? : I've slept on it and he is right. Every single poker player in the history of poker plays chiefly for the money and to try be a winning player. Anyone who says their primary goal is to enjoy themselves is talking garbage, because swanstu said so. Please forgive me for having the audacity to think you talk out of your backside. Posted by hhyftrftdr
Mudslinging now there's no more points for you to make then?...That's great.
If you ever actually read any post properly instead of rush to troll back you would see I didn't argue that. ^^^
Comments
I don't think this is 100% true. I deposited £20 about 7 years ago and am still playing on that £20. It's been into 3 figures and down to more or less starting stack numerous times but as long as I don't have to re-deposit, I'm happy. If I did "go broke", well what other hobby can you enjoy for hours and hours almost every week in 7 years without it effectively costing you a penny?
Having fun and learning are my primary goals when playing. Aiming to win per se is a nice bonus, winning each game once I'm in it is a target but that's about all you can say.
People can love the challenge of trying to do the above, whether it is realistic or not. Then there is the social aspect of the game to think about. Poker is afterall a social activity (we need to mix with others) and an activity that people can get hours of entertainment out of for very little outlay.
If you really want to know if you just play for money or not then ask yourself the following question. If Bill Gates popped his clogs tomorrow and left you £50m-£100m... Would you still play poker? I mean the money would be of no practical consequence to you apart from being a barometer of game performance.
For me the answer would be yes, I would keep playing. I have met so many interesting people playing poker and enjoy the company of so many, even some who prattle on about concrete/cement
Look at Barry Greenstein, does he not donate all his winnings to charity?
Financial remuneration would not be the motivating factor drawing me to the felt in the above example but merely a handy tool to keep track of how I performed in the game I was enjoying.
I think Marky's made a very good point, I'm sure a survey of real money poker players would reveal that most would carry on playing, even if the money meant nothing to them.
Thanks Jingle