Hacker News Reader

Comment by bluedays | Hacker News Reader

How does that work? Being a professional gambler, I mean. I'd love to know more about this.

Can't speak from personal experience, but OP laid it out pretty clearly. You wait till you have an edge, then you bet. There are various books that try to capture it. Doyle Brunson's super system is like way outdated, but there are some funny bits about being a Texas road gambler getting run out of town. Annie Duke has a book I believe. My window into that world is pretty narrowly focused on poker.

I'll always recommend _Positively Fifth Street_ by James McManus. He doesn't really lay out how to do it step by step, but takes you along for a ride as to what the world looks like from that perspective. kinda.

Another big aspect of professional gambling is actually being able to place bets once you have an edge. This is obviously not an issue in poker but is in most other games:

The casino will ban you if you count cards in blackjack.

The sportsbooks will limit your action or ban you if the figure out you have an edge (or just see that you're winning or betting in certain patterns).

The most open information is about poker. See the forums. Many of the concepts there apply to other sports. The idea that you don’t know if you are any good until you played 10000 hands etc. Trying to make money off lots of little edges. In a sport you probably need to model every game very well, use AI/ML (mostly linear regression though). Honestly it is boring frustrating work IMO.

10,000 hands in poker is nowhere even close enough to get a significant sample, unless you're playing extremely weak players where you just have a girnomous edge. But those sort of games are very uncommon. There were plenty of instances of strong, winning players going through swings that lasted hundreds of thousands of hands. A more reasonable baseline sample would be ~500,000 hands.

Frustrating is definitely a great way to describe the game, and emotionally crushing. Like imagine one is playing a 5/10 no limit hold'em game - so people are generally buying in for about $1000, unless they're from Spain. An extremely good player might have a longterm winrate of around 3bb/100 there. In 100 hands, there's every chance you'll be involved multiple pots, easily for thousands of dollars. And your long-term expectation is about $30 out of all of that. So you'll go through short term swings where you're up tens of thousands of dollars in very short periods of time, swings where you're down tens of thousands of dollars - all to get your $30 per 100. And you never become completely numb to the money, even after playing millions of hands.

You are probably right. I could have misremembered the number of hands, the main point is it is alot more than most think. One to ten games of soccer is enough to tell roughly how good someone is, by comparison.

I mostly played poker, where you can have an advantage over other players that is greater than the rake the casino takes. But I also found all sorts of random opportunities here and there where I had an edge. Where a casino comp system gives you more in rewards than the game takes from you for instance. (That’s both common and legal but they will cut you off because you are essentially taking the comps they want to go to the people they make more off of so it’s a lot harder to make a lot at than it used to be.)

Or when an online casino is not careful enough about how you earn the bonuses they give you. Things of that nature. There are people also who can do it at things like horse, racing or sports betting, but I never knew enough about either of those or wanted to learn.

My Predictit wagering has mostly been on the theory that exactly what this article says is true: people are betting who they like and the polling aggregators are better. I really just look for arbitrage opportunities or discrepancies between the market and 538 that are large enough to overcome the fees.

The fees are high enough to make it not happen a ton, but it does happen.

The IRS has various rules in place that determine whether gambling is your business / profession. If you qualify as a professional gambler, you can deduct losses against your winnings (just like casual gamblers can) but you can also deduct your "business expenses" (e.g. cost of travel, hotels, meals, etc that you spend in pursuit of your business).

2017 tax reform took all of that away for gamblers. they are on as equal footing as casual gamblers, at least for when net losses exist, there are no more NOLs to carry forward (or back) which is what made that status the most useful

https://www.journalofaccountancy.com/issues/2018/oct/pro-gam...

but some deductions maybe yeah

I did not know that! That was well after the decade where I qualified.

Pretty sure it's a joking way of saying they used to be a day trader.

You can grind out poker games for a living, especially when there is a steady stream of rubes that think they’re hot stuff because they clear out friendly home games. In the long term those kind of people always lose to the pros.

I grinded online poker games for a summer in college. I observed opponents betting behavior and classified them into one of a half dozen strategies and then ran a strict algorithm based on who I was betting against. I ran three tables at the same time, finding success in rapid low stake games. My edge at the time was varying my play based on my opponent. Many of the other professional low stake players at the time were running simpler strategies on more tables.

Haha it was not. While I goofed around with that in the late 90’s/early aughts I never believed it was a long-term profession and never really won or lost much at it.

like r/wallstreetbets. Some people making consistent huge $ over there. You look for a setup which has a edge, like buying 0-day SPY calls if the market is down a bit. Backtest strategy and use something like the Kelly formula to find optimal betting amount. if you can make a living at this, then I guess that would make you a professional.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com