How long does it take to become a winning player?

vinylspiros

vinylspiros

PIRANHA-------->< (((º>
Silver Level
Joined
Oct 9, 2012
Total posts
4,393
Awards
1
Chips
1
Im wondering.

i hear alot of people, even poker pros or coaches saying that at the beginning of their carreer they were losing players. Then you even hear nanonoko in his interview saying that in the beginning things werent working out and he kept trying new ways .

So my question. what would you consider to be the average timeframe for someone to turn from : "opened my first online account" to "winning player consistenly"?

and im obviously talking about those who actually make it to being a consistently winning player.

I know alot of you are going to say: not everyone becomes a winner and it depends on this and that. Cool agreed! but how long on average is the question??

Im guessing it takes more than a year or even two in some cases? or does it for some begin instantly? like wonder children? and im obviously talking about cash grinding ,which is, in my opinion the holy grail of online poker. and also i believe its the only way to be able to say if someone is a pro or not.
 
XXPXXP

XXPXXP

Legend
Silver Level
Joined
Sep 7, 2012
Total posts
5,511
Awards
2
Chips
0
it is really hard to say! but to be a winning player need experience, like in the game, need accumulate EXP to level up. so it depends on how soon u could accumulate enough EXP to reach the winning player LEVEL. but at least 100K hands needs to be played, I think, LOL
 
daredeviljo

daredeviljo

Legend
Silver Level
Joined
Apr 11, 2011
Total posts
1,407
Awards
1
Chips
6
Very good question to ask, and a very hard one to answer...

All I can say is first you should see what games your best at
Ie. HU, Sng, MTT, specials etc.

Once you have figured that out you are more likely to succeed.
You must get a feel for the game, so start off low buying and work your way up, because, as much as you don't want to hear it, the skill levels are very variant from buyin to buyin.

Just be patient, it is obviously different for each person, but remember persistence pays. This poker game is always evolving, so find your style and stick with it.

Best of luck, daredeviljo.
 
Poker Orifice

Poker Orifice

Fully Tilted
Platinum Level
Joined
Jan 19, 2008
Total posts
25,596
Awards
6
CA
Chips
968
Im wondering.

i hear alot of people, even poker pros or coaches saying that at the beginning of their carreer they were losing players. Then you even hear nanonoko in his interview saying that in the beginning things werent working out and he kept trying new ways .

So my question. what would you consider to be the average timeframe for someone to turn from : "opened my first online account" to "winning player consistenly"?

and im obviously talking about those who actually make it to being a consistently winning player.

I know alot of you are going to say: not everyone becomes a winner and it depends on this and that. Cool agreed! but how long on average is the question??

Im guessing it takes more than a year or even two in some cases? or does it for some begin instantly? like wonder children? and im obviously talking about cash grinding ,which is, in my opinion the holy grail of online poker. and also i believe its the only way to be able to say if someone is a pro or not.

i believe its the only way to be able to say if someone is a pro or not.So what are you actually talking about in this thread? What is your question? A 'winning player' (consistently) or a 'pro'?I was just watching some of the SCOOP high buyin tournaments on Stars & am pretty sure a good percentage of them are strictly 'tournament' players (many actually in excess of $1mill in profit just in Stars mtt's alone). Would they not qualify as a consistently winning player? (based on your post).Don't all the different formats require some type of skill set to become a consistently 'winning player'?My own experience. I played a bit of everything when I first began playing online poker (all micro stakes) > Stud, nlhe fullring/6max, SNG's, MTT's, 6-max sng's. I felt I needed to focus more on one format if I was going to become a consistently winning player (I chose SNG's & MTT's).I'd say for the first 6mos I was probably a losing player in SNG's, maybe -5% to -10% ROI. (in mtt's I'd always been +ROI but was skewed from placing 2nd in my first game I played, even though it was only a $1 buyin).I was motivated by the competition & need to win (I didn't really care much about the money). I knew I didn't want to keep playing if I wasn't winning.I decided to spend quite a bit of time to studying, starting off with a handful of books & some decent strategy guides (read the sticky section on one forum a couple times over, saving some articles I knew I'd want to go over again later).I found my results changed dramatically. From that point on I was consistently winning.Poker is like anything else. The more time you put into it, the better you will get. You also want to use that study time wisely.SO. How long would it take? "It depends". I've coached some losing microstakes players who'd been playing for a few years and they became winning players within a couple weeks. If a person puts in the time I think a motivated new player could be a winning player within a couple mos. (maybe sooner if they put in ALOT of time).
 
Poker Orifice

Poker Orifice

Fully Tilted
Platinum Level
Joined
Jan 19, 2008
Total posts
25,596
Awards
6
CA
Chips
968
Believe it or not I actually wrote the above post in 'paragraphs' & with spaces. wtf?
 
luckytvguy

luckytvguy

Visionary
Silver Level
Joined
May 28, 2008
Total posts
604
Chips
0
I think it depend on how hard you work,how many hands have you played,50 thousand hands or more,and how many books have you read.
 
Noah31

Noah31

Enthusiast
Silver Level
Joined
Oct 3, 2012
Total posts
54
Chips
0
It all comes down to time and effort....simple as that.

-‘Nobody is always a winner, and anybody who says he is, is either a liar or doesn't play poker.’ - “Amarillo Slim” Preston
 
vinylspiros

vinylspiros

PIRANHA-------->< (((º>
Silver Level
Joined
Oct 9, 2012
Total posts
4,393
Awards
1
Chips
1
time and effort and studying, are not going to guarantee anything.

Im not winning consistently and ive been playing for more than two years. thats why i made this thread. Its like asking, am i retarded or smthng?
 
dmorris68

dmorris68

Legend
Loyaler
Joined
May 27, 2008
Total posts
6,788
Awards
2
Chips
0
Like anything else, not everyone learns at the same pace. Some are naturals at it, others struggle for a bit, and some just aren't cut out for it no matter how hard they try (although I'll argue these are rare and usually aren't really putting forth the effort they claim to).

You can't expect anybody to give you an "average" because it's pretty much impossible to do. There are so many players - the vast majority of which are losing players - that I doubt anyone could aggregate a representative sample to figure any sort of reasonable average. I suppose one could survey X number of winning players and ask them how long it took them, but the answers would likely be unreliable since most of us probably aren't sure. I think I became profitable within a year, but I immersed myself in books and videos and training sites and invested in tracking software very early on. I also didn't waste any time at the penny stakes - after an initial small deposit to test the waters briefly, I deposited enough to play 25NL and moved to 50NL soon after. I also played tourneys and binked some bigger ones early on, like a 25K GTD on FT. I played very few freerolls outside of private CC games because I couldn't tolerate the stupidity.

And you can't really discriminate between cash and tourney when it comes to being a winner or pro (two different things btw). You can profit in either, some people are more suited to one or the other. Certainly less variance for a winning cash player though.


Sent from my iphone using Tapatalk
 
aero87

aero87

Rock Star
Silver Level
Joined
Mar 14, 2013
Total posts
283
Chips
0
Find out where something went wrong and then analyze it. For example, yesterday I was running good in a tourney and was chip leader. I got pocket 7's and raised. I got re-raised. I just shoved without thinking. As soon as I did I knew I messed up. What else would they be re-raising with? AA, KK, QQ, AK? well it was AA. An ace flopped and it was over. Lost a good chunk of chips. If I would have just called I could have gotten away from it on the flop.

Sometimes a small mistake like that is all it takes to be the difference between winning and losing.
 
Tinie107

Tinie107

Rock Star
Silver Level
Joined
May 18, 2013
Total posts
201
Chips
0
It all comes down to time and effort....simple as that.

-‘Nobody is always a winner, and anybody who says he is, is either a liar or doesn't play poker.’ - “Amarillo Slim” Preston

Hit the nail on the head there!
 
vinylspiros

vinylspiros

PIRANHA-------->< (((º>
Silver Level
Joined
Oct 9, 2012
Total posts
4,393
Awards
1
Chips
1
Like anything else, not everyone learns at the same pace. Some are naturals at it, others struggle for a bit, and some just aren't cut out for it no matter how hard they try (although I'll argue these are rare and usually aren't really putting forth the effort they claim to).

You can't expect anybody to give you an "average" because it's pretty much impossible to do. There are so many players - the vast majority of which are losing players - that I doubt anyone could aggregate a representative sample to figure any sort of reasonable average. I suppose one could survey X number of winning players and ask them how long it took them, but the answers would likely be unreliable since most of us probably aren't sure. I think I became profitable within a year, but I immersed myself in books and videos and training sites and invested in tracking software very early on. I also didn't waste any time at the penny stakes - after an initial small deposit to test the waters briefly, I deposited enough to play 25NL and moved to 50NL soon after. I also played tourneys and binked some bigger ones early on, like a 25K GTD on FT. I played very few freerolls outside of private CC games because I couldn't tolerate the stupidity.

And you can't really discriminate between cash and tourney when it comes to being a winner or pro (two different things btw). You can profit in either, some people are more suited to one or the other. Certainly less variance for a winning cash player though.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
thank you. nice post. makes sense. my thread here is rather generalised, but i want to prove to myself mostly that there is something missing either in my game or my brm. because in my case when i weigh time consumed playing and profit made, its definitely not worth the time im putting into it.
thats why im trying to see what the norm is.
 
vinylspiros

vinylspiros

PIRANHA-------->< (((º>
Silver Level
Joined
Oct 9, 2012
Total posts
4,393
Awards
1
Chips
1
i believe its the only way to be able to say if someone is a pro or not.So what are you actually talking about in this thread? What is your question? A 'winning player' (consistently) or a 'pro'?I was just watching some of the SCOOP high buyin tournaments on Stars & am pretty sure a good percentage of them are strictly 'tournament' players (many actually in excess of $1mill in profit just in Stars mtt's alone). Would they not qualify as a consistently winning player? (based on your post).Don't all the different formats require some type of skill set to become a consistently 'winning player'?My own experience. I played a bit of everything when I first began playing online poker (all micro stakes) > Stud, nlhe fullring/6max, SNG's, MTT's, 6-max sng's. I felt I needed to focus more on one format if I was going to become a consistently winning player (I chose SNG's & MTT's).I'd say for the first 6mos I was probably a losing player in SNG's, maybe -5% to -10% ROI. (in mtt's I'd always been +ROI but was skewed from placing 2nd in my first game I played, even though it was only a $1 buyin).I was motivated by the competition & need to win (I didn't really care much about the money). I knew I didn't want to keep playing if I wasn't winning.I decided to spend quite a bit of time to studying, starting off with a handful of books & some decent strategy guides (read the sticky section on one forum a couple times over, saving some articles I knew I'd want to go over again later).I found my results changed dramatically. From that point on I was consistently winning.Poker is like anything else. The more time you put into it, the better you will get. You also want to use that study time wisely.SO. How long would it take? "It depends". I've coached some losing microstakes players who'd been playing for a few years and they became winning players within a couple weeks. If a person puts in the time I think a motivated new player could be a winning player within a couple mos. (maybe sooner if they put in ALOT of time).
poker orifice,solid post man. i could use a lesson or two from you. ill look at the sticky section myself. never really looked at it. thnks alot.
 
spsb83

spsb83

Rock Star
Silver Level
Joined
Jun 1, 2011
Total posts
205
Chips
0
It all comes down to time and effort....simple as that.

-‘Nobody is always a winner, and anybody who says he is, is either a liar or doesn't play poker.’ - “Amarillo Slim” Preston

Agree.

I would say make sure your enjoying playing. If your frustrated and thinking about not consistently winning then you won't play your A game.

I started in sit n gos and did ok but it became mechanical and boring and I started to lose/breakeven. Moved to heads up lost loads and nearly gave up on poker. Point here is if you assessed me as a player at this point I was pretty bad losing player and had been playing for a few years. Finally had a proper go at cash games and found my home.

Its about finding what you enjoy playing and are better suited too. Then working your nuts off to get better. play loads of hands, learn, read,analyse. Again analyse your play find those little mistakes that are costing you money.

Good luck, well I should say skill.:)
 
Arjonius

Arjonius

Legend
Silver Level
Joined
Jun 8, 2005
Total posts
3,167
Chips
0
I don't see much point to looking for an average time it takes to become a consistent winner. There are too many variables for this to be applicable to your individual situation. Some have been mentioned already. Suffice it to say there are more.

As just one example, it's easier to become a winner if you don't rush to move up. This may not be a great strategy however, since it may slow down your rate of improvement.

Another is that trying to measure in months or years ignores any disparity in the amount played. Plus learning and improvement don't happen at a nice, steady, predictable rate. In my case, I've had periods of rapid improvement and others where I felt no change for some time.

The main point IMO is to keep working on your game by implementing, adding or changing specific things - not too many at once. After a while, you should be able to list the aspects where you've improved, not just feel that your game is better overall.
 
dj11

dj11

Legend
Silver Level
Joined
Oct 9, 2006
Total posts
23,189
Awards
9
Chips
0
There are so many peeps who play poker for the entertainment, and get lucky once in a while, that to say how long a grinder will take is nearly a useless guess.

If your friends are the top pros, and you want entertainment, you better bring a boatload of luck to the table. If your friends are all kindergarten kids, then even a little skill will suffice.

I concentrate on having a good time first, and profit comes as it comes. Sometimes big, sometimes none. But almost always fun.:D

Are you grinding Vinny?:confused:
 
micalupagoo

micalupagoo

Legend
Loyaler
Joined
Mar 16, 2008
Total posts
7,476
Awards
2
Chips
141
I'll tell you when I get there...hopefully not another 7yrs lol
 
Nathan Williams

Nathan Williams

Poker Pro
Silver Level
Joined
Sep 13, 2011
Total posts
1,095
Awards
3
Chips
10
Different for everybody probably. I was always winning right from the beginning but then again I started quite some time ago at low stakes versus insanely bad opponents. I am also a naturally tight player with good emotional control so I didn't have a proclivity to spew a lot if things didn't go my way. I think anybody who has the desire and ability to be successful in poker will get there though if they really want it. Nanonoko is a great example of that.
 
M

MaDaMan

Rock Star
Silver Level
Joined
Jan 6, 2013
Total posts
128
Chips
0
Different for everybody probably. I was always winning right from the beginning but then again I started quite some time ago at low stakes versus insanely bad opponents. I am also a naturally tight player with good emotional control so I didn't have a proclivity to spew a lot if things didn't go my way. I think anybody who has the desire and ability to be successful in poker will get there though if they really want it. Nanonoko is a great example of that.

Great guy and your book is wonderful.
 
vinylspiros

vinylspiros

PIRANHA-------->< (((º>
Silver Level
Joined
Oct 9, 2012
Total posts
4,393
Awards
1
Chips
1
something i hear very often is that ALOT of people are break even over a huge period of time or just slight winners. The thing that makes the huge change in their carreer is winning a big tourney.

Cause this is a way to quickly move up limits(cause ur rolled properly) and be able to play in pots that are actually worth playing.

Because in the micros, you have to play thousands of pots to win 10,20 or like ,50 bucks max.

So it takes soooo much time and feffort to make baby steps.

When you win a big tourney( 20k and above),thats when you can go sit down and play100NL comfortably and im sure this is a level where you can make a living off of.

is this right? or is this a two way knife? meaning that if you suddenly find yourself with a huge roll and go play 100NL,will u go broke fast?

is it better to work your way up there? or is it possible to jump right in there and learn it quick?( if ur comfortably rolled for it)
 
Four Dogs

Four Dogs

Legend
Silver Level
Joined
Apr 13, 2005
Total posts
4,298
Awards
1
Chips
17
something i hear very often is that ALOT of people are break even over a huge period of time or just slight winners. The thing that makes the huge change in their carreer is winning a big tourney.

Cause this is a way to quickly move up limits(cause ur rolled properly) and be able to play in pots that are actually worth playing.

Because in the micros, you have to play thousands of pots to win 10,20 or like ,50 bucks max.

So it takes soooo much time and feffort to make baby steps.

When you win a big tourney( 20k and above),thats when you can go sit down and play100NL comfortably and im sure this is a level where you can make a living off of.

is this right? or is this a two way knife? meaning that if you suddenly find yourself with a huge roll and go play 100NL,will u go broke fast?

is it better to work your way up there? or is it possible to jump right in there and learn it quick?( if ur comfortably rolled for it)
Don't sell those thousands of micro hands short. They're an important part of learning the game. Honestly, I don't know how pure live players ever get enough hands in to learn the game properly. It takes far too much time and money at 30 hands per hour to figure the game out and even after all that they still don't have hand histories to refer back to.

The truth is, most people never actually learn the game, EVER. They're like fish in a bowl. A goldfish never gets board because every second of his life is fresh and new. But they never learn either and that's how it is for most recreational players. Every session is like their first. They never change their game, they never think about their mistakes and they're perfectly happy to stay that way forever.

So don't be in such a rush to jump levels, don't worry about whether you're a net winner or loser. Don't worry about what someone else might think of your style, or winrate or bankroll management. Spend a year playing at a level you're comfortable with and expect to lose, but think of it as an investment. Low Limit is the little league of poker. Just put your time in, enjoy the fact that you have a hobby where there's so much room to improve and most of all, don't be a goldfish.

Oh, invest in Poker Tracker or Poker Office. That is KEY!
 
vinylspiros

vinylspiros

PIRANHA-------->< (((º>
Silver Level
Joined
Oct 9, 2012
Total posts
4,393
Awards
1
Chips
1
Don't sell those thousands of micro hands short. They're an important part of learning the game. Honestly, I don't know how pure live players ever get enough hands in to learn the game properly. It takes far too much time and money at 30 hands per hour to figure the game out and even after all that they still don't have hand histories to refer back to.

The truth is, most people never actually learn the game, EVER. They're like fish in a bowl. A goldfish never gets board because every second of his life is fresh and new. But they never learn either and that's how it is for most recreational players. Every session is like their first. They never change their game, they never think about their mistakes and they're perfectly happy to stay that way forever.

So don't be in such a rush to jump levels, don't worry about whether you're a net winner or loser. Don't worry about what someone else might think of your style, or winrate or bankroll management. Spend a year playing at a level you're comfortable with and expect to lose, but think of it as an investment. Low Limit is the little league of poker. Just put your time in, enjoy the fact that you have a hobby where there's so much room to improve and most of all, don't be a goldfish.

Oh, invest in Poker Tracker or Poker Office. That is KEY!

Nice one four dogs!! definitely agree with you here. and yes holdem manager is a MUST. thnks for this wonderful post man. alot of truth in it.
 
Arjonius

Arjonius

Legend
Silver Level
Joined
Jun 8, 2005
Total posts
3,167
Chips
0
something i hear very often is that ALOT of people are break even over a huge period of time or just slight winners. The thing that makes the huge change in their carreer is winning a big tourney.

Cause this is a way to quickly move up limits(cause ur rolled properly) and be able to play in pots that are actually worth playing.

Because in the micros, you have to play thousands of pots to win 10,20 or like ,50 bucks max.

So it takes soooo much time and feffort to make baby steps.

When you win a big tourney( 20k and above),thats when you can go sit down and play100NL comfortably and im sure this is a level where you can make a living off of.

is this right? or is this a two way knife? meaning that if you suddenly find yourself with a huge roll and go play 100NL,will u go broke fast?

is it better to work your way up there? or is it possible to jump right in there and learn it quick?( if ur comfortably rolled for it)
When people say this kind of thing, it's basically wishful thinking. Sure, there are people have jumped up to much higher stakes and been successful quickly. But it's highly unrealistic for any individual micro-player, even a decent winner, to think he or she can do so.
 
T

Tom102

Enthusiast
Silver Level
Joined
Jun 2, 2013
Total posts
42
Chips
0
In all seriousness there is no set amount and every player is different. It's just experience in the game you play. Think about poker is the more you play the more you become accustomed to how people play, *e.g Russian=Donk* I digress. If you play micro's cleverly and know how to spot plays you should be profitting within days, with the amount of material out there to improve your game it shouldn't take long.
 
Top