The Trials and Tribulations of a World-Class Pro

Mark Gregorich, pro poker player and talented contributor at www.UnitedPokerForum.com, recently wrote a post on the forum regarding a seven-month period in which he made significantly less than what he thought his normal expectation should have been. He found himself sailing some pretty stormy seas, to the point that he began to question himself.

Mark attributed his poor showing to three factors. First, he was being consistently outdrawn in many of the large pots in which he was involved. Second, there was a lower economic threshold of money available right after 9/11, a period in which the tourism industry and Las Vegas were hit hard economically and the number and quality of poker games in Las Vegas suffered dramatically. And third, Mark changed his play and became more passive due to psychological changes within himself that were caused by constantly getting outdrawn.

Mark went on to state in the post that he thought the effects of the psychological change compounded, creating situations in which he was outdrawn more frequently. By playing less aggressively, he let players into pots in situations he otherwise would not have, and therefore perpetuated the cycle of getting outdrawn more often. Mark pointed out that if this weakness in his game surfaced just once a day, over the course of seven months such an error would intensify negative results greatly. Small differences in playing style can make big differences in results. Mark even questioned if he really was running badly or if the difference in his results was because of the change in his psychological makeup.

Statistical deviation will cause all players to have runs of bad cards that negatively affect expectation. If, for instance, you are a $20-$40 hold'em player and are looking to make one big bet an hour, realize that you can easily be betting at a rate of $600 to $800 per hour in order to attain that positive expectation of $40 per hour. That's putting 120-160 red chips an hour into pots, with the hope of getting eight additional chips back – hour in and hour out, day in and day out, month in and month out, all year.

That is a small number of additional chips to get back in relation to the number of chips bet. If you play 15 pots a month with more than $600 in each of them, how you fare in those 15 pots will have a big impact on your month. If that translates to 90 pots every six months, those 90 pots are going to have a huge impact on your expectation over that time period. And 90 pots is not near enough to achieve statistical parity. All sorts of fluctuations will take place in 90 pots. It is important to realize that a player with a positive expectation of $40 per hour is running very badly when he breaks even over a six-month period, but a player who is expected to lose $40 per hour would be running very well if he breaks even. Of course, the losing player who breaks even is unlikely to perceive it that way.

That said, all worse-than-par results are not necessarily a function of a bad run of cards. If you are "running bad," you need to be able to determine why. You need to know if the way you are reacting to running bad is making things worse. That way, you can make changes if the reasons are factors that you can control.

In drawing conclusions regarding how you are running, you do need to incorporate other factors into the equation. Has the quality of your competition changed? The economics of the poker subculture is ever changing as laws change, new venues open or others close, and the evolutionary economic course takes its toll as good players get the money and bad players run out of it.

The state of the economy is a huge variable that many players ignore. When I moved to Vegas in 1985, it was the only place where public hold'em games were played with limits over $10-$20. The Golden Nugget, Caesar's Palace, and the Stardust had all the poker action. Caesar's and the Golden Nugget closed their cardrooms at a time when the country was in an economic downturn. That made playing professional poker in Las Vegas a much tougher proposition. Professional players were still in town looking to grind out a living, but the fewer number of recreational players due to lower tourist traffic and fewer cardrooms lowered the amount of cash flowing into the poker economy. The poker pie was smaller with the same number of professional players looking for a slice, and lots of them were looking to win the whole pie (like me, for instance).

The opening of the Hilton cardroom provided a much needed influx of cash that enabled many of the struggling pros to survive. Then, California opened up hold'em and stud games. The economic strength of the state of California and the introduction of many thousands of players with little public poker experience to the poker world created an economic bonanza for the professional player. Players who had struggled to stay in action suddenly got all pumped up, some monstrously so. Over time, the lucrativeness of the California poker scene waned as new, fresh, high-quality players developed in California. Other poker markets have opened, creating other opportunities for growth in both the industry and from a player's perspective.

As Mark described, the money dried up in Las Vegas poker and the professional potential deteriorated right after 9/11. Luckily, such things don't last forever. The inception and popularity of the World Poker Tour have made millions of people aware of public poker, as has the massive growth of Internet poker. Chris Moneymaker's story generated more beyond-the-poker-world buzz than anything since Amarillo Slim appeared on the Johnny Carson show after winning the World Series of Poker (I'm showing my age here). The poker economy is currently the strongest I have ever seen it.

The strength of the poker economy is a huge factor for professional players looking to make a living from the game. Many players move from one geographic location to another looking for the best economic arenas. While there is an upside to the fact that such players can and do play in the most lucrative areas, I believe their lives lose something both economically and personally by not establishing roots and stability. Professional players such as Mark, who have families and homes, have a tougher time chasing down the best games.

When things are going well economically, you need to strike while the iron is hot. Most professional players seem to perform to a level of what is needed to survive the moment. Very few invest and build a bankroll for a rainy day. Without bankroll security, players make tough situations (such as when the economy, the cards, or their personal lives turn sour) much tougher, and then they engage in long periods of intense struggling when either the games or their performance are not the best.

Very few players play better when things are not going well. When things are going badly in life or at the table, the majority of players tend to exacerbate their losses. Not putting yourself in negative situations in the first place is the best defense. Many players lead lonely, sheltered lives as a way of reducing the effect of personal conflicts on their poker game. I think that is a sad way to live life, and too much of a sacrifice. That said, structuring your life with stability as a foundation could aid in the longevity of your poker career.

The volatile emotional swings inherent to the gambling trade cause many otherwise capable players to flounder. Players who constantly put themselves at risk put themselves under more pressure. I see many once-great players who appear to be like boxers who have been in too many tough fights. Their reflexes dull a bit, and their competitive heart diminishes. When you are playing tough competition, these can be the small edges that make the difference.

Over the course of your career, you will face adversity. You can get desperate to win a pot, go on tilt, pay everyone off, and start playing much looser and gamble it up, hoping to get even, or, you can face adversity with toughness and grit. Having the right attitude, one of confidence, heart, and positive thoughts, is a requirement if you hope to make poker a career.

Mark Gregorich is a top-notch player, voted No. 1 in the world by his peers at Omaha eight-or-better. Even such a high-caliber player can have issues within himself when dealing with the mental and emotional factors that go with a poker career. Mark did the right thing. He honestly analyzed the source of his problems and made adjustments to even the keel. He straightened his ship and is currently sailing through smooth waters.

Roy Cooke played winning professional poker for more than 16 years. He is a successful real estate broker/salesperson in Las Vegas. If you would like to ask Roy poker-related questions, you may do so online at www.UnitedPokerForum.com.