Panorama Sun 26th Nov

[boldie]

Matthew Hopkins - http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/programmes/panorama/6177046.stm

yes nothing mentioned about what he felt about the experiment...a shame really

[lazaroonie]

panaroma has become the Sun with moving pictures...

[boldie]

As we researched the impact of online gaming in the UK for Panorama, we were surprised at how many people in online poker forums were saying that they had given up their jobs in order to play full time

yeah i read that and thought...funny I have never heard anyone ,mention anything like this on blonde, where i would have thought blonde was a big enough forum to say "hey, guys I'm a reporter with panorama, coudl you tell em how many of you are rpo's these days? and what do you think?

[byronkincaid]

i guess as we found out on the APAT threads it's pretty hard to define a pro these days.

Interesting post on THM forum saying if you've won $12K this year you're in the top 0.1% of poker players. Seems too low a percentage to me.

[Woodsey]

i guess as we found out on the APAT threads it's pretty hard to define a pro these days.

Interesting post on THM forum saying if you've won $12K this year you're in the top 0.1% of poker players. Seems too low a percentage to me.

I saw that aswell, I thought it was total rubbish. I've made way more than that this year and I'd be suprised if I'd be in the top 5% let alone 0.1%

[doubleup]

From the BBC article:

"An addiction expert predicted up to one million a year could become hooked."

ooh yummy - I certainly hope so.....

[Jon MW]

...Interesting post on THM forum saying if you've won $12K this year you're in the top 0.1% of poker players. Seems too low a percentage to me.

It seems too low to me too, but it isn't too hard statistically to show that it would be true if you used the right sort of data - eg tournament winnings only and every poker player - you could probably get it even higher.

[AndrewT]

...Interesting post on THM forum saying if you've won $12K this year you're in the top 0.1% of poker players. Seems too low a percentage to me.

It seems too low to me too, but it isn't too hard statistically to show that it would be true if you used the right sort of data - eg tournament winnings only and every poker player - you could probably get it even higher.

Bear in mind that someone who opens an account at a site, deposits $20 to try it out, loses the $20 and is never seen again would be counted as a losing player. If you've got accounts at lots of rooms like this, even if you're overall a winning player, you would count as lots of losing players in the statistics.

[Jon MW]

...The golfer spent far much more playing golf, but for some reason that's acceptable and 'different'...

My brother was a bit sceptical about me playing poker, but he is into archery and despite being fairly highly ranked is almost certain to never to win any money from it.

He did at least manage to work out for himself that the £1000 odd he paid for a bow represents much less value then the minus a little bit it costs me to play poker - and that's before taking into account that he still has to pay to register in tournaments.

[AndrewT]

...The golfer spent far much more playing golf, but for some reason that's acceptable and 'different'...

My brother was a bit sceptical about me playing poker, but he is into archery and despite being fairly highly ranked is almost certain to never to win any money from it.

He did at least manage to work out for himself that the £1000 odd he paid for a bow represents much less value then the minus a little bit it costs me to play poker - and that's before taking into account that he still has to pay to register in tournaments.

At least he's getting fresh air.

[Zebediah]

...The golfer spent far much more playing golf, but for some reason that's acceptable and 'different'...

My brother was a bit sceptical about me playing poker, but he is into archery and despite being fairly highly ranked is almost certain to never to win any money from it.

He did at least manage to work out for himself that the £1000 odd he paid for a bow represents much less value then the minus a little bit it costs me to play poker - and that's before taking into account that he still has to pay to register in tournaments.

Easily done in poker with a wireless laptop.

At least he's getting fresh air.

[kvnstv]

The mainstream media is a curious beast, if the government lets us decide how to spend our own money they are  '"naive" and "playing dice" with people's health by liberalising gambling laws. But if they introduced new restrictive laws they would be labeled as nannying.

[kinboshi]

i guess as we found out on the APAT threads it's pretty hard to define a pro these days.

Interesting post on THM forum saying if you've won $12K this year you're in the top 0.1% of poker players. Seems too low a percentage to me.

How many people play poker online?  Is that stat for the UK or worldwide?  To say that only 1 in a 1,000 earn more than $12K a year seems to make sense to me.  There are lots of people who play low or medium stakes, and play infrequently in tourneys or cash games.  Very few of them are going to earn anywhere near that amount.

The people on here probably play more hours than the majority of online players.  That's going to seriously limit the amount they can win.

Be interesting to see where that stat came from.  72.4% of stats on the web are made up anyway...

[boldie]

i guess as we found out on the APAT threads it's pretty hard to define a pro these days.

Interesting post on THM forum saying if you've won $12K this year you're in the top 0.1% of poker players. Seems too low a percentage to me.

How many people play poker online?  Is that stat for the UK or worldwide?  To say that only 1 in a 1,000 earn more than $12K a year seems to make sense to me.  There are lots of people who play low or medium stakes, and play infrequently in tourneys or cash games.  Very few of them are going to earn anywhere near that amount.

The people on here probably play more hours than the majority of online players.  That's going to seriously limit the amount they can win.

Be interesting to see where that stat came from.  72.4% of stats on the web are made up anyway...

I think you'll find it 's actually 84.8%

[kinboshi]

i guess as we found out on the APAT threads it's pretty hard to define a pro these days.

Interesting post on THM forum saying if you've won $12K this year you're in the top 0.1% of poker players. Seems too low a percentage to me.

How many people play poker online?  Is that stat for the UK or worldwide?  To say that only 1 in a 1,000 earn more than $12K a year seems to make sense to me.  There are lots of people who play low or medium stakes, and play infrequently in tourneys or cash games.  Very few of them are going to earn anywhere near that amount.

The people on here probably play more hours than the majority of online players.  That's going to seriously limit the amount they can win.

Be interesting to see where that stat came from.  72.4% of stats on the web are made up anyway...

I think you'll find it 's actually 84.8%

Ah!!!  But are you talking UK or worldwide?