How far are we "Amateurs" from "Pro's"

After giving it some though ( especially when i saw FOURDOGS post ) I began to really wonder, are we that far from the pro level. Think about it, we all share the same knowlegde as them , we play thousands of hands daily, giving us tremendous experience. We know that in ring game ( this is geared toward NL ,NL tournys and LIMIT ring games ) , we play tight aggressive , in tournaments, we know the value of position , of hands, of bluffs, we are armed with the same knowlegde as the pros. Im not sure about you guys, but i think many players are close to the pro level, only reason why they are up there is maybe, because the chosse it like as a profession, and because they have the bankroll to wisthand those levels. I have seen many players here in cardschat.com , who post, speak and analyze like poker machines ( pros ) . I even have a friend ( whos name i wont mention for privacy and because maybe he wont like it ) who has made over 200000$ playing online poker, and he doesnt consider himself a pro . Im wondering , whats everyones view on this subject .

I think the only major thing that clearly stands out between pro's and everyone else is it is there JOB. They must win to live and I believe this difference separates poker players. I think if you decide to leave your job to make more money by playing poker you can call yourself a pro.( As long as you dont lose everything)

Just my 2 cents

Jonathon

No comparison. I have on occasion finished ahead of some of the better players on this site. Just means I got lucky & am learning not that I am in their league. Nice thing about it if you think you are as good as the pro's just mortage the house & head to Vegas. The big boys are always happy to be put in their place by the next hot shot to come down the road.

I didnt say im as good as them , i just wanted to see everyones view on it. I do have faith and knowlegde of my skills, and just like them, with dicipline and dedication i could make it ( just like everyone on this world can ) , Its a matter of setting your mind into it .

The difference between "us" and "them" is night and day.

You cant get any more different than the pros and the amateurs. But, poker strives on the illusion that the difference is minimal.

Bill

Short Term: Not too far because luck is a good-sized factor.

Long Term: Pretty far because luck is less of a factor and skill becomes a larger factor.

If you are talking online skill, I am in the black over the last year but still wouldn't consider myself being able to do it for a living. If you are talking live, that's a completely different game and don't think I would stand a chance against a real pro. I watch those guys on the tube and their people reading skills are enough to scare me even if I was close to their card playing skills.

I think that's an excellent point! When you play for a living, you have so much more on the line! So yes, there is definitely a big difference in that alone. As far as for me, skill wise, hell yes there's a chasm between me and where the pros are!

To be a pro i would consider this first:

1. Can you handle a long term losing streak?

2. Can you be certain to maintain a household income sufficient enough for yourself and/or your family not to "tighten the belts".

3. Not just play when you want to, but play as you have to.

4. For travelling to tournies pay for the accomodation, food and travel etc not just the seats at the game.

And after all that there's the small factor off actually winning and persuading certain people such as insurance companies and the financiers of this money mad world that by being a poker pro, you are still a safe money investment.

If you answer yes to all of these then hello Mr Lederer, Brunson etc nice of you to join our group


IanT.

I think we would get blasted by the pros, most of them, the good ones have Degrees in Mathmatics or are genuses like Chris Ferguson, they can tell down to a percent in a second what the odds are on any hand, after all its their living. I would say that if I went to Vegas with say $100,000, it would take them about 3 days till i went broke, and had to hitch hike home,LOL, On the other hand if i went there for the WSOP i might last 2 or maybe 3 days cause thats a whole other tourney, theres plenty of guys/gals just like us. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> buck

Is that not kinda like asking someone who is good at first aid, how close to they think they are from being a Nurse. (alot of training and hard work I think would be there answer)
Like any career path a person chooses to take they have to put in years of training, study, practice ect to become qualified. And I think just like a Nurse, it takes a certain type of personality to become a pro poker player. Not everyone would be suited to this type of life.

So I think we are quite far from becoming pros but it certainly is not impossible, like most things in life.

I dont watch much Poker on TV, but I remember seeing Devilfish play. He said to one opponent mid hand "you've got Jack Queen". It wasn't a question, it was a statement (obviously he did have, it wouldn't be much of a story if he didn't!). That's years of experience and observation, so we're all a hell of a long way off. Of course, if you get the right cards at the right time anything can happen, but long term is a different story.

online and live play are totaly different a fair % of pros play online just to keep us interested in the game but if most of us played live with them we whouldnt last 5 mins.

When I posted my chart of tournament results compared to pro results, I was in no way equating my ability to theirs. Ideed it was only a very small snapshot done more for fun and motivational purposes than anything else. The point was not, "look how great I am" but rather, "chin up kid, the pros don't win 'em all either".

But, the fact that out of 11 attempts, the pros made the money only once, is still significant. Out of the 5 tournaments, all the money went to on-line players. Probably good ones. In what other competitive event could this occur? Chess? Tennis? The Boston Marathon.

Chris Furgusen and Phil Helmuth not withstanding I must disagree with Bill's assertion that the difference between "us" and "them is like "night and day". More like "dawn and day".

Now, to be fair, when I say this, I am comparing the best amatuer players to the average "pro". I have a very low opinion of the average amatuer, in particularl, the on-line variety. If you compared them to the "best" pros, Even "Night and Day" would be an understatement. A better analogie would be say..."a Fish in the Water and a Pig on Rollerskates".

Honestly, there is a HUGE difference between amateur players and pro players.

Some of the previous posters have posted how they have good records over thousands of hands...

I know some of you have had success at limits as high as 3/6 or maybe higher in some cases...but there is a VERY LARGE gap between players for hundreds or thousands of dollars online or at a local casino and plunking down $10K of your own money for every major tournamnet, not counting the hefty cash games... (50/100 NL and up...)

Some of us may have success, but there is a difference in winning at 3/6 and winning at 100/200, and a lot of it has to deal with your personal ability to maintain composure when you lose, because you WILL lose...

I just watched Ted Forest lose $50,000 in one pot . I often lose 50,000 play chips in 1 pot , so I'd say I am close.

lol

lol.

I totally agree with darkhorse30. the online and live game are different in play and in the live game we would probably get crushed in the long run. I know we all study and practice alot but the only difference is that the pros probably have better insight to the game. Most of the pros have learned from other pros which also gives them another advantage over the rest of us with the experience of knowledge from veterans of the game.

Poker is a little like Golf....we all get to play at different levels. In golf, you have to be an elite player to be a pro....say in the top .001% of players worldwide.

In poker, you simply need to know what level you can be a winning player at and log enough hands eg 6 x mutlti-table 3/6 at 2BB/100 hands for 6-8 hours a day and you could be a pro.

The trick is to be disciplined about how much you study and play and to play at a level where you are a winning player.

Back to the Golf analogy....a 10-15 handicapper might be equivalent to a 3/6 poker player (but in golf, you can't make any money at that level...in poker, you can).

Like in Golf, the difference between a 10-15 handicapper and Tiger Woods is lightyears....same as the difference between a 3/6 player and a 4000/8000 player.

[quote=buckster436] I would say that if I went to Vegas with say $100,000, it would take them about 3 days till i went broke, and had to hitch hike home,LOL,

Buck, I really don't think you should be commenting on how much you would be spending on strip clubs here.

How do you think you would do accross the felt?

ok ok...ive read the thread and listened to the 'fors' and 'againsts'...now can someone tell me if i am a pro or not so i can maybe let the wife know i'm quitting mahh job and taking the family on the road to fame and fortune?

You're talking about huuuuuge tournaments. It takes huge amounts of luck to win. How often do you see repeat performances by nobodies?

You're confusing luck and skill. Luck allows lesser players to win. It does not mean they are on an equal footing with the pros.

Actually, most of the tournaments are rather small by on-line standards. Usually less than 200 entrants. Out of interest, I have been keeping tabs on the pro success rate at FTP and I must say, it's deplorable.
And, I'm not confusing anything with anything. I understand the luck factor in tournaments. Mason Malmuth never plays tournaments for this very reason. He doesn't believe that tournament success is a good gauge for determining true skill. But, most of these so called pro's have done nothing to earn their red name status but win a couple of high profile tournaments. A feat which I believe many GOOD amateur players are capable of.

I'm not talking about the Chris Fergusens, Daniel Negreanus or Dan Harringtons. The real pro's can keep it up year after year at the tables. Many never play a tournament and therefore, never reach celebrity status. They don't get the endorsements, the beer commercials, or the guest host spots. They just make a living and can kick our asses. But sorry, I'm not gonna run in fear from Andy Bloch or Richard Brodie.

So what does it take to reach this level?

Independence-If your married with kids you can just about forget it. Unless your a selfish, neglectful douchebag.
Time - Gotta real job? That'll make it hard.
Bankroll- Are you planning on honing those mad poker skills at the $.50/$1.00 tables? lol
Patience- Can you wait it out for the right combination of hand, opponent and position. HOP. It could take hours. Or never.
Temperment- This is why I believe that Mike Matusow is a complete fraud.
Intelligence- If you don't have this, it doesn't matter how much time or money you invest.
Introspection- How much time each day do you spend away from the game,thinking, reading and writing about poker? This is key. The big difference between pro and amateur is the ability to think quick. While it is impossible to assess every possible situation, many are similar enough to be worthy of rumination. The time for analysis is in the car or bed or on the crapper or while walking or jogging or wherever your best able to free your mind from the grind. It is NOT while sitting at a $20/$40 table.

Oh, one more thing. You have got to love the game. If it feels like a job, you will never give it the attention required for real success.