Log in with your TwoRags.com account. Click here to register. Email: Password: Remember log-in information

I frequently get PM’s asking for coaching and staking. These days I do basically zero staking (though I do buy percentages of people now and then) and minimum coaching, almost never in the traditional sense (mostly people come over and watch me play and ask questions.) However, my friend StevoL and I are always on the look out for the next perfect horse-student. This is a person we’d both consider investing time in training and staking in order to groom them into the perfect horse (though obviously they could eventually go alone.) Stevo recently had one of his horse-students hit a six figure score for him by winning the $15,000 buy in Sydney high rollers event during the APPT grand final. Jarred Graham, aka ‘FlopNutsOnYou’ online, has been working under Stevo for about a year, though it’s important to note that a huge amount of Jarred’s success is a result of the enormous hours and hard work he put into his game. It’s also relevant to note that I don’t think Jarred hitting one large score in Sydney proves his success; he has been putting up big scores for some time now online and consistently crushing for some time.

So what exactly are Stevo and I looking for when we consider someone for that kind of thing? I thought it might be interesting to make a list and talk about what qualifies or disqualifies a person from consideration:

1. A potential student must have absolutely zero gamble in them. Anyone who spends any time whatsoever in the pit, sports betting, or doing anything else that’s –EV gambling is pretty much instantly disqualified. Same goes for anyone who used to gamble frequently but has since settled down. I’ve learned the hard way that once a person gets the gamble in them, it pretty much never leaves. If someone plays their favorite pit game a couple times a year with a small amount of money as simple recreation (as I and several other poker players do) that’s not a big deal, but anything beyond that and they are no longer in the running.

2. A potential student must not be an emotional person. In poker you’re constantly dealing with disappointment and frustration, and anyone who reacts strongly and negatively to that is again pretty much instantly disqualified. Surviving in poker over the long term in a stable way requires a very even temperament and while there are plenty of successful players who are emotional I honestly believe they are worse players (and often people) because of it. It’s totally normal to swear, feel disappointment, or be annoyed over running bad or taking an especially brutal beat. However, anyone who flips out, breaks things, lets fury heavily affect their play, or takes their anger out on others is out of the running. Additionally, I flat out hate dealing with emotional people’s bullshit. Grow the fuck up.

3. A potential student must not use drugs outside of marijuana. I don’t really care if someone has tried this drug and that drug, but anyone who regularly uses recreational drugs outside of marijuana is normally disqualified. I’m aware that plenty of people are capable of only using drugs on occasion and in moderate doses, but any use of a potentially addictive substance is additional liability to a backer who has their money in the trust of the horse. Additionally, anyone indulging in more than occasional drug use is likely out partying a lot, which means less time they will spend grinding. Although I’d tell most people asking me for advice to have a balanced and very social lifestyle, I’d obviously prefer that a horse spends as much time grinding as possible. A huge percentage of professional poker players regularly use marijuana, many in very high doses. I would likely give less consideration to a person who was a full blown pot head as it tends to make people lazy and unmotivated, but I wouldn’t disqualify them because many very good players function under the substance near constantly and find it easier to put in volume as a result.

4. A potential student must have a real desire and motivation to learn. There are lots of people who think they want to learn the game quite badly but once they realize the amount of work required get lazy or apathetic. Others think that if they are taken other the wing of a highly successful player then things will sort of fall into place for them and not too much work will be necessary. The fact is, even someone given the undivided attention of a highly successful pro will still have to put in massive hours of both play and study by themselves. This quality was highly evident in Jarred and one of the chief reasons for his quick evolution as a player. Whenever someone I know asks for a blue print of how to get better I essentially assign them a large amount of homework and demand they give me feedback and questions after reading it. Anyone who can’t be fucked isn’t worth my time.

5. It is preferable that a potential student didn’t learn poker by playing live. This isn’t my having some vendetta against live players or trying to get into an argument about superiority. The simple fact is that learning through live poker creates and reinforces many bad habits in a poker player. Stevo and I have discussed this at length and both agree that we’d both rather work with someone who was 100% raw and inexperienced than trying to deprogram a live player and teach them the game all over again (with a few already successful exceptions.) I know how hard this is because I am a prime example of having done it. I grew up playing live home games and eventually grinding at Crown casino, as well as learning from the books live players. When I was finally taught the game correctly it was evident that my years of learning and practicing incorrectly were making it more difficult for the proper concepts to sink into my game. The ideal student has been playing online for some time and already studies the game from established resources (training sites, forums, articles, etc) but simply hasn’t broken through yet.

6. A potential student should ask many questions, but not question us. This goes back to having a desire to learn, which is certainly a quality in a potential student. However, having a student who won’t take orders or do what’s necessary of him is a liability neither of us is willing to deal with. Of course as teachers we’re going to be wrong from time to time and it’s certainly acceptable that a student would point out flaws or suggest a better alternative. That said if he’s overruled and told he’s wrong or needs to do something how we say it should be done it needs to get done that way.

7. A potential student should enjoy grinding, or at least not mind it. Many poker players actually hate putting in volume (one of the reasons many spend their playing time high.) If a player is at the early stages of career and development and already hates putting in the hours it’s not a good sign for his future. Although I know many successful players who absolutely hate playing, were I to spend time teaching someone it would obviously be preferable that they enjoy the time they spend grinding.

8. It is preferable though not necessary that a potential student is good at math. There are plenty of poker players who aren’t particularly good at math (myself included) but at a minimum a student needs to be willing to make the effort to understand the basics of pot odds, equity, ranges, and things of that matter. Naturally, it’s even better if the potential student is highly capable at math, because at the end of the day the whole game is really a massive math problem and people experienced in the area will have a better idea understanding the idea of ‘long term’.

9. It is preferable that the potential student is young and single. For the most part as people get older they have a higher degree of responsibility, often to an already established career or a family. Anyone with a serious girlfriend or wife immediately has a major drain on his time and in many cases the woman in his life will want something more stable than a poker playing boyfriend/husband. The ideal age for a student is 18, particularly in Australia as far fewer Australians enter college allowing for maximum time commitment to learning the game.

10. It is highly preferable that a potential student is male. It’s rather obvious that I have considerable experience teaching a girl to play and in no way regret that experience. That said, women are already predisposed to being much more emotional than men and almost every known female poker player has been known to outbursts (there are exceptions, but not many.) Additionally, the poker world is a harsh place for a woman to try and make a living. If she gains any fame or notoriety her looks and personal life will be under constant scrutiny and potential ridicule. And if she happens to achieve a major success the line of haters will be a mile long (Hi Annette!) Additionally, many female players (attractive ones anyway) realize that they don’t really have to be very good in order to get attention and sponsorship money and as a result lose the drive to constantly improve their game. It is extremely unlikely I’d ever consider taking on another female student.

11. It is mandatory that either I or Stevo know the potential student in real life. This is necessary in order to observe the behavior of the person in regards to the rest of the list not to mention being able to ascertain whether our personalities match up in a way that’s conductive to a proper learning environment.

Lastly, I want to say that we do not want anyone sending us any form of application or request. Anyone I’d consider for this kind of thing is likely someone I would approach about it personally. Even if someone fit this list completely it’s extremely unlikely that we’d consider them as we are highly selective with this sort of thing (a result of failing to be so in the past.) If you send me some kind of information or student request I will likely give it a very brief glance then reply that I’m not interested.