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 ), 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]

Not wanting to hijack the thread.... but Daniel, are you a professional forum poster?

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?

[APAT]

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.

[hi_am_chris]

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?

[kinboshi]

Isn"t it true that any housewives and house-husbands who play in APAT events earn their whole income from poker?

[Maxriddles]

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.      

[kinboshi]

...and there are always players like myself and Jon W to lower the standard and increase the value anyway!

[hi_am_chris]

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

[Jon MW]

...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?

[Jon MW]

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.

[Ken Jude]

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.

[RioRodent]

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!!