On finding your niche in poker
As you all know, 'finding a niche' is key to being successful at business. But how to do it in poker? I mean, how to choose a game variation to play and areas to focus studies on so that we're uniquely qualified there and actually make some money there?
One of the top Google results about finding a niche is this article that sums it up well imo.
Dedicate one hour and spend 15 minutes on each of the below four questions to find a killer niche:
1. Identify the talents and skills you’re good at.
2. Out of the above talents and skills, what do you enjoy doing most?
3. Of those talents and skills you enjoy, what do people need?
4. From the above needs, what will people pay big money for?
While the first two questions are self-explanatory, the latter two require clarification when applied to poker.
When talking about 'being needed' as a player, most poker hopefuls mean being in demand as a coach, i.e. being useful to fellow regs. But that essentially limits them to being B2B enterprises.
Indeed, who are our, poker players', customers? Right - recreationals plus those weak regs who think they're stronger than us! How to encourage those who donate money to us (or to the reg pool as a whole if we're talking games without table selection, but at least partially, their deposits still come to us) to continue doing so? How to provide B2C service in poker?
Recs will keep coming if we're entertaining enough. This means being loose. Of course chatting is also beneficial; I was thinking about making special hotkeys for the old PKR specifically dedicated to emoting. Alas I'm asocial so I feel awkward about text chatting, should overcome this fear and respond to recs once in a while. Anyway, it's beneficial to find a way to entertain them that we're good at.
Weak regs will continue underestimating us and not studying us well enough if they think that we're fish and we've got our winnings only due to blind luck. This doesn't necessarily mean that we need to be fish in fact. Instead, we just need to know some aspects of the game deeper than them (the aspects that we're good at and they don't think about) so that some of our plays or habits look as if we indeed were fish.
This is how Isildur1 was getting action onto his tables. Just don't be afraid of looking like a clown. If you don't look ridiculous at least sometimes, then you'll remain a superstandard reg, and as it's barely possible to play optimally, this means that you'll be too predictable and exploitable, which is a no-no at high stakes.
An important sub-question of the 4th question - and it's asked in the article too - is:
What is scalable?
It actually limits us to poker variants that are interesting enough to the public to allow to play them at stakes high enough with traffic high enough to let us earn money that we're dreaming of. So the games that are traditionally called 'niche' - the 'old man coffee' games like Stud and PL Omaha Hi/Lo cash (as opposed to the NLO8 tournament mayhem) - are out of question*. On the contrary, we need to be at the spearhead of the poker progress, identify the games that have a potential for growth and study some unique strategic elements there that no one else has figured out yet.
* There's a reason for this. The games that are in demand are those with high variance... well, because most people play poker to get lucky, don't they? The higher the variance, the more sustainable the game.
Let me know in replies what you think about this unusual theory