Poker Forum > General Discussion
What is a 'Poker Pro'?
kinboshi:
I"ve had this discussion in the past, and it"s probably a good idea to start a separate thread about it (possibly not, but I have anyway).
So what is a "poker pro"?
Is it someone who makes their sole income via poker? Is it someone that makes the majority of their income via poker?
What about someone who is unemployed, made redundant, retired, looks after a family, and also plays poker? Obviously it will me their main source (or only source) of income. But does that make them a pro?
What about someone who"s very wealthy, and so can play in the big events, and does try to play all of them? Are they a "poker pro"? What about someone who plays in all these events, but is a losing player? They can"t be a pro, surely?
To me there is no definite black & white division with pros on one side, and none-pros on the other. There is also a very large grey area. This is why a number of players have played in some of the early APAT events, but now no longer play in the "amateur" events as they are now considered "pros".
I have a friend who is an excellent player, and is currently what I"d guess we"d call a pro. He plays freerolls and low buy-in MTTs - and does remarkably well in them. He"s mentioned going "back to work" and when (if) he does this he"s said he"d love to play in the APAT events. It"s a shame that he can"t at the moment, but it makes sense. The funny thing is, if he does become a "non-pro", he"ll still be the same player.
To be honest, the argument might actually be a red herring as far as APAT is concerned. The pros we all know won"t want to play in a £75 amateur event. They can make a far better ROI in other events. In addition to this, I was lucky enough to get a chance to play in an EPT - and I was sitting in a room full of pros. I didn"t feel outclassed (well, no more than I do in the APAT events), the majority of the pros weren"t anything special. So should we be worried about a few players who people might consider to be "pros" playing in an event dedicated to amateurs? If I remember rightly, there were a few players in last season"s Welsh event who are no longer allowed (if that"s the right word) to play in the APAT events as they are now considered as being pros. They didn"t actually win - the title went to a luckbox from Blackpool (hi Lee ;D), a full-time soldier and exactly the sort of player these APAT events were devised for.
Haven"t written all of that nonsense it seems to boil down to two things. One, it"s difficult to define what a pro is, and secondly, should we be bothered if some "borderline" pros play in the APAT events. I don"t think I care.
AMRN:
I play low stakes 4 to 6 hours per day (every day), and withdraw a couple of thousand quid every few months. I also work full time and earn a salary, but do rely on the poker withdrawals for holidays and Christmas, etc..... but I am strictly an amateur player.
Not wanting to hijack the thread.... but Daniel, are you a professional forum poster?
kinboshi:
--- Quote from: AMRN on December 31, 2007, 18:42:19 PM ---
Not wanting to hijack the thread.... but Daniel, are you a professional forum poster?
--- End quote ---
No, as I"m unpaid (unfortunately).
WarBwastardo:
Until there"s an official register for Professionals there is no such thing as a Pro-Poker player, at least not in the same context as golfers for example who have to pass tests and pay fees and own a certain amount of pastel coloured tank tops.
Poker may be someone"s profession in that earnings from the game represent their sole source of income, but the dynamics of poker are not the same as golf, snooker etc because of the luck factor and the number of variations of the game so professional status does not necessarily translate to specific levels of skill. It"s a bit more complex than that.
Anyone worrying about "pro" players sneaking into APAT national events is worrying over nothing. If you play these games because you"re a recreational player and enjoy the atmosphere and the social aspect then who cares who you"re up against? It may even be a benefit to play against better players to improve your own game. If you think you can win and don"t want to be up against pro"s, I think the better amateurs in these events are as good as pro"s anyway so your concerns are misguided.
Waz1892:
Isn"t this defined on the front page of this very association?
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[#] Next page
Go to full version