You need to be logged in to your Sky Poker account above to post discussions and comments.
You might need to refresh your page afterwards.
Options
Drinking with Lives
We should have extreme restrictions on the purchase and consumption of alcohol, in the year of 2020 there 7423 alcohol specific deaths. In England there are an estimated 602391 dependent drinkers. Only 18% are receiving treatment.
24% of adults in England and Scotland regularly drink over the Chief Medical Officer’s low-risk guidelines, and 27% of drinkers in Great Britain binge drink on their heaviest drinking days (over 8 units for men and over 6 units for women.
Alcohol misuse is the biggest risk factor for death, ill-health and disability among 15-49 year-olds in the UK, and the fifth biggest risk factor across all ages.
I propose we start a pressure group called drinking with lives that puts extreme pressures on any sale of alcohol, advertisement of alcohol, strict health checks on anyone who has more than one pint in any given night and affordability checks. We have a drinking epidemic in this country and the predatory pubs and breweries need to be bought into line.
Btw should be obvious what I am doing here and what my real point is. Hint drinking with lives is a very similar name to a pressure group I am not a fan of.
24% of adults in England and Scotland regularly drink over the Chief Medical Officer’s low-risk guidelines, and 27% of drinkers in Great Britain binge drink on their heaviest drinking days (over 8 units for men and over 6 units for women.
Alcohol misuse is the biggest risk factor for death, ill-health and disability among 15-49 year-olds in the UK, and the fifth biggest risk factor across all ages.
I propose we start a pressure group called drinking with lives that puts extreme pressures on any sale of alcohol, advertisement of alcohol, strict health checks on anyone who has more than one pint in any given night and affordability checks. We have a drinking epidemic in this country and the predatory pubs and breweries need to be bought into line.
Btw should be obvious what I am doing here and what my real point is. Hint drinking with lives is a very similar name to a pressure group I am not a fan of.
Comments
www.twitch.tv/pkrpar
Ein pint wodka?
Do you know what’s coming down the pipe?
Australia have,or are about to , ban the sale of ciggies in retail shops.
NZ are just about to go for an outright ban on smoking, full stop.
Booze, sugar,salt, will all be looked at. Slowly turning the screw.
A big push on fake lab grown meat is coming in 2022 and thereafter.
During the first lockdown in SA,the sale of ciggies were forbidden.
The Zulus came to the rescue,according to a friend.The ciggies that were on the black market,went for 4 times the price.
More concerning is the folks addicted to soaps and reality tv.
There’s a vaccine already on the market for the above,morphine,but it’s difficult to judge the efficacy.
I'm off to get ANOTHER Pint of G+T
However, banning or restricting the sale of alcohol will not alleviate the problem, in fact it will make matters worse, as supplies get low prices will soar. This will cause more criminality. Prohibition really worked in the States didn't it.
Another example is class A, illegal but easily bought and consumed creating misery and death, causing a strain on the already overburdened Health Service and a blight on whole communities.
Creating a shortage in supply or putting restrictions in place will not work, nor will the "we are doing this for your own good" argument. Addicts can and will only get better when they want to, and many don't.
I can remember sitting in my doctors surgery with my wife holding my hand and beginning the conversation with this line....
"Doctor I know I'm drinking myself to death, but I can't find a good enough reason to stop"
I know that cut my missus to the bone and I hated myself for saying it but it was true. At that moment in time my wife, my kids and my life weren't enough of a reason to quit, and that's the problem with addiction, that's how it gets you.
What is required are the services to help those who want to get off the ride. There are hundreds and thousands who want to get clean but there are no facilities, few trained people and sod all funding.
Does everybody want help ? No there are many who are happy to enjoy the emotional and moral numbness that results from their withdrawal from reality. I was one such functioning alcoholic until a in a moment of clarity I saw myself for what I was and realised that I had to so something.
I was lucky, I had the one thing that most addicts don't, a loving, supportive family. By the time many realise that they need help their only company and friends are their fellow dependents, and that is not a recipe for success.
Finally you cannot legislate against mans right to do stupid things. Why should people suffer because I decide that I'm going to put 500 units a week into my body. That was my decision and nobody stood there forcing me.
Sorry guys didn't mean to come across as a ranting reformed alky, but the Government know what's required but they go for attention grabbing soundbites instead of tackling the issue in a lasting constructive way.
The best option probably, and the one we seem to be attempting, is removing adverts and raising the cost etc. Over generations these little things should change the culture gradually.
It's the same with racism, xenophobia, homophobia etc. Philippines style drug wars where you just kill anyone involved, to wipe it out, is too barbaric and inhumane. You need to play the long game and educate generational shifts.
I do not actually believe peoples liberties and freedoms should be restricted at all due to others having addiction problems.
Firstly addictions can and do ruin lives, and I do not mean to belittle that or dismiss that. I just do not believe we should restrict everyone because a few people cannot control themselves.
The point I was alluring to is that on nearly every measure if not every measure drinking has done more harm to society then gambling. So if they bring in massive restrictions like those been proposed for gambling then by the same logic they should bring in restrictions for drinking.
I actually commend the comment from theedge yes there should be services to help those who have addiction problems and seek help whatever those addictions may be. However we should not have everyone's freedoms restricted because of this.
gambling is in our very DNA the Romans used to carry heavy slabs on their backs when marching to war for the purpose of gambling. When broken down it actually makes sense why gambling is in our DNA Its fundamental to survival.
That may sound strange but I shall explain further, Okay in the wild when people are starving and fighting for food and resources they may find pig/boar.
This is a really good example because pigs/boars will eat people if they get the chance but it is a common food a lot of people eat. When deciding to hunt the pig a gamble is been taken, for if they fail and get hurt they could lose their life instead and end up been the pigs dinner.
A calculated risk therefore has to be taken, Obviously I doubt they used spreadsheets calculators pen and paper to calculate the level of risk vs reward etc like I do, (not during play, I work out expected return and variance for bankroll management purposes and etc when I am not playing.) however some measure of the risk been taken vs the potential reward is calculated/approximated accurately or not in some way. Everything man had to do in our hunter gatherer days was risks rewards based. The same could be said for many choices today.
You can't stop gambling it has been part of every almost every society if not every society throughout history. It talks about it in every holy text I have come across most condemning but meh thats religion for you.
There may be an argument regarding how some gambling products are sold/marketed to people. I just don't think we should have limits on our freedoms.
I have experienced both sides of this. Nearly all of my "gambling" has been on poker. When it comes to all other sorts of gambling, I am very much a small-time rec. Simply because I have every confidence that, in all other forms of gambling, I will be a losing punter overall. So-it needs to be sums I can easily afford to lose, and the pleasure from any gamble needs to outweigh the stake.
I have done many jobs in my professional life. One of those jobs was issuing Bankruptcy Petitions on behalf of a (now defunct) casino group. Due to having to appear in Court, I have had occasion to speak to many people (and their families) whose life has been ruined. It has always surprised me how many of those gamblers still believed that they were a winning punter.
There are many similar occasions when what may be a harmless pleasure for the majority is a hopeless and dangerous addiction for a minority. The really difficult part is striking the right balance.
Our freedoms are important. But there needs to be some level of restriction to protect that minority and their families. It is certainly the case that there was not enough protection 20 years ago. It could certainly be argued that there are too many restrictions now. But there must be some level of protection.
The advantage of online poker is that you can see your balance every time you log in and out and sharkscope exists too. So it is much harder to delude yourself on what your profit/loss situation is. I say that I make 20% roi per mtt I play for £5.50 bounties my results are much higher for £11 bounties its roughly about right but I think 20% is a good prudent figure to assume (for low stake mtts only). based on my results so in order to make £1000 a month from online poker I would need to wager £5000 in combinations of £5 and £10 bets.
The game type I am targeting long term is a hyper turbo sng format where I would be playing 600-700 $20 games a day 3/4 days a week. I am not there yet I am not currently doing that yet. this is on another site so wont go into too many details about that here.
however that would be wagering $12000-$14000 a day or $36000-$56000 a week. Of course in both cases it is small incremental bets placed repeatedly the money is been recycled many times over on the bets, and if I see my bankroll is steadily decreasing I would stop before I ever got anywhere that amount wagered.
I work on one deposit to any site and that is it if I lose or bust the deposit which has not happened in a very long time, I would take some time out to re assess everything and think hard before depositing again.
some sources are talking about wagering restrictions which is what I fear most. If they were simply to have rules on net deposits per month I would not be worried at all.
What I fear is restrictions on what I can wager with what I currently have in poker accounts.
1. You focus almost entirely on you. There is a big world out there. A lot of people lie to themselves, and Sky have to create rules to protect them (and themselves)
2. I am not the most talented poker player on here (never mind the rather tougher games elsewhere). What I may lack in ability I make up for in hard work and game selection. I have certainly played more than 100,000 MTTs/STTs-your proposed future schedule is ambitious bordering on madness
3. Sharkscope is not accurate. It misses various stuff. It also assumes you make an average amount of rebuys/re-entries, regardless of whether you do
4. Very, very few players are mentally able to play 2,000-plus tournaments a week. 99% of people who think they can crash and burn within a month. I sincerely hope you adjust your goals
What temperature is bearable? -1C -2C -3C.....
Those who consume too many units, and should be checked upon,are an easy spot.
My stance is that I myself should not face restrictions that impede me because a small minority of people are out of control.
We could literally impose mass restrictions to everyone in society if we went down this route. If we can have restrictions that stop people that have problems but not those that do not no problem with that. My issue is with limiting everyone because of a minority.
with regards to my comments on goals I am talking about hyper turbo spin and goes these are games that typically last 5 minutes so would not be the same as other turbo sngs. So it may be viable there are plenty of people already doing that. However yes they are in a minority. The only way I will find out if this is viable for me personally is if I try it and find out. As stated I am not there yet. I have tried goals in poker that have failed before I make a plan I work towards it if it works great if its not for me I reassess and either study and try again or go another route.
With regards to shark scope I tend to not rebuy and only add on occasionally I rebuy but not most of the time. I definitely rebuy less then average. Also I have gained free entry to tournies before based on promotions which were not added to my sharkscope but counted when I lost. If anything I believe my sharkscope is likely going to be worse on sky then actual results, But I do hear you here. i know sharkscope does not catch everything but does it have a bias towards more positive results or just does not catch everything? because if the later that would be good to know.
I think my main concern is the possibility of wagering restrictions. The media can be very disingenuous and with regards to gambling figures. Any serious poker player or gambler of another ilk would realise if you focus on amount wagered it can drastically inflate figures.
My thoughts are it should be based on amount lost or net deposits in a time period rather then wagering.
If you base it on wagering amounts the only people who would ever pass affordability to be able to play enough to make any decent money at online poker would be people making at least six figures a year already.