Amateur Poker Association & Tour
Poker Forum => General Discussion => Topic started by: kinboshi on December 31, 2007, 18:34:05 PM
-
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.
-
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?
-
Not wanting to hijack the thread.... but Daniel, are you a professional forum poster?
No, as I"m unpaid (unfortunately).
-
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.
-
Isn"t this defined on the front page of this very association?
-
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.
Good post.
As we have said all along, it is up to the players to self police on this issue as there are grey areas in intrepretation based on any definition. If a player considers himself to be a professional player then he should step aside and not compete in the APAT amateur events.
Similarly, if a player is "between" jobs, and plays a bit of poker, then he is clearly not a professional as a result. Even if that player is good and achieving results, because War is absolutely right in saying that a number of APAT members could hold their own with many of the lower to mid level professionals, as the selection of nominees in the "non APAT tournament" category within the APAT awards demonstrates.
-
with regard to Jon Spinks, surely his reply earlier indicated that he does class himself as a proffesional, earns his whole income from poker and therefore shouldnt participate in amateur apat events?
-
Isn"t it true that any housewives and house-husbands who play in APAT events earn their whole income from poker?
-
I have only been playing since April and feel I"m doing alright for the length of time I"ve been playing but I am keen to keep improving as a player. To do that I feel I need to play against, test myself against, and learn from good players. Therefore I would welcome any pros (and any good player for that matter) into any APAT event as I would relish both the challenge of playing them and the opportunity to learn.
-
...and there are always players like myself and Jon W to lower the standard and increase the value anyway!
-
do most house wifes and house husbands charge for tuition and release videos to teach others how to play? im not slating the guy cos obviously hes a very good player and is doing well for himself and personally would have no problem with him playing apat events but it would appear it conflicts with the reason apat was created. There is still the pro am for him to play and it doesnt stop him being a member of apat and supporting it
-
...and there are always players like myself and Jon W to lower the standard and increase the value anyway!
huh!!!
Did somebody mention my name?
-
do most house wifes and house husbands charge for tuition and release videos to teach others how to play? im not slating the guy cos obviously hes a very good player and is doing well for himself and personally would have no problem with him playing apat events but it would appear it conflicts with the reason apat was created. There is still the pro am for him to play and it doesnt stop him being a member of apat and supporting it
I believe there have been a few players over the course of the first and second season whose amateur/professional status has been questioned.
These questions have all been resolved with hardly any bloodshed at all - so I think this should be no different.
So I wouldn"t worry about it, it"ll get sorted one way or another.
-
do most house wifes and house husbands charge for tuition and release videos to teach others how to play? im not slating the guy cos obviously hes a very good player and is doing well for himself and personally would have no problem with him playing apat events but it would appear it conflicts with the reason apat was created. There is still the pro am for him to play and it doesnt stop him being a member of apat and supporting it
I think the matter will be cleared up one way or the other when Des talks to Jon and that"s the way it should be.
To my knowledge he hasn"t yet charged anyone for any tuition so as far as I"m concerned his plans for next year are a seperate matter to what he achieved at Walsall and in the WCOOP when he was an unemployed ex-student still deciding what to do with his life and I"m disappointed that the anonymous cretin has tried to suggest he wasn"t qualified for his nomination in the awards. Absolute garbage.
-
with regard to Jon Spinks, surely his reply earlier indicated that he does class himself as a proffesional, earns his whole income from poker and therefore shouldnt participate in amateur apat events?
He actually states, "I am unemployed at the moment, but you don"t know anything about the area I live in, if I wanted to earn a crap income, I could, and I could go work 1 day a week and tell you where to stuff it..."
I just hope he"s not claiming any benefits and I"m subsidising him!!
-
Well if your income is made up from poker income supporting your house, family lifestyle then I feel you can call yourself pro. However if you have a full time job and play as a hobby, then all your winnings are tax free. If you are pro then your winnings are taxed as income. It is a thin line area, when can you call yourself or want to call yourself pro. If you check out websites like sharkscope you will see most people (90-95%) of people are in debt in sit and goes. This game is massive with many forms to it and I will be bold to say at the right level it is the new CHESS. However there are so many levels to the game, so luck does come into sometimes or all of the time. The question is when can you afford to jump and go pro?
-
... If you are pro then your winnings are taxed as income. ...
Not in the UK, but - just being pedantic, I don"t really have any point to make. :)
-
I agree to a point, but if you have no other form of income and you are bringing in 50k pa plus from gaming and res in the UK. Then it will only be a matter of before the IR want their slice of the cake. If you know different then lease share this!!!
-
I agree to a point, but if you have no other form of income and you are bringing in 50k pa plus from gaming and res in the UK. Then it will only be a matter of before the IR want their slice of the cake. If you know different then lease share this!!!
I don"t think so.
As far as I"m aware taxing winnings has never been contemplated at any level by any government.
They get income by taxing the profit of the companies that provide it.
The economic reason why this is so is that the cost of the extra bureaucracy needed wouldn"t cover the extra revenue raised from it. The USA can do it because of the massive economies of scale that the size of the US generates when it comes to national matters.
There are some subtler political reasons why a British government is not likely to change their tune any time soon - but ultimately the economic argument will always win, and this isn"t likely change in the forseeable future.
-
If your right then ace mate!
-
To be fair there have been political truisms in the past that have been discarded, but for now I don"t think it"s likely.
-
Yep - you can play poker in the UK and win millions, and not have to pay a penny in tax.
-
LOL at thinly veiled post that Dan thinks he has a friend :D
BTW dont"t care who sits down at an APAT tourney it is a 75 quid freezout and if someone wants to play it please sit down.
Oh happy new year to you all ;D
-
hasn"t it been like about 5 years since a "Pro" won the WSOP...so bring them on I say!!....hehe
my little point is that we (Royal APAT) don"t want the events being won by the same "pro"s"..after all it was set up as an amateur asscoation in the first place. Could it be possible that word gets round the "circuit" that £75.00 freezeout every month is full of fishes like me...then they bring their rods and enjoy the scenery?
But like I say above, Pro"s aint that good in tourneys...lol..fishes like my getting more than a fair share of luck....so not against the idea..but caution should be the word!
-
LOL at thinly veiled post that Dan thinks he has a friend :D
OK, someone I know - who speaks to me.
-
I personally couldn"t care less a few pros or wannabe pros turn up at APAT events. I can"t imagine that the likes of Dave Colclough and Marc Goodwin are going to cough up £75 for a 2 day freezeout and the difference in standard between a low-level pro and top amateur is marginal at best. Besides which, didn"t Roberto Romanello and John Tabatabai take part in last years Welsh event without winning it? That being the case, what is the fuss about?
-
I met Jon [Spinks] at Walsall and know of him through the EMS forum. Although I don"t know him that well I feel describing him as a pro is a bit over the top. He"s certainly a good player and may in time become what, in my opinion, constitutes a pro. I"m sure there are lots of members playing the same levels and buy-ins as Jon.
However, whilst I would love to sit down at a table with pro players, the problem with it is that it means less seats for amateur, recreational players.
But I think we"re worrying unnecessarily. Anyone who wants to sit and play for 2 days in a £75 freezeout (even with the sweetener of a GUKPT seat - surely it"d be easier and cheaper to satellite-in online?) does not match my idea of a poker pro.
-
But I think we"re worrying unnecessarily. Anyone who wants to sit and play for 2 days in a £75 freezeout (even with the sweetener of a GUKPT seat - surely it"d be easier and cheaper to satellite-in online?) does not match my idea of a poker pro.
X2
-
Interesting question as I"ve considered it myself over the last couple of months Two things I came up with were the difference between a poker pro and a professional poker player.
A poker pro is definately some-one whose main source of income is derived out of poker - but that can involve internet sites, players who are authors, tournament organisers etc - in general those who have a full-time active involvement in the poker industry in a capacity other than just playing. It may be that many of their non-playing activities help support their play therefore their play does have to be that good.
A professional player is likely to be someone who plays poker on a fulltime basis - probably cash games and/or has a sponsorship deal to play in a majority of the large media hyped tournaments. After a time they will probably develop a business side to their game as a means of giving them long term secured income. Level of play definately higher than your average joe.
-
Yep - you can play poker in the UK and win millions, and not have to pay a penny in tax.
Sorry but this is innacurate.
If you are a self employed poker professional, then you will be taxed on any profits you make. Quite how they would quantify an assesment is beyond me but tax is the sole item in UK legislation where the burden of proof is on the individual, as opposed to HMRC.
Of course whilst everyone was jumping on the Gutshot case bandwagon last year, screaming "it"s a game of skill, not luck!!!", they were not contemplating the downside if Gutshot had won their case, which would have meant that the HMRC would have wanted their slice of the action. ::)
-
If you are a self employed poker professional, then you will be taxed on any profits you make.
...but there is no requirement to declare winnings made from playing poker. yes you would have to declare profits made from associated activities, ie tuition, authoring, etc, and therefore these would be exposed to taxation, but as the winnings from playing do not need to be declared, they would remain exempt.
-
As someone who works for HMRC, not within the tax side, I hasten to add, I was quite interested in this question of whether earnings as a professional poker player are taxable within the UK.
I"ve made a few enquiries and it would seem that Daniel is correct, winnings are not taxable.
I also found this forum http://www.taxationweb.co.uk/forum/discuss.php?id=1201 where an accountant confirms the position.
Also of interest - http://www.thehendonmob.com/Articles/poker%20and%20the%20taxman.htm
Ian
-
If winnings were taxable, losses would be deductible as well. How do you show losses? You win a million, and then you could turn round and say you lost it all in a cash game. How do they do this in the States where it is taxable?
I have friends (OK, people I know) who a professional gamblers (betting on horses mostly), and again, there"s no tax to pay.
The government gets their slice from the bookies and poker rooms. But obviously that"s difficult if the poker rooms aren"t based in the UK. With some recent legislation that I read about regarding the awarding of seats in events that are outside the UK (or the EU, I can"t quite remember) being prohibited surely that"s going to make the UK a less welcoming place to base a poker room - and they"ll stick to Gibraltar and the like.
-
As someone who works for HMRC
.....but you seemed like such a nice chap :)
-
As someone who works for HMRC
.....but you seemed like such a nice chap :)
Post of the Year.
-
poker winnings are currently not taxable in the UK - trust me.
Associated income from poker such as poker publications etc would be taxed as a trade etc.
-
I think you may be right to a point on actual winnings, but then we all know that professional poker players don"t make their sole income from just tournament or cash game winnings. There are many other variables that could be construed as taxable income, such as rakeback, sponsorship, appearance monies, referral commissions, bonus payments, expenses payments etc etc. These payments are made for services rendered and could well be taxable. :o
Also HMRC can require an individual to keep records and report any "non-taxable winnings income", so as to comply with money laundering regulations (i.e. to prove you aint some sort of crack dealer).
It is important to note that it is not carte blanche exemption from tax, but is very much decided on each individuals circumstances.
-
yes i would always advise that good records are kept (especially where cash is involved) for money laundering regulations purposes and also the fact that there may be some mixed income.
Good point
-
As someone who works for HMRC
.....but you seemed like such a nice chap :)
Post of the Year.
But I am a nice chap !!
I can even provide 5 sworn statements from 5 separate people to back up that claim......please.......give me a chance....... ;)
-
As someone who works for HMRC
.....but you seemed like such a nice chap :)
Post of the Year.
But I am a nice chap !!
I can even provide 5 sworn statements from 5 separate people to back up that claim......please.......give me a chance....... ;)
Burn him!!!! :rubshandswithglee:
-
...I have friends....
Funniest post of the year ;D
-
...I have friends....
Funniest post of the year ;D
@#&*$&er
-
As someone who works for HMRC
.....but you seemed like such a nice chap :)
Post of the Year.
But I am a nice chap !!
I can even provide 5 sworn statements from 5 separate people to back up that claim......please.......give me a chance....... ;)
If you add Aunties and Uncles to parents, siblings, children then you might even make it to 7 ;D
-
poker winnings are currently not taxable in the UK - trust me.
Associated income from poker such as poker publications etc would be taxed as a trade etc.
Of course we trust you, you are a poker player!
-
No I do not claim benefits, no I have not started my tuition sessions yet, no I do not have my income taxed, then again I think I deserve benefits for my 2 month downswing.
Just before I played WCOOP I was about to quit poker and get a job, I still have days where I think "I can"t do this", and I would like a stable income, but full time employment would kill any hope I have of becoming a "real pro", but I will be taking up part time work most likely in the near future. Oh and whoever it was that mentioned my videos (trying to make an income as I type this and too many tables loaded) , I do not make anything from those and they are purely for educational purposes to the people I want to give something back to.
I"m not going to be discussing my situation anymore in public and I"d prefer for others to not too until I have spoken with Des.
-
Jon - although it was your situation and the other thread that sparked this thread off, this thread is in no way about your specific situation. It"s just a wider discussion on the topic of what constitutes a poker pro in general.
Like you said, individual cases should be discussed privately with Des. Best of luck with it all.
-
No I do not claim benefits, no I have not started my tuition sessions yet, no I do not have my income taxed, then again I think I deserve benefits for my 2 month downswing.
Just before I played WCOOP I was about to quit poker and get a job, I still have days where I think "I can"t do this", and I would like a stable income, but full time employment would kill any hope I have of becoming a "real pro", but I will be taking up part time work most likely in the near future. Oh and whoever it was that mentioned my videos (trying to make an income as I type this and too many tables loaded) , I do not make anything from those and they are purely for educational purposes to the people I want to give something back to.
I"m not going to be discussing my situation anymore in public and I"d prefer for others to not too until I have spoken with Des.
Fair play fella - it"s your business, and nobody else"s.
-
Jon - although it was your situation and the other thread that sparked this thread off, this thread is in no way about your specific situation. It"s just a wider discussion on the topic of what constitutes a poker pro in general.
Like you said, individual cases should be discussed privately with Des. Best of luck with it all.
I understand and knew that but had to reply to a few of the comments with my situation, I think its a very good subject and one that causes problems because there being no definitive answer and different view points on the matter, there are also different areas, for example I intend to make my living from cash games, like many others. I know someone who plays full time and played 3 tournaments last year... in a whole year! What I"m trying to explain is that a cash game pro may have a lot of leaks in their tournament game and are more than likely to be worse than many casual/recreational tournament players!
Also some full time workers may even play more poker than people who earn all their income from it, so it"s really hard to quantify IMO.
-
I know someone who plays full time and played 3 tournaments last year... in a whole year! What I"m trying to explain is that a cash game pro may have a lot of leaks in their tournament game and are more than likely to be worse than many casual/recreational tournament players!
Also some full time workers may even play more poker than people who earn all their income from it, so it"s really hard to quantify IMO.
This is so true, I would be surprised if there are many, if any, pros who make their sole income from tournaments. The variance in tournaments is just too great.
I also know plenty of amatuers who play way too much poker. I know I have had occasion where I have had to break playing, because playing too much has a detrimental effect on my game.