Seems everyone on here is making money playing poker. Nobody ever loses. Amazing.

Saw this posted on another site by a poster. Makes a LOT of sense.

The bottom line of Texas Hold 'em Poker is this. You have a slight chance of quitting a winner at No Limit if, after winning a gigantic sum of money in a lucky session or series of sessions, you never play again. If you play it long enough, you will be a big loser.

Paradoxically, the Hold 'em variant that requires less skill, limit,
is, by it's very structure and the nature of gambling, IMPOSSIBLE to win
long term. If you play it long enough, you will emerge a big loser.

Paradox corollary number 2 : the higher the limit, the longer you can maintain the illusion of long term victory, because higher limits are somewhat more coherant to read and therefore easier to play.

The reason for the inevitability of long term loss is, despite all the books and theoretical approaches, despite tremendous discipline and knowledge of the game, despite only choosing to play games where conditions are "optimal" is simple enough:

The vast majority of hands you will be dealt are terrible and will not improve. Since, regardless of how much money you have , the inexorable attrition of the rakes and blinds will force you to play hands other then AA, and force you to call with "good draws", combined with the reality that you will constantly be called with several hands, one of which will frequently beat you, makes the game IMPOSSIBLE to win long term at any limit. Yes, in a few situations (AA against one opponent, flopping quads, or top pair with the nut draw, and making the draw on the turn with no pair out etc.), you will usually win.

But how often does this happen? Usuallly you look at 50 hands in a row like J2 offsuit while your money trickles away, calling or raising with 88 and seeing a flop like AKT that gets raised and rereaised, or playing JT diamonds and seeing a 2c3cAc flop and get bet in front of you, or finallly getting KK and an ace flops. Or getting your preflop capped AA called by 49 that then goes on to flop 2 pair or make a second pair on the river. And it would be nice if you only had one person call with a hand like 49. But people call any hand with an ace or that is suited, and if one terrible hand doesn't beat you, another one surely will. And how often have you seen some character holding the lucky 3 or 7 to make a bottom straight
and beat your flopped trips? Sound all too familiar? So you move up limits to get rid of some of those people only to find that they are still there but now instead of calling with 37 offsuit, they are reraising preflop with it. (Still, this is easier for you, because your JJ just got golden, all that's required is a better nervous system.)

The few times your good hands hold up will never compensate all the busted draws (despite the wonderful odds you were getting,
and that the book you are reading this week written by some supposed genius has advised you that the hand that you just lost with was a gift from God.) And never forget the rake and blinds, and the truly horrific draw-outs that kill you, and always seem to be there despite the biblical texts you read.

The reason you have a chance of quitting a winner at No Limit (although if you play that variant long enough you will go broke or amass huge debt) is because the added leverage you get being able to bet enough to bluff successfully will hold off the inevitable eventual disaster long enough to quit while you are ahead, if and only if, you get LUCKY at the right times.

I realize that "theory" demands that you believe, as an article of religious faith, that poker is a skill proposition, and that if you can choose the perfect table with the perfect suckers that you can read like a book offered in kindergarden, and that you play certain hands in certain ways,
that the odds will take care of themselves, that, like a casino, you will have the long term edge. and this edge "MUST" statistically oblige the laws of probability to assert themselves in your ultimate favor, it does not work that way.

You will be beaten by the above mentioned characteristics that these immutable laws can not compensate.

The magazines and books and cable TV shows paint a very different picture, as one would expect, to support the industry, and your good buddy that "always wins" is now in court on a some "schmuck vs. jerk" case, and is now asking if he can crash at your place, and is in your refrigerator, but still going to the casino and "winning", but you know very well from your own experience and the fact you have never actually met a real live long-term winner, that the above is the stone cold truth.

So, stop blowing money you earned or inherited. Stop blowing the rent and social security checks. Stop selling the jewelrey. It's a lost cause. Are you tormented by the notion that there are a handful of unbelievably rare tournament players that have been winners for years?
And that you are as smart as they are? If such people exist, are they really winners? You jnow that how? Second, if they really are ahead, are you tormented by the fact that you aren't Bill Gates or Clint Eastwood too? Or that you haven't won the state lottery yet? The odds are better that you will win the Lottery then that you will win long term at hold 'em. You will go through phases where you adjust your approaches to the game and they will all lose. You will convince yourself about all sorts of things over the years, you will keep exquisite records, and you will still lose.

Give yourself a break, just give it up and let the promoters find someone else to influence.

Hmm if you think like this, you better stay away from the poker table, because there are alot of things that you don't understand. If you don't mind, i keep playing :-)

P.S. That DN guy is a damn lucky guy

I stopped reading after the 7th paragraph...out of what seemed like 50, I think thats pretty good odds....anyway...who gets good cards in only 1 out of 50 hands?

This person doesn't play poker, doesn't speed nor have sex without a condom. I feel for him and his unsually small bit of tunnel vision.

That was entertaining. As creative as the argument on 2+2 about being able to get a 5 of a kind in Hold 'em because you 'share' cards.

Good work kid.

well the novel of a post would be correct if nobody ever put new money on to a site. The rake would win in the end since all the money woudl be raked off...The problem is that people continually put money into sites and continually reload. That allows you to stay ahead of the rake if you are good.

Now is the variance? of course there is...AA isnt 100% against any hand. I know this for a fact after my nice down swing. But the odds say that in the long run aces will win more than they lose...so will kings, queens and so on. Of course u get down into the marginal hands and it becomes a lot closer on if you can win in the long term. But if you dont play the hands that are -ev, break even with the marginals, and of course win with the strong hands..how do you not come out ahead?

finally yes the uneducated player loses in the long run b/c they dont understand how to play poker.

PS: it wanted to stop reading after i read that limit was the less skillful game but i was laughin so hard i thought id look to see if there were any other jokes

Funny how you can convince yourself of one thing, then when it doesn't work out, blame it on bad luck, etc. If at first you don't succeed, it can't be your fault...

What a waste of time...

Thanks for those minutes i'll never get back.....

Obv this person knows very little about poker and bankroll managment.

Or..

He just came off of the worst bad beat streak in the history of poker lol :roll:

oooo that was him i forgot about that. Yeah its real smart to take a lot of money and play out of ur ability against better plays and then complain about bad luck. We all warned him what would happen b/c he just wasnt good enough. So dont blame anybody else but urself for beign so full of urself that you didnt take the time to realize that you werent good enough for those stakes

I lose all the time. That is why I'm here. It helps to read up on strategy, and engage in constructive discussions with people who know what they are doing. And even if they aren't experts themselves, you will still only get better by learning different points of view about specific plays.

Zach

it may seem like people never lose, because the vast majority of posts are about wins. that's mostly because people prefer to talk about wins than losses. it is a common misconception that people talk as if they never lose on this site. however whenever there is a poll about wins and losses, plenty of people post that they are losing players.

as for the article it is simply wrong. it is most certainly possible to win in the long run in poker, especially in no limit. i won't get into why, but hopefully someone with a few extra minutes on their hands does us that favour.

daniel

I shortened it for you.

biggest.moron.ever.

Losing is for losers, I only get bad beats.

You forgot to add that he watches the news at 8,9,10 & 11pm

If I had 50 hands in a row of J2, I would be down a total of 5bb and 5sb, which I wouldn't exactly call a catastrophy....clearly the OP isn't patient enough to wait out the bad runs for the good runs.

And since this thread doesn't really have a point, and I've been wanting to show it off, here is a run of hands I had recently. Hand 1 is an arbitrary hand I started counting at:

Hand 1: I'm dealt AA
Hand 2: AT
Hand 4: AA
Hand 7: 22
Hand 11: QQ
Hand 13: QQ
Hand 15: AA
Hand 17: QQ
Hand 24: KK
Hand 29: AQ
Hand 36: AA
Hand 39: AT
Hand 42: 77
Hand 43: AT
Hand 48: AK
Hand 57: JJ

Mark

I'm almost convinced that the AI in poker websites has a predetermined winner for the hand if that person holding that hand plays it correctly. I.E. having middle pair and not calling pot sized bet only to have someone else call it and the turn makes the set you folded, or the str8 you folded pre flop.
I;ve seen this too many times to count. idiots calling a raise and a reraise in front of them with J 9 off and catching the flop for a str8 when they really shouldn't have been in the hand to begin with cracking the pocket aces or kings.

you are "almost convinced" wrong. sorry.

well actually, you are right except for the term "AI". and the term "predetermined" is also a misnomer.

nothing is predetermined, nor is there any AI. the hands are dealt randomly, or in such a way that is in all possible senses insignificantly different from randomness. nothing is predetermined except that people will play their cards stupidly, thereby allowing for the very long-term profits that the OP says are impossible.

your post and the OP's imply two opposite conclusions. i'll let people be convined by whichever they choose.

daniel

What i think people fail to realize is that, if a draw is 10% to hit, you sort of have to accept that .... you know, ONE IN TEN TIMES, ITS GOING TO HIT!

When the collective table VPIP is hovering in the 70's, you there are going to probably be several long shot draws per hand.

So the solution is simple. Move up in the limits. The fewer the fish, the easier it will be to beat the games.

LOL.

To the OP:

I think it is impossible to beat poker as well. Im just super lucky and I happen to make consistent profit month after month. Thanks to your enlightening post I will now start playing the lottery because I never came to fully realize how lucky I truly am.

I never lose. Why? Because I can dodge bullets baby!

To the OP:

Just by playing good cards and playing the well, it is possible to gain significant advantages on your bets. I'd say that in a limit game around the 15/30 level, it is easily possible to get your money in on average as a 55% favorite.

So, if you're playing at a table with a $150 average pot, and a $3 max rake, even if you consider an average rake of $2.50, then that's still less than 2% going to the house. Thus, if you just play as well as I listed, than you'll be consistently making profits. It's not that hard to understand. Variance makes it difficult to make money in the short run without good luck, but in the long run, it's certainly possible.

However, despite the flawed thinking of the original poster, he does make some good points. It seems like everyone that plays at the 10/20 level or above acts like they're a consistent winner, and it's only possible for about 10 or 15% to be winners in the long run. I think a lot of people who play decently well use "creative bookkeeping" to convince themselves they're winning when they're not.

Also, I'll agree that the element of skill is more important in NL poker in relation to luck. The fact that you can force people to pay much more to chase when they're behind, force them to pay more to call you down, and the fact that you can get many more bluffing opportunities makes it possible to get your money in as a heavier favorite. I'd say that if you're playing at a weak table, then (counting fold equity), you can get your money in as about a 60% favorite on average if your playing right.

Finally, I'd like to say it's kind of enlightening to see the perspective of someone who's actually putting serious money into the games. You never hear anyone say "yeah, I just put $8000 into x____x poker site and I lost it all. I'm a losing player. I mean we know that the $2,000,000 a day that PartyPoker makes comes from somewhere, right?

DING DING DING

Gross overgeneralization!!!!

Actually, I didn't phrase that well at all. I was thinking in a heads-up situation, it would be 55%. I guess what I really meant is that on average, you'd have 110% equity on the money you put in the pot. Obviously, if you see an 8-way flop, you're not going to be a 55% favorite to win. Being 14% on average, and then 28% when you're one of the four people that continues on the turn would be perfectly reasonable however.

The point is that it doesn't take a very big edge to beat the rake in limit poker.

i stopped reading after the first couple of sentences...

this guy just has bad money management and tries to play at tables far above his skill level. Probably one of those type of people that have seen some tv poker and said to himself "that looks easy, i can do that!"

That sure was an amusing novel. Must have been written by a person who had a week like I had on Pardise Poker. It sure is fun to get rivered every hand you play, but again that is poker.

I am not going to say that I win every time out that is just foolish thinking. But what I have done is turn a 10$ investment into a 1000$ bank role. This took about 3 months to do, but it can be done. So my advice to the guy who wrote amusing short story, quite while you are down, you don't have the mental capasity to continue to play winning poker. Go play chess or checkers you won't have to worry about the odds of being sucked out.

I must be one lucky bastad. Ive gotten blacked out drunk at great bars, eaten at sweet resteruants, and bought all sorts of ridicoulous crap daily with my poker winnings over the last 3 months. Now that I think about it I should quit while im ahead. I dont really have a choice i guess, I certainly dont want to lose my whole bankroll because I am dealt J2 every hand for a month.

i got killed at paradise too. man that site is crazy loose, but seems like a lot of people lose at it. can't imagine what an upswing must be like though. definitely high EV, high variance site IMO.

talkin' bout low limit LHE of course.
daniel

Troll

I saw the article on 2+2 a while back. It's by some psycho anti-gambling organization.

Yep, I knew I'd see the idiot comments, the bank roll management lecture and the such.

But the question remains, how many profitable poker players do you personally know? The bottom line is with the rare exception of the truly gifted cash players, and I am talking about to upper 1 % of 1%, most end up long term losers. That is simply a fact.

Now if you play as a recreation, knowing you will be a long term loser in the game, than ok. I still play the occassional game with friends, but no longer do I play with the dedication of somehow being profitable.

I love it when on-line players talk about their "success". Well let me ask, bullsh1t aside, show me the material possessions you now have due to poker. You know, the cars, the houses, the vacations....How about honestly taking year's worth of credit card statements adding up the deposits versus the withdrawls. Where do you stand? Pretty bleak, eh?

Its a fact, 9 out of 10 of online players never make a withdrawl, yet still consider themselves profitable. What a farce. Being profitbale is not winning a few sessions on line and keeping the money there only to lose it all the following month. Its ONLY a profit if you take it out and spend it(or save it). Keeping it on line is a pattern of failure.

And what about the live player? I used to play at a club with a "NL specialist". He was a feared player, he even bluffed $200 from me one night on one pot with 7-10 off. I had not seen him in a while until last month. I heard him in the smoking room one night of the place, bemoaning the fact he quit his job when he was on an upswing, and was now facing eviction from his apartment on a downswing. I saw him bum $50 from another player on his way out so he could fill his 1999 Mustang with a tank of gas. And this was a feared player. Now he was a broken man. You know the guy...when he was on a roll he talked, bragged and flashed his rubber band stack of $100s.

So unless you can document your success to yourself, look at your possessions and bank account and give the credit to poker, spare me the "I am crushing the 10-20 game". Unless you are in the upper percentile of 1% you are NOT a profitbale poker player. You may win some money in stretches, but you know as well as I you'll eventually donate it back.

That said, poker as a hobby is very fun. Just don't delude yourself you will make money long turn because you have a better chance of picking the winning lottery numbers.

Cheers!

Hi. I've played online for 10 months. I started with $10. On a downswing right now, I'm at $4200. My material possessions? Well, I'm paying for college with it. I bought a leather chair, DVD's, CD's, books, and a TV. And I could be getting a computer during winter break.

Does this mean I'm gifted?

look man, just because you suck doesn't mean everyone else does.
if you want to see profits, i'm sure many people could do that. for instance, i started with a $50 deposit on Empire. I have never deposited any other money, nor used any other money for poker, aside from $5 or less for home game. I now have over $1000 in several sites, a Neteller account with over $1000 and more importantly, a bank account, from which I have paid many expenses over the past year, and still have money in there. Those are all profits. Profits from poker.

As for your garbage stat about .01% of players winning that is faulty and false. It is faulty because your stat probably includes everyone who has ever played poker. I'm sure there are a significant percentage in there who played once or twice, or play to gamble (the same way some of us might play roulette or craps). It probably does not count only people, like the ones on this forum, who take it seriously.
For reference - a quick look at my Pokertracker forum shows that just over 40% of people are winners. This is an unbiased look at everyone I've played online poker against. 40%. that is more than .01%, which was clearly made up.

I'm sure there are a dozen other ways people could show this article to be complete garbage, but hopefully this suffices and people can simply ignore your idiocy.

Daniel

p.s. according to you, the odds of winning at poker is .01%, or 1/10000. I'm pretty sure the odds of winning the lottery are a lot worse.
Read Theory of Poker. Rinse and Repeat.

The money ive withdrawn has gone both towards school, living expenses and is sitting in my bank.

_____ Long winded details of my entire online history _______

The first deposit i made online was for $40 canadian. A friend and i both deposited this amount. We did exceptionally well and won first in a $30 MTT after winning a bit at the low stakes cash games. We won roughly $4,000 american, split two ways. I withdrew all but $200 of the amount that was for me, and i had that transfered to my own account. With that, i won a hundred dollars or so at .50/1 and withdrew.

After this, i played along with a different friend on his account for a joint deposit of $25 american each. We had a wicked run over the course of 2 months, withdrew roughly $2,000 each (some cash games, some sit and goes, some MTT's). There was $200 left in the account, and we continued to play with that, until it was $500 and then he sent half of it to my account and kept half in his, and we decided to play on our own.

I turned that $200 into roughly $800 first at .50/1 and then at 1/2, plus $300 or so that my friends sold to me (because he needed cash, and didnt have time to get a party cheque via mail). I withdrew it all, leaving my account at 0.

By then, my friend had lost most of his share of the $500 from when we split ($250 of which was his). The account was left at $50. I played with it for him in a tournament, and he said if i did well, i'd get half. Well, i did well. Cashed a decent amount and had the account at about $200. After this, i played .50/1 until the account was $600. At this point, i split the account again, and left myself with $300.

*this is when i got poker tracker, and starts roughly a weeks and a half ago*

I have just recently turned that $300 into $725 at .50/1 and .10/.25 nl.


That means that ive deposited a grand total of roughly $70 american on party poker and withdrawn a total of $4,900, and i have roughly $725 sitting in the account.

The only other deposit ive made was $30 on UB, which i lost.

This all happened between april 2005 to date. These are completely honest figures.

Ha Ha, I love it. $50 into $1000. Wow, what a model. Of course, it took you how many hours, days and weeks to obtain that? Its below minimum wage when you factor that in. Congrats, you outlasted the other bingo players. You could have got a telemarketing job and made 10 times that in the amount of time you invested in online bingo, errr poker.

But in the long run, trust me, you'll lose it all and then some. Unless you are a pathetic drone, you will have to rise in limits. What, you going to duke it out at the nickle tables for life? Even the nickle slot player eventually tries the quater machines.

No, you will try and move up. And thenwhat? BAM. You stack is erased. Of course, it will be because of bad beats, variance, etc...

Now, if you are playing for fun, then I apologize. Have fun with it, and when you lose your stack, you can chalk it up to entertainment. But please spare me the poker speeches. Oh and if you think 40% make money, please pass the peace pipe.

Custom,

Can you ban this guy?

Thanks,
Brandon

*shrug*

I didnt say it was a job, but in total, im up well over $12K cdn (including live) since last summer started for me. I consider htat pretty alright for a hobby. It's sure better than losing several thousand, which sounds like its the case for you.

FYI, since ive gotten poker tracker, over now 15k hands, i average slightly more htan 4.0 BB's/100 and i primarily 4 table. Seeing 60 hands an hour per table means that my hourly rate is in the ballpark of $10 an hour, at the lowest possible stakes available - stakes which i've since moved past.

2/4 tables arent significantly different than .50/1. My winrate will probably be cut in half, id guess. Who knwos? Maybe i wont even make that at first. 2BB/100 isn't unheard of though, and i think that im capable of getting there. That's $20 an hour while 4 tabling. Not bad for something i enjoy doing anyways. And higher limits certainly are beatable, unless you're just shitty at poker (which you sound to be).



Not really. Im more than adequately bankrolled to play whatever limits i do - and given that im willing to drop down if i lose a given amount, i can effectively hedge risk down to a negligable amount.

If you start at 1/2 with a 300BB bankroll and are prepared to drop to .50/1 if/when you drop to 150BB's, look at what happens...

Instead of there being a 2% ROR for you to go bust (or whatever the precise percentage is), the probability of going bust suddenly is the product of the probability of losing 150BB's once and 300BB's once, or effectively a 450BB bankroll. If you can drop limits again, it becomes the equivalent of a 600BB bankroll, and so on and so forth.



I dont know or care what percent of people make money. I have a statistically significant sample of hands, and i evidently _do_ make money at poker.
You apparently do not.

Whether you're part of a 60% majority (of losers) or an 80% majority, i have no clue.

Unfortunatley, I can't until he breaks the rules.

we really need a get rid of dumb trolls ban rule going. TTIDAH

Not that this thread is even worth a response...

The whole point of the $50 to $1000 experiment proves that poker is a long run game and good players win by beating weaker players over the long run.

There ARE bad players, there ARE gamble-holic losers, and they put food on the table for the winners.

And yes, turning $50 into $1000 is a model. I have helped several friends do this, using my own successes and failures as a model.
It is below minimum wage, you are correct. but I don't think i could find even a minimum wage job that I could do while watching tv, listening to music, talk to friends, at my own convenience, on my own schedule or while wearing no pants. if you do (no pants clausnote optional) then sign me up.

You say unless we are pathetic drones we'll move up? Well true, most of us will move up, but we will do so carefully, and in such a way as we do not expose ourselves to risk unnecessarily.

I have not had pokertracker for a long time. Many people have. For those people, they have sustained a win rate at a certain limit over a large sample. It is nearly mathematically impossible that these people could maintain this win rate over such a large sample size if they were not winning players. If you believe that despite this, they cannot win in the long run, then the only way you can be proved wrong is with evidence. Since you doubt the evidence you've been presented with, there is no way to prove you wrong. Don't think that makes you right, in fact it is almost the opposite.

40% of people may not make money at poker, but about that many are winning players online. This includes those that played once and gave up.

Bad beats and variance affect everyone. But if you are a careful, winning player, and stay within your bankroll, they will not erase your stack. It is that simple. It is almost mathematically impossible for that person to lose everything. And if you don't lose everything, you'll be around for the positive side of variance and build your stack back up.

To the OP - if you want to dogmatically believe this garbage, feel free, but you will soon be banned and poker will be nothing but a costly bad memory. If you want to learn how to play poker well, and more importantly manage your poker playing well, explore the site a little more and you'll be able to do it.

To everyone else - no i'm not saying all this stuff to argue against the OP. I hope anyone else reading this, especially lurkers or newbies, i hope you'll consider the dogmatic opinions of one person for what they're worth against the educated opinions of many others before accepting either position.

Cheers,
Daniel

Thank you damone.I read this and cleared out all of my accounts.I guess I had never looked at it like that.Good bye poker.I am however gonna go play on checkers stars..KING ME BITCH.

P.S.Im gonna catch Kdawg in posts by the way.So far its

whale_hunter -1

Kdawg-8552

Good luck

I'll delete posts and ban you before that happens

This is exactly what makes limit a harder game, and why nl players and people like the OP tilt severely whenever they play it. BTW, OP it really isnt that hard to be a winner at limit HE. Its just that the ratio of morons to competents is very disparate. Many hundreds of players have the stats to back up their claims including myself and others on this site. You are just one of a healthy number of losing players who are envious and refuse to realistically assess why they really lose.

Damone: Two questions for you.

1. What happens if a group of players play with no rake for say, 5 years.
2. Now take this same concept, and throw the WORST poker player you know into the big game with the world's best players. You think that over 5 years he will do just as well as the seasoned professionals?

Think about it for a few minutes, it'll PROBABLY start to come to you.

I've made 3 $200 deposits.

Turned the first into a $5000 holiday for my wife and parents

Blew the second

Turned the 3rd into a car, a computer, $8000 bankroll and every 2-3 months I take my wife shopping.

In Paris.

For the weekend.

(Believe me she never argues about me playing... )

Part-time online limit poker pays for it all.

You keep your theory.

I'll keep my profits.

i never lose, i just havent quit playing yet

I'm on a 300 big bet downswing, I never thought it was possible, but it most certainly is. It's like Murphy's Law, everything that can go wrong has gone wrong. This has happened in less than a span of a week and wow is it ever scary. It's definitely been a humbling experience and hopefully it will end soon. I've handled it pretty well though, the money doesn't bother me much as sick as that sounds, thankfully I've got a fairly big bankroll to ride it out or I'd be busted.

So, yes I'm pretty sure everyone loses on here at least once in a while, just nobody would really like talking about it, which makes sense.

Online, I'm a career losing player. I've put in about $2000 into online poker and taken out about $1000, leaving me $1000 in the hole. It's frustrating -- online poker and me don't seem to get along in a long-term way, while people I know claim to be, and show all the signs of, making 5- or six-figure annual incomes playing online.

In brick-and-mortar cardrooms it's another matter. I've been playing cardroom poker since 1997. I lost about $500 in '97, broke even in '98, up roughly $2K in '99, up five figures in 2000, and have had solidly positive years ever since.

I don't view myself as a good player, but as a mediocre one. Lucky for me, most of the people I play against are even worse!

OP: id love to show you my spreadsheets and end this discussion. The fact is in a couple of days I could teach my little sister to be a clear cut profitable player multitabling the low NL games. If you think only 1% of people are making above minimum wage long term you are seriously out of your mind. Im done with this thread, that is unless you would like to see a dozen or so spreadsheets.

hilarious

Ive got a sister i would love you to meet. For real? 3 200 doller payments and you have gotten up to those amounts? Im personally down online and up in RL. Thats amazeing tho... Im impressed...