Definition of a pro poker player

R

Rumme1

Rock Star
Silver Level
Joined
Mar 29, 2016
Total posts
225
Chips
0
For me , a pro poker player isnt always what we see on TV.

For example, someone may consider Erick Lindgren who has won millions of dollars in poker and is a big name in the poker biz along with being on tv. But I dont view him as a pro poker player because he has lost all his winnings, lived beyond his means and even owes millions of dollars to other people .

A true poker player, in my book, is one who can earn enough of a living in poker alone, to sustain their individual lifestyle. In other words, I consider a no name poker player in home games, who has never been on tv, but is able to win enough each year, to pay their bills and live a comfortable HAPPY life , much more of a pro, then someone like Erick Lindgren or even Stu Ungar .

If a poker player can live comfortably on winning $25,000 a year, and not need any other form of income , then IMHO, they are a pro , compared to someone who is a big name poker player on tv and in the poker circuits, who may win 2 million in a tourney , then be dead broke in 18 months , having to borrow money to sustain their habit/ lifestyles.

Poker is not all about tv shows and being famous . Most true pros, will never be a household name or be on the talmud tv set.

A true pro poker player, is not only successful in poker, but succesfull in their lives , money management and realizing their are many other enjoyable things in life to do, other then poker. Living in a casino for 80 hours a week gambling, or spending 80 hours a week playing internet poker , really isnt much of a life.
 
M

MikeyE8

Rock Star
Silver Level
Joined
Mar 19, 2016
Total posts
116
Chips
0
I agree with your statement that a pro poker player is someone who can make enough of a living to live a happy, comfortable lifestyle just from playing poker. It doesn't matter if they are not making millions or their on TV. And if you lose millions on poker you were a pro, but not anymore.
 
Omahahahaha

Omahahahaha

Visionary
Silver Level
Joined
Jan 28, 2012
Total posts
554
Awards
1
Chips
15
a pro is someone who considers only the decision, not the result
 
R

Rumme1

Rock Star
Silver Level
Joined
Mar 29, 2016
Total posts
225
Chips
0
a pro is someone who considers only the decision, not the result

Where on earth do you people come up with these stupid one liners ?

So if what you claim is true , then a pro poker player who has went on a bad run for 2 years , having lost big money for those 2 years , doesnt care about the results , but only his decisions ?

Results should ALWAYS be a part of the big picture, because if a player is playing the game and always losing, then those results must be anaylized to determine if the player is :

playing properly to suit their style , which should always strive to win in poker

or

if the player is just so continiously unlucky , that it doesnt matter how good they play, they will be a constant loser in the game.
 
olfabiolo

olfabiolo

Rock Star
Bronze Level
Joined
Apr 13, 2012
Total posts
324
Awards
2
Chips
0
My opinion

a pro is someone who considers only the decision, not the result



I agree with Omahahah the profession of Poker being professional or not only the issue of return, but the decision-making to why the Poker or any sport there is only champion there losses and gains then a good poker player should minimize their losses and maximize your earnings.
 
R

Rumme1

Rock Star
Silver Level
Joined
Mar 29, 2016
Total posts
225
Chips
0
Players I do not consider to be pros to be respected ;

phil helmuth - hes a asshole at the table, a bad loser, a bad winner. he definitley has some phsycological issues/ narrissism . It is no fun to have to sit at a table with players like Helmuth whom think they are always the best player and will verbally ridicule any player that beats him in a hand.

Stu Ungar - yes, he was the greatest gin player ever, 1 of the greatest hold em tounreny players, and he had a photographic memory , but he was a loser in the game of life and died broke, even though he won over 30 million in gambling.

Erick Lindgren..another example of a so called pro player , that won millions, and went broke and owes millions to other people because of his uncontrollable gambling habits.

In the end, I think any player that is unable to have the discipline to pull back from gambling, when they have lost a significant portion of their poker winnings, is lacking a basic skill that truly makes a person a poker pro that can make proper decisions when winning or losing.
 
XXPXXP

XXPXXP

Legend
Silver Level
Joined
Sep 7, 2012
Total posts
5,511
Awards
2
Chips
0
professional player
in my eyes

1st at least treat poker like a business - so at least 8 hours a day of play is A MUST.
2nd, he/she wins money. cos most of the income comes from table.
3rd. would think he/she has some discipline for his career - like tilt control, keep regular hours.
4th, would think he/she knows the relation between poker and life, and treat family well ** this is very important.

Therefore, Stu Ungar -- He is a gift player, but not pro, sorry, even he wins millions of dollars, but...see his life...he is a gambler, not pro poker player.
:D
 
MrPink514

MrPink514

Visionary
Silver Level
Joined
Jan 10, 2016
Total posts
644
Chips
0
What I consider to be a "pro" is someone who makes their living from playing poker. Poker is their number one source of income. Has nothing to do with being on TV.
 
starting_at_the_bottom

starting_at_the_bottom

Legend
Silver Level
Joined
Dec 9, 2012
Total posts
2,665
Awards
1
Chips
7
A professional player is somebody that earns enough that they can play without the need for any other income streams.

/thread.
 
detroitjunkie

detroitjunkie

Visionary
Silver Level
Joined
Oct 11, 2009
Total posts
826
Awards
4
Chips
0
Players I do not consider to be pros to be respected ;

phil helmuth - hes a asshole at the table, a bad loser, a bad winner. he definitley has some phsycological issues/ narrissism . It is no fun to have to sit at a table with players like Helmuth whom think they are always the best player and will verbally ridicule any player that beats him in a hand.

Stu Ungar - yes, he was the greatest gin player ever, 1 of the greatest hold em tounreny players, and he had a photographic memory , but he was a loser in the game of life and died broke, even though he won over 30 million in gambling.

Erick Lindgren..another example of a so called pro player , that won millions, and went broke and owes millions to other people because of his uncontrollable gambling habits.

In the end, I think any player that is unable to have the discipline to pull back from gambling, when they have lost a significant portion of their poker winnings, is lacking a basic skill that truly makes a person a poker pro that can make proper decisions when winning or losing.

Helmuth is a jerk most of the time, I have dealt to him about 4 times in wsop, even once on the ME money bubble, BUT he is by far one of the best (if not the best) tournament poker players in history. especially at NLH. Have to respect that at least....and no one said being nice is a rule (most of it however is an act plus tilt, we have all been mean on tilt now and then, and the rest the 'people' want to see).

Unger was a good tourny player too, but sucked at gambling and doing drugs, nice guy though mostly - no respect here because he threw it all away (at least Helmuth keeps his shit together)

Lindgren, another bad gambler, not sure about drugs, though is a very nice guy - a mix of helmuth and unger in life and poker, respect? TBD.

Respect or not, these guys were all pros by definition because they make (made) their living at playing poker, regardless if they blew it all on other gambling or drugs, are nice or not. And Lindgren will come back if he can keep his gambling at bay.
 
R

Rumme1

Rock Star
Silver Level
Joined
Mar 29, 2016
Total posts
225
Chips
0
Helmuth is a jerk most of the time, I have dealt to him about 4 times in WSOP, even once on the ME money bubble, BUT he is by far one of the best (if not the best) tournament poker players in history. especially at NLH. Have to respect that at least....and no one said being nice is a rule (most of it however is an act plus tilt, we have all been mean on tilt now and then, and the rest the 'people' want to see).

Unger was a good tourny player too, but sucked at gambling and doing drugs, nice guy though mostly - no respect here because he threw it all away (at least Helmuth keeps his shit together)

Lindgren, another bad gambler, not sure about drugs, though is a very nice guy - a mix of helmuth and unger in life and poker, respect? TBD.

Respect or not, these guys were all pros by definition because they make (made) their living at playing poker, regardless if they blew it all on other gambling or drugs, are nice or not. And Lindgren will come back if he can keep his gambling at bay.

I would classify Helmuth a person that can play great poker, but not a great poker player. For me, its not just about the tourneys. money he has won . Its also about having a good attitude when they lose a hand , being a gracious winner, and not always acting like you are the best player at every table you sit down at. I do not think Helmuth is regarded as 1 of the best cash game players....his one big speciality seems to be hold em tourneys. If it werent for those , he probably would not be as well known , except for he childish attitude at the table. Ive seen Tom Dwan and Esferondo make offers to Helmuth , to play him for any high stakes, heads up, and Helmuth refuses to do it.

Yes, Helmuth has won alot of tourneys, but lets keep it in perspective. He plays alot of tourneys { maybe more the most other pros} and is often staked by other people . Also, his only main event WSOP win, was when the fields were way smaller then the last 15 years . Has Helmuth even made the final table of a WSOP main event, since his first and only win, years ago ?

In fact, Im more impressed by players like Johnnie Chan , for their skills, live cash game wins and overall attitude when they win or lose at the table. IMHO, Helmuth is a disgrace to the poker scene.
 
P

pachopaez

Rock Star
Silver Level
Joined
Feb 15, 2016
Total posts
155
Chips
0
as well as in any job , professional poker should be dedicated, disciplined , studious . have a good management of your bankroll , and must like poker more money
 
detroitjunkie

detroitjunkie

Visionary
Silver Level
Joined
Oct 11, 2009
Total posts
826
Awards
4
Chips
0
I would classify Helmuth a person that can play great poker, but not a great poker player. For me, its not just about the tourneys. money he has won . Its also about having a good attitude when they lose a hand , being a gracious winner, and not always acting like you are the best player at every table you sit down at. I do not think Helmuth is regarded as 1 of the best cash game players....his one big speciality seems to be hold em tourneys. If it werent for those , he probably would not be as well known , except for he childish attitude at the table. Ive seen Tom Dwan and Esferondo make offers to Helmuth , to play him for any high stakes, heads up, and Helmuth refuses to do it.

Yes, Helmuth has won alot of tourneys, but lets keep it in perspective. He plays alot of tourneys { maybe more the most other pros} and is often staked by other people . Also, his only main event WSOP win, was when the fields were way smaller then the last 15 years . Has Helmuth even made the final table of a WSOP main event, since his first and only win, years ago ?

In fact, Im more impressed by players like Johnnie Chan , for their skills, live cash game wins and overall attitude when they win or lose at the table. IMHO, Helmuth is a disgrace to the poker scene.

He has no cash game that is for sure, but I wouildnt let that take anything away from what he has accomplished. Some people are great at cash and some tourney, its actually seldom to find someone that is great in both. Some of the best tourney players are not high stakes cash players at all, but that does not mean they are not good at poker, just a specific type, which is fine.

I bet Dwan and friends would also back down on high stakes last longer bets in big tourneys against Phil because they are not very good at them - does that take away from what they have done?

Let us not forget, Phils attitudes are glamoured to a degree, especially during the Moneymaker effect, so a lot of it is show - people want him to be like that, but he is a jerk, but no more than a lot of people.
 
tauri103

tauri103

Legend
Silver Level
Joined
Aug 29, 2016
Total posts
2,144
Awards
1
Chips
24
I believe that the biggest poker winners were anonymous, perhaps deliberately so. David Sklansky once wrote that the only way he could maximize his win rate would be to wear a disguise.

I am nearly certain that the biggest winners are NOT pros, and I am CERTAIN that non-pros were the biggest winners in the pre-television era. They were people who had huge incomes from other sources and played in private games with weak players. There are people on Wall Street and in the Silicon Valley who make tens or hundreds of millions of dollars per year.
 
greek132

greek132

Enthusiast
Silver Level
Joined
Sep 22, 2016
Total posts
60
Chips
0
i agree with ..pro poker player do money management and not gambing all time
 
Alex Batista

Alex Batista

Enthusiast
Silver Level
Joined
Dec 14, 2015
Total posts
30
Chips
0
I have the same thought yours. But I think the only thing that differentiates a poker player who can live the game and the poker player is TV fame. Where in addition to the awards, there are arrangements such as payment Byns and money they receive with advertisements and events to attend where a player "normal" so get what wins and ultiliza of your bankroll to participate in tournaments.
 
R

Ranny

Legend
Bronze Level
Joined
Sep 16, 2007
Total posts
1,349
Awards
5
Chips
4
a pro is someone who considers only the decision, not the result

This is a great answer. If you get your decisions correct you will win in the long run and thats the aim in poker.

Regards Helmuth, I actually laughed at some of the earlier comments. Barny Boatman (WSOP winner and someone I have great respect for) said about Helmuth, forget the bluster, this is a player that will never go bust.
 
Tinfoilchef

Tinfoilchef

Enthusiast
Silver Level
Joined
Mar 16, 2016
Total posts
39
Chips
0
A "pro" is somebody who consistently wins at poker and their winnings are enough to live on.

Whether or not they do so more or less anonymously or in televised tournaments like the Main Event is, IMO, Irrelevant as is whether or not they are good at bankroll management.

I think Daniel Negranu is one example of a good professional and I think his being at or near the top of all time winnings attests to that.

Re: Phil Helmuth. I personally think he's hilarious. I look forward to his antics and over the top entrances, in the Main Event every year. I sincerely believe that if he were to rip into me with one of his infamous rants that I would totally crack up laughing and thank him, telling him that it was an honor. At the core of it I believe that most of the whole "poker brat" thing is an act, it's intended to put people on tilt and for the most part, it works.
 
Top