Are There Poker Millionaires

These pro poker players we see on TV, the famous
ones, are they really millionaires? They like to give
the impression they are, but outside of their huge
BR's, how much are they really worth. I keep running
into comments that its all hype to draw people into
the poker sites, to make them think they can be
millionaires too.

I remember an interview a few years ago with Chip
Reese, just before he died. He said most pro poker
players talk a big game, and flash a lot of cash, but
the fluctuations of the game affects them too and
most of them don't have a lot of wealth outside their
bankrolls.

You can count a BR as personal wealth, obviously,
but it goes up and down so much, its not the same
as money in the bank or big investments in property.

Thats a good question! Id Imagine that some are especially from the endorsements from some of the bigger sites (though i dont know for sure).

Because of the fluctuations, you can go a few months
and not have a winning session. This has got to play hell
with your BR and your mind.

Id say even more on the mind, especially for the pros! haha

I'd find it hard to believe that all of the larger prize winner lose everything they one. There has got to be plenty that are still sitting on huge winnings from multi million prizes over the years...

I have also heard that many of the big-name pros get financial backing to cover the entry fees for the big tournaments, either from personal investors or from companies that sponsor them. So if they win, they have to pay back the sponsorships plus an agreed-upon fee/interest/vig/whatever, and if they lose they are now in debt to those people, on the hook for the next time they finish in the money in a big tournament.

I don't remember his name, but klimate10 posted a story about one of these guys a while back, and how he asked klimate for a loan after showing him video of himself at the WSOP final table or whatever.

How do you get a professional poker player off your porch? Pay them for the pizza.

And one more:

Reporter- "You just won the poker tournament and $1 million dollars. What are you going to do with all that money?"

Poker Pro- "Well, I'm going pay back people that I owe money."

Reporter- "What about the rest?"

Poker Pro- "They are going to have to wait."

Thats another good point. Pro's are always borrowing
money from each other and from backers. If they're
so rich, why is this necessary.

Quote: EvenBob

These pro poker players we see on TV, the famous
ones, are they really millionaires?

At least the conservative ones clearly are. Players like Brunson and Harrington don't squander their money and don't push their variance.
Cloutier drains his bankroll on craps. And he's not even playing for nosebleed stakes in high-roller rooms, people see him doing the minimum at $25 tables... just too much of it.
Some players crushing tourneys can't handle cash games quite as well, and they often play past their bankroll. $500/1,000 NL is too high a limit for anyone, even the top pros are underbankrolled there.
Greenstein donates his donkament winnings, so his income comes from side games alone.

You have to consider that the money doesn't really go anywhere. It doesn't just vanish when you lose, and unlike low limits there's no rake drain, seat rent cost is insignificant there when present at all. For every big tourney player losing tens of thousands in ring games, there's a solid player living off his losses.

There is a lot of money on hands in that world, and more is being brought in from the bottom every year. Being an equity millionaire isn't even a big deal; most upper-middle class households were valued at over a million in 2008... so, "big investments in property" you say? Poker pros at least have that money as cash on hand. And home equity millionaires are in much less of a position to sell their home and go splashing around than a poker pro, who can always get staked if he doesn't have bankroll to spare.

Quote: EvenBob

Pro's are always borrowing money from each other and from backers. If they're so rich, why is this necessary.

Because bankrolls go up and down. But if you get backed at say 100/50 (100% buy-in for 50% of winnings), your bankroll can only go up, not down.

Quote: P90

At least the conservative ones clearly are. Players like Brunson .

I don't know about Brunson. I've heard he doesn't
retire because he can't afford to. I do know in 2006
he had a period where he didn't have a winning
session for 4 months and that was the same year
they shut down his poker site with all the rest. He
was financially strapped and said he was thinking
of getting out for good.

Quote: EvenBob

I don't know about Brunson. I've heard he doesn't retire because he can't afford to.

I don't know if I believe that. People like Brunson don't retire because if they do, they would die. Look at JoePa. Out of a job for three months, he has no reason to live. He had health issues his whole life too. Besides, poker is a pretty low-key activity, and after you've taken your 1000th Bad Beat, or hit your biggest jackpot, the rest kind of mellows out.

As far as the original question, I think most poker players stated wealth and actual money available is inaccurate. Other than the successful authors (Caro, Sklansky, Hellmuth and Brunson thru Super System), most of the professional's money comes, CAME from endorsement deals to the poker playing websites, i.e. Full Tilt, PokerStars, etc. Now that those have dried up for the most part, it's harder to get endorsements. Ben what's-his-name, who made the final table this year at WSOP, wore an Aria shirt, obviously scoring a huge deal from them, but for the most part, the money comes from engagements.

As for the cash players, they basically shift money around from one another, ganging up on the occasional ploppy who dumps cash onto a table. The most successful players, while experiencing bad swings occasionally, are smart enough not to play the same place too often. They play for lower stakes, against MUCH worse players where they nearly always have an edge.

Joe Pa died of complications arising from treatment for lung cancer.
Lung cancer caused by a lifetime of smoking.
Not by three months of unemployment or a broken heart...

Most of these so called poker pros are degenerate gamblers who can't hold jobs and don't want to.
There may be a handful who hold on to some of their money, but not many.

Quote: Tiltpoul

Other than the successful authors (Caro, Sklansky, Hellmuth and Brunson thru Super System), most of the professional's money comes

How much does a book earn? It's not like they wrote book series about some magical putz that got made into high-grossing movies.

Authors typically get about 10% of a book's total revenue gross, and after expenses, agent fees, etc, keep somewhat over half that. From what I could find out, Brunson's Super/System, the top-selling poker book, sold about 300,000 copies. At $3-$5 per copy, he made a little over a million on that. Harrington sold over 600,000 books, but they never went for $100, so that also comes to about a million. We could dig around more, but, generally, that is the order.

Their tourney winnings are about an order of magnitude higher, although they have to be somewhat offset by the buy-ins. And then there are cash games.
So books are clearly a substantial part of their income, but not overwhelming.

Also, reality check. $1.2 million over the 30 years that Super/System has been selling comes out to $40,000 a year.
Do the same math with tourney winnings. It isn't all that much money. Five figures on books, low six to high six figures on tourneys.

An exception is post-Moneymaker ME first prize winning kids, but those are their only big prizes and most likely to stay that way.

Quote: Tiltpoul

As for the cash players, they basically shift money around from one another, ganging up on the occasional ploppy who dumps cash onto a table.

You are forgetting the big cash dumping party that happens every year and adds over 100 million to top pros' combined bankrolls. It's called WSOP.
Also, top cash players do play outside these all-celebrity TV show tables, and they do get to win there.

Quote: P90

How much does a book earn?

Most gambling books make very little money, too niche
a market. Ask the Wiz, he knows first hand.

Quote: EvenBob

Most gambling books make very little money, too niche
a market. Ask the Wiz, he knows first hand.

As I said in my post, other than the SUCCESSFUL authors, most of the books probably don't bring in enough money. Since nearly every starting, aspiring poker player picks up at least one of those, there's some money there. Further, they often lead to writing article for trade publications or blogs, which adds a bit of revenue. Many professional poker players have written books, but very few would I consider to be successful.

Quote: P90

You are forgetting the big cash dumping party that happens every year and adds over 100 million to top pros' combined bankrolls. It's called WSOP.
Also, top cash players do play outside these all-celebrity TV show tables, and they do get to win there.

I wasn't actually referring to the the celebrity TV show tables. I consider that money to be completely separate and more along the lines of endorsement deals and tournaments. I'm talking about day-to-day play, the majority of the players play in games in Vegas and/or Atlantic City (and anymore, it's JUST Vegas). "Bobby's Room" at Bellagio is known for having players who play in "The Big Game." Those players are very equal in skill and just trade money back and forth, except for the occasional donk who comes in and donates to the cause.

Back to the original question then: Are there poker millionaires? The answer is yes, but I don't think there's nearly as many it seems. Just because you're professional doesn't mean you're profitable. Look at Mike Matusow. The guy's on top of the world one day, destitute the next. I think there are more stories like that than what we hear.

Quote: WongBo

Joe Pa died of complications arising from treatment for lung cancer.
Lung cancer caused by a lifetime of smoking.
Not by three months of unemployment or a broken heart...

I TOTALLY disagree on this. Once people who have been doing a routine for YEARS stop doing it, they often don't find a reason to live anymore. Take Charles Schultz, creator of the Peanuts cartoon. He died the day his last original strip ran.

I made a bet with my dad that JoePa would die within six months of the day he retired or was fired. I won that bet by at least 3 months. But back to Brunson, I think the same could/should be said about him. If he ever announces his retirement from poker, I place the over/under at 4 months.... and I'd take the under.

Quote: Tiltpoul

But back to Brunson, I think the same could/should be said about him. If he ever announces his retirement from poker, I place the over/under at 4 months.... and I'd take the under.

Brunson acts like he's bored to death with poker.
Chip Reese was, thats why he quit playing for
years. He got to dread it, he could play in his
sleep he said. It was all routine, he'd seen every
possible combination of hands a hundred times
and was sick of it.

Tales are legion about Phil Ivey being a huge bettor at craps, with the wide swings that go with it.

He may have won over $13M lifetime at poker, but he's left a lot of that behind at the craps tables.

Not to worry: he's a big boy.

Betcha there are more poker millionaires than roulette millionaires. Or thousandaires.

Quote: zippyboy

Betcha there are more poker millionaires than roulette millionaires. .

And we would know this how? There are VB players in EUR who have
won millions at roulette. Billy Walters won millions using a roulette
computer. I wouldn't make that bet at all.

Quote: Tiltpoul

I TOTALLY disagree on this. Once people who have been doing a routine for YEARS stop doing it, they often don't find a reason to live anymore. Take Charles Schultz, creator of the Peanuts cartoon. He died the day his last original strip ran..

Charles Schulz died in his sleep at home around 9:45 p.m. on February 12, 2000.
Although he was dying of cancer, he suffered a fatal heart attack.

You act like these guys just happened to die...they were both terminally ill.

Quote: Tiltpoul

If he ever announces his retirement from poker, I place the over/under at 4 months.... and I'd take the under.

Sounds a little odd, having one person set an over/under line and then declare which side they will bet on. It seems a bit as if you are saying that you get to set the line but won't make it a fair one. Is that right? Would it be OK for someone else to say the line is two weeks but that you still have to take the under? Why not just say what you think the fair line is? Just curious.

Quote: Doc

Sounds a little odd, having one person set an over/under line and then declare which side they will bet on. It seems a bit as if you are saying that you get to set the line but won't make it a fair one. Is that right? Would it be OK for someone else to say the line is two weeks but that you still have to take the under? Why not just say what you think the fair line is? Just curious.

LoL... well, it's kind of morbid. You're right, I shouldn't be setting lines and making bets.

Two-time WSOP World Champion Doyle Brunson is well-known as one of the biggest gamblers in the world, but he's literally putting his life on the line in his latest bet.

It all began when Mack Rawden wrote the CinemaBlend article "100 Most Likely People to Die in 2009" and listed Brunson in 16th place with a 10% chance to die from obesity. Perhaps Rawden was unaware that Brunson has lost 130 pounds in the past five years.

Brunson wrote about it in his blog, calling Rawden a "clown" and then remarking, "... he said it was a 10% chance I would die. I would like to lay 10-1 for any amount if anybody knows this joker."

Sure enough, some phone calls were made, and Rawden accepted the bet for $1,000 (which means Brunson would pay out $10,000), with all the winnings going to the American Cancer Society.

Quote: Tiltpoul

I wasn't actually referring to the the celebrity TV show tables. I consider that money to be completely separate and more along the lines of endorsement deals and tournaments.

They get some "reverse rake" for it, but it's not an act or your usual "reality" show. If players themselves are to be trusted, High Stakes Poker is a sparingly edited and largely faithful translation of the game. Their payment for being televised is very small compared to the stakes, not even covering the blinds. Probably less than they can make at other tables, but better company.

Quote: Tiltpoul

I'm talking about day-to-day play, the majority of the players play in games in Vegas and/or Atlantic City (and anymore, it's JUST Vegas). "Bobby's Room" at Bellagio is known for having players who play in "The Big Game." Those players are very equal in skill and just trade money back and forth, except for the occasional donk who comes in and donates to the cause.

It is. And that's one room. For every room like that, there is a dozen rooms where a player that level is among strong, but still much weaker competition. You want to improve your skill, you play among equals; you want to improve your bankroll, you go a floor below.

Quote: buzzpaff

Two-time WSOP World Champion Doyle Brunson ......

When he won, there were less than 36 players in the tournament. Big deal. Who among us poker players hasn't won bigger fields than that (repeatedly)? Players back then didn't realize the bracelet would be a status symbol 30 years down the road. Brunson himself has said he'd have gone for more events if he'd known Hellmuth would make such a competition out of it.

Fighting for bragging rights to being the best holdem player is like fighting for the claim of being the best used car salesman...

Quote: zippyboy

When he won, there were less than 36 players in the tournament. Big deal. Who among us poker players hasn't won bigger fields than that (repeatedly)? Players back then didn't realize the bracelet would be a status symbol 30 years down the road.

Indeed, not every WSOP bracelet is equal. Even Amarillo Slim is sometimes credited as a WSOP winner - which he wasn't, the players just agreed with him to throw the match and split Binion's money after.
The tournament didn't get serious for another 10 years.

But Brunson has proven himself in other events throughout the years, not to mention countless cash game grinding, it's not just those two wins. There is a lot of luck involved in getting the first place. A better indicator of a tournament player's strength is how many final tables he made; from that point on you can safely consider everyone about equal, the cards decide.

Quote: EvenBob

And we would know this how? There are VB players in EUR who have
won millions at roulette. Billy Walters won millions using a roulette
computer. I wouldn't make that bet at all.

You named off one. We have Phill Hellmuth, Johnny Chan, Doyle Brunson, Johnny Moss, Erik Seidel, Phil Ivey, Pius Heinz, Jonathan Duhamel, Joe Cada, Peter Eastgate, Jerry Yang, Jamie Gold, Joe Hachem, Greg Raymer, Chris Moneymaker, Robert Varkonyi, Juan Carlos Morensen, Chris Ferguson, Noel Furlong, Scotty Nguyen, Stu Ungar, Huck Seed, Dan Harrington, Russ Hamilton, Jim Bechtel, Hamid Dastmalchi, Brad Daughtery. That is people have one at least a million dollars in WSOP events alone.

You add in Daniel Negreanu, who has been very successful in international poker tournaments, among many, many others.

So all these players have won at least 1 million dollars...still doesn't answer the question: Are they worth 1 million dollars...

Honestly, it's like lottery winners. Some likely are still worth that, while others dropped off into bankruptcy.

Its the Tournament versus ring-game syndrome. A lot of thiose, if not all, are big-time ring-game players. Thats the variance model to be studied.
Tournament only players have a different expectation/playstyle than attacking for big bucks at the drop of a hat, or a sweep-second hand at "3".
jmh p&f

Quote: Triplell

So all these players have won at least 1 million dollars...still doesn't answer the question: Are they worth 1 million dollars...
Honestly, it's like lottery winners. Some likely are still worth that, while others dropped off into bankruptcy.

There is a difference however. The average IQ of a lottery player is what, 90? While poker involves a lot of math, even (or especially) the loosest styles, if you can't figure out your odds you might as well not bother looking at your cards. I don't think there's anyone at final tables under 110. While IQ only measures math and formal logic aptitude, it does correlate positively with general intelligence.

There is also a difference in expectations. A lottery player hopes for the big prize, but doesn't really expect it. A poker player knows exactly what amounts he is going for. You don't hear players burst out pathetically upon winning a tourney, most of them have handled large sums of money before, especially in less luck-based events than WSOP ME, they aren't about to start tossing it into the air in excitement. Neither literally nor figuratively.

Celebrity showoff is single-handed work of just a couple players, or should we say Phils. They do it because they are showoffs, not because they won big, that's just a source of funding. The majority of players keeps their feet firmly on the ground.

" The majority of players keeps their feet firmly on the ground. " except the dopers, theives, scam artists, dead beat dads, and other fine gentleman that inhabit your average poker room.

Quote: WongBo

Joe Pa died of complications arising from treatment for lung cancer.
Lung cancer caused by a lifetime of smoking.
Not by three months of unemployment or a broken heart...

Paterno was well known to be a non-smoker. A quick google would have confirmed this. My guess, knowing where he lived most of his life, would be radon exposure. That's common in PA.

There are some poker players worth multiple millions, but most of the guys you see on TV all the time are just guys who play 10k tournaments a lot.

There have actually been simulations run that 10k live tournaments are unbeatable due to taxes. Some of them might be millionaires, but it is just because they got lucky and binked multiple tournaments. In reality playing a game where you end some years down 200k and other years up 600-1M is a bad idea. You get to pay taxes on your winning years and take the full loss on your losing years.


The actual guys who have made millions have done so in high stakes cash online.
I'm sure you've heard the names of many of these players, but a lot of them aren't very well known. They just play 25/50 PLO/NLHE all the time.

I think many of you would be surprised to learn how much Phil Hellmuth has made over his entire tournament career versus how much someone like Ben Grundy has made in the last 5 years.

Quote:

Quote: WongBo
Joe Pa died of complications arising from treatment for lung cancer.
Lung cancer caused by a lifetime of smoking.
Not by three months of unemployment or a broken heart...



Paterno was well known to be a non-smoker. A quick google would have confirmed this. My guess, knowing where he lived most of his life, would be radon exposure. That's common in PA.

I'll take Door #2 Asbestos inhalation, lotsa stuff insulated with that in his area also.

Quote:

Tales are legion about Phil Ivey being a huge bettor at craps, with the wide swings that go with it.

This symbolizes to me that lots of poker players even in the top tier love gambling over being risk averse.

People like making money, but there are two ends of the spectrum:

1. those that like making money and hate risk
2. those that like making money and love the drama of risk

I'm not the latter. I hate risk. I hate putting big money on the table when I play blackjack, but I've made a little money at the game over my lifetime. I enjoy the game the most when the stakes are low, but I have to bet big occasionlly to beat the game.

I've very much appreciated this thread and the discussion. I've been thinking about learning poker because a neighbor has been badgering to learn. But because of discussions like this, I'm more convinced that the poker culture isn't for me. I respect those who've made money on poker, but it isn't for me. I found this thread when I googled "Poker vs. Blackjack". I then joined the forum after I found these threads.

As an aside, some BJ Players have transitioned to profitable careers. The most well known is BIll Gross at PIMCO's hedge fund. He's a billionaire. Ed Thorp (the MIT math professor who became the father of card counting) became a fractional billionaire hedge fund manager after his blackjack career. HIrschstick of the MIT blackjack team sold his software business for $200,000,000. If one wants to follow the path of professional "gamblers", these would seem better examples than some top tier poker players who eventually tap out because they like the thrill of gambling....like Nick the Greek who loved playing poker and craps.

If it is true Ivey likes playing high stakes craps, then he's a real gambler. Gambler's like taking risk because they enjoy it. Perhaps that's why some blackjack pros prefer the term Advantage Player because they actually disdain the idea of taking unnecessary risks with hard earned money just for fun.

There are people who can make money playing poker, but it seems many of the best are gamblers at heart (they enjoy taking risk instead of avoiding it). If even the top tier poker players are gamblers at heart, it will be challenging for them to hold on to their poker winnings unless they have other sources of money like money from endorsements or celebrity status, etc.