Pro Poker Players

I'm curious as to what you guys think makes a poker player a pro? I thought about it and came up with no determinative answer. I'm sure theres alot of different criteria but I'm not sure

There's pretty much only one definition: their primary source of income is poker.

close enough, basically if your job is poker, then you are a poker pro

true, but someone like Guy Laliberte does not get all of his income from poker, but he would still be considered a pro right? does ability or skill have anything to do with it?

This guy sucks IMO. He gets lucky and plays way too much. Plus, hes a billionaire and doesnt get nearly as much money from poker as he does his company.

What the dude above said. Guy Laliberte can hardly be called a pro. He is just an absurdly high rolled ammature. He has been very fortunate to beat 'life' for a huge amount of money, but I don't think he beats poker for much money (if any) at all.

hey, I'm a pro!

how is that the only way ur a pro i think a pro is someone who can win consistently no matter if its ur job or not if i play 4 times a week and make an average of $500 every week playing different people and different games and place in tournys on a regular basis wouldnt that meen i would be a pro where i play?????

I think that sums it up, if your as good as AG then your a pro

1. Consistantly Winning
2. Consistantly able to raise the stakes at which you win at

I would think you could be a "pro" @ $.01/$.02 tables, but that's probably not what you are calling a "pro"(?). So consistantly able to win and raise your stakes and continue winning would probably be what would make someone a pro.

I wouldn't think just having poker as your source of income would make you a pro. What if you have a 9to5, but then go to Vegas every weekend and are consistantly winning, and are able to raise the stakes every year or so. Or, you have a 9to5 but you go to 3 or 4 high stakes tournies each year and always place in the $$?

Also, once a pro, always a pro?

Very interesting, dont think i can answer that

By this definition though, the likes of Doyle Brunson and Barry Greenstein aren't pros: they already play in the big game, so they've hit a ceiling and aren't consistently raising the stakes at which they win.

I think it's like a few other people have said: a professional is someone who makes their living playing poker. Note that this is different to someone who plays poker every day but has to regularly borrow money from others to pay their rent.

so if you work 9-5 and play on weekends = part time job or maybe semi pro?

If you're consistently making a profit playing poker on the weekends (or online after work, or whatever) then I guess that'd be a good term for it, yeah.

By that definition then, I'm a semi-professional poker dealer

pro·fes·sion·al /prəˈfɛʃənl/Pronunciation Key - Show Spelled Pronunciation[pruh-fesh-uh-nl]Pronunciation Key - Show IPA Pronunciation
–adjective 1

following as a business an occupation ordinarily engaged in as a pastime: a professional golfer.

That sums it up for me. From Dictionary.com

If you can borrow $100k from your friends when you are broke, then you are a pro.

If you've hit a ceiling in the height of stakes... you're probably a pro. If you've hit that ceiling and are consistantly losing... you may not... or no longer be... a "pro".

But, Steve's definition looks good to me.

it does not matter if ur a winning or losing player
if u play poker to make some sort of money u ARE A PRO
if u have a job and that is ur primary source of income then U ARE NOT A PRO

So, if you have no other job, but are consistantly a losing player... you're a pro?

line 2 contradicts line 1. You have to average out as a winning player in order to make money, which means you would have to be a winning player.

So we can take Mike Matusow off the list of pros then?

Pro's can also be big losers like Matasow and Gus hansen when they get paid appearance money to show up and get tournament entry fees staked. Book writers can also be pros even if they are not profitable players.

Watch High Stakes Poker series 4, he plays very well on that show. Plus he's not just been invited there because he's rich, GSN know that he's good.

how does this make him not a pro???

This is exactly my point, maybe someone can be a pro without getting all of their money from poker.

Same here...but I don't deal in a casino, just at corp events and the occasional home/private game. Does that make me a semi-semi pro dealer?

What if you throw in as part of the definition:
If you win/make enough money playing poker to sustain yourself, devoid of any other forms of income then you're a pro. So if you make enough playing poker and then make more on the side, that would count as being a pro.

My qualifications for a pro are a little rougher, I think if someone that makes 80% of their income from poker is a pro, but also cashes in about 75% of the tournies they enter. Like one of my favorite players is PearlJammer just cause it seems like he cashes in everything. Must be nice lol

So there are NO poker pros?

roflol @ cashing in 75% of tournaments..

PearlJammer: ITM 535/3105 17%

I can show up 75% of the time for a tourney.

i can blow smoke rings

i believe by deifinition a professional poker player is someone who makes a living off playing the game. Like if someone kicks every1's ass in hockey but does not play in the NHL or any professional organization, he is not a professional hockey player, he is just a kick ass player. thats like n e sport. so i think if u have a job and make money that way, and then kick ass at poker as a hobby, you are not technically a professional.

haha didnt see that 75% of cashing in tournies, that would be ridiclulous, i would just play poker straight for like 3 months and be like a multi-millionaire, id say 8 or 9 digits

I like this definition, sums it up best

matusow and hansen are not losers at poker, matusow has braclets to his name and hansen is huge on the ept tour