How long did it take you to become a winning player

[rmhumr]

I learnt how to play about 3 months ago. I'm still easily a losing player (please don't find me and take my money )

To get better I'm reading anything I can, and I feel like I understand more of how things work, but was wondering how long did it take you guys. Is 3 months too long? maybe hold em is not for me?

[Jernej Zorec]

must have been about a year before i was confident that i'm wining player at the limit i played back then , well not only confident but i had proof over a proper sample size

lemme put it this way , if u play 50k hands and are wining and ok amount , u can say pretty confidently that u are wining player

[Muck]

I’ve always played poker for fun but after the first 3-4 years it started to support itself.

But as with all endeavours it comes down to how much you’re willing to work at it. One guy I taught was better than me in 6 months just because his attitude towards the game was very serious from the get go.

[jimmer]

There are a number of factors to decide when answering this question.

For example;
What limits are you playing?
How many hands are you playing per day, week, month or year?
What games are you playing?
How good is your bankroll management?


The simple answer is; IMO until you play 100,000 hands+ at the same limits and at the same game, you shouldn;t be in a positon to comment.

I have friends that are really good players. Yet they will never be pro's because they although they read the game really well, they have no concept of bankroll management. Their play would suggest they're good, yet long term, they never have anything to show for it.

I think (and I could be wrong), but i read an article to suggest that 95% of online poker players are losing ones.

[BeerWench13]

I'm a chick, so I've pretty much held my own in live play (a.k.a. everyone thinks chicks are dumb), but online is/has been a different story. Playing online varies more than live play ever has for me.

[MrDarling]

First 6 month I played I lost every deposit I made.
Then I managed to hold my own and slowly build a BR, but never considered my self a winning player for the next 9 month.
Then I had a huge rush at tournaments and made some real money in poker for the first time ever (funny enough, that month was my dead line to fit or fold)
That was last october!

Since then I did climb up through the levels, but still didn't consider my self a winning player... am guessing that if I stuck with one level I would have killed it much quicker, but since my BR was big enough to the higher levels I decided to climb as soon as I felt somewhat cofortable.

Now (after almost 2 and a half years playing poker) I'm ready to start considering that I might be able to do this for a living (been doing this full time since last July)...

The journey is long for most of us but if you stick to it and take it seriously you should be able to do it.

[raisebot]

The defintion of "winning player" can be very loose.

Daniel Negreanu once wrote some semi-famous article about 2 different types of players.

Player A would consistently play the same limits day after day, grinding it out and slowly but surely accumulating money. He'd never move up in limits, because he found a beatable game, yet he wouldn't play in maybe higher limit games because they were "unbeatable" to him. Is this player a "winning player (can easily grind softer games)", or a "losing player (can never take a shot since he know's his style would get torn up in higher games)"?

Player B, was much more aggressive, with say, game selection, hand selection, more unorthodox playing style, etc. He'd win a Ferrari, lose a Ferrari (cue Brad Booth, lol) in a session or 2, but occasionally make huge scores that player A would be incapable of. Brian Townsend comes to mind. He ran like god for about a year, then had a huge downswing. Does that make him more of a winner than Player A (had much bigger wins), or more of a losing player (losing his roll at a table and maybe getting staked by someone to play in his next tourney) than Player A?

It's all relative. Sample size means something I guess, but it still comes down to what you consider to be a winning player. If you want to consistently win at happy meal stakes online, it can be done in a relatively short amount of time. But if you're not content winning $4 per session and wanna be a winning player against Doyle & Antonius playing on HSP, then good luck, you have lots of work to do.

[odlozilik]

There is a way to exclude the possibility of being losing player. If you start with freerolls and use those few bucks to build the bankroll, you have nothing to lose, you can only win. If you lose it all, just start over again. It's good, if those few bucks mean much to you, so you don't play recklessly. If you just deposit 50$, which means nothing to you, it's much more probable you bust soon. I had to start twice, then I kept it up...

[golddog]

I won for the first five years I played regularly. (Not every time, of course, but finished each year ahead).

Hit the first real cold streak, combined with bad play, over the last year or so. Still ahead for the long run, but learning where I can play.

Anyway, remember that "winning player" can be defined by level. I seem to do o.k. at low-limit, but when I move up, get knocked back down. A lot to learn.

[UrAteUp]

I'm a chick, so I've pretty much held my own in live play (a.k.a. everyone thinks chicks are dumb), but online is/has been a different story. Playing online varies more than live play ever has for me.

Wenchie we all know you "hold your own" in your bra and show plenty of cleavage to win....

As for how to tell if your a winning player, base it on the number of hands you play and not the amount of time. Like Jernej said, it takes 1000s of hands to truely know if your a winner or a weiner... . I have played with guys who play this game for decades and still suck. I have also played against newbies and find they have some knowledge. So time means little in this game. Base it more on your ROI (return on investment). This will truely tell you if your a winner or a loosing player. BTW there is no such thing as a loosing player. You have winning players and then you have fund raisers (players who lose alot). I just hate to term them losers...

[miaowmiaowchowface]

couple of trips to the casino. lol live poker

[MasterMike]

i am very proud to say ive never made a deposit in my life or lost all of my money. Now, in live cash games with friends, i may just be a little up or about even, maybe down, but online, i started with $1.75( given to me after i asked), and now i have about 775 (cashing out and giving away probably like 150) after a few years playing on and off. this summer (2 months) ive made over 200 bucks and im actually trying to make money to pay for things. On that pace, thats 1200 a year, thats rent/school money so yea.

I dont think ill ever make a deposit unless its for the bonus money. I still play .1/.25 and occaisionally will get into .25/.5, but im not trying to lose big chunks of money.

so i guess that makes me a winning player from day one

[Dave B]

Are you a winning player if you are making less than minimum wage?

Hmmmmmmmmm............


*not directed at any one person, just saying that if you are doing it for income and not fun and underperforming alternatives, you would have a tough time defining that as success. Ref: Starlightcoast 3/6 casino GOD.

[MasterMike]

Are you a winning player if you are making less than minimum wage?

Hmmmmmmmmm............


*not directed at any one person, just saying that if you are doing it for income and not fun and underperforming alternatives, you would have a tough time defining that as success. Ref: Starlightcoast 3/6 casino GOD.

in my loose definition of it, i simply mean making more money than you lose on a consistent basis. for every month/week you are down, you should have a couple that are up.

[supafrey]

You pay 1200 a year in rent?