What determines whether you a pro / semi pro player?

[HC5831]

I've been curious how I should classify myself as a poker player. I think I am a semi-pro. Poker suppliments my income, although it now makes up 2/3 of my income. I am a college student. I play 11 hours a week, making $50/hr, for 2200/month at Party Poker $50+5 NLHE SnG's. My sole sourse of income could be poker and I would be able to pay my bills. I am a college student right now. I'm starting to eyeball the $100 tables.

What are your thoughts? How much do you play/make/stakes?

HC

[t_perkin]

Are you playing multiple tables?

Does it really matter how you classify yourself?

You are certainly not a professional unless your sole source of income is poker. There are endless discussion about what it means to be "pro" on the internet forum.

Tim

[AleoMagus]

Questions like these answer themselves in numerous ways.

First of all, pro/semi pro is an arbitrary distinction. 2200/mo. is more than many 'professionals' make at ordinary jobs so if you want to think you are a 'pro', go right ahead. Some define 'pro' as playing on the pro tour, others define pro as an attitude. Whatever.

I just have a couple questions myself. What could possibly make up the final third of your income that is worth doing? You say that you are making $50/hr, so what job could a college kid possibly have that compares to this.

I've looked over some of your past posts and it seems like you have gone through the paces moving up the levels and everything, but it has all been kinda fast. Correct me if I have read it wrong, but in the past year you have moved from small stakes to 50+5 with your biggest sampling of SNGs at the 30+3 level (about 300 sngs). Now, I will not argue with your 30+3 results, but I am hesitant to think that $50/hr at poker is realistic just yet. If you have gotten in a few hundred 50+5, I suspect that you have the bankroll now to try the $100 games, and given your success I might do so.

I would just caution you to not settle in to the 'poker pro' lifestyle just yet. It has a way of falling out from under you at times.

I cannot tell precisely, but is your poker repertoire currently limited to NLHE sngs? Come to think of it, rather than moving up, I might be inclined to try a few other things so that if the rug is pulled out from under ABC sng domination in the next couple years, you will not miss that income you have grown accustomed to in the past year (or couple months).

Regards
Brad S

[HC5831]

I was asking about being a pro out of curiosity and how others think/respond of themselves. When the subject comes up and I tell them I play poker for my part time job, they always say, "ohh, so your a professional poker player...". I laugh and say no, it just suppliments my income. I feel like a semi-pro, but I always wonder if I'm just being cocky. I never try to pump myself up by giving myself titles however. Does it matter what I am? No, as long as I am making money playing poker and enjoing the game. Am I curious? Absolutely.

I received $1150 from my GI Bill. I got out of the USMC 18 months ago and have 18 months or so left on it. I could live on $1150 a month if I am tight with my money. Poker income has allowed to to have a little fun and save a lot of money. I'm saving right now to go buy a house, so I don't have to rent anymore. I'm 26, been around the world and am definately not a college kid. Although, I guess I'm a kid to a lot of people. It's all relative. I have a good head on my shoulders and make sound decisions, bottom line.

Yes, I've been moving up pretty fast as of late. I played 100 10+1 NLHE Sng's over 2 months. I'd only play 1 or 2 a night and maybe not play for a couple days. Making $5/hr just didn't give me enough incentive to play. I was having fun and had the crazy notion that I was getting better and couple move up and make some decent money. I then took 2 months off because I got bored with poker. It took me to 3 months to play 100 20+2 Sng's. Same as before. I then took 3 weeks off.

The poker bug came back again and I decided I couple play 2 games at once and move up to the 30+3 tables. This is where I took off and here I am. I decided to try to play 120-150 Sng's a month, playing 2 at a time. Over 2.5 months, I played about 130 a month, having a 38% ROI. I made $37.5/hr here. I noticed that I was one of the best, if not the best players at most of the tables I was at, so I decided to give the $50+5 tables a shot 3 weeks ago.

I've played 70 $50+5 Sng's so far, 2 at a time, with a ROI of 48% right now. I know it will drop down to 40ish and that I am running well right now. I just posted $50/hr because that is what I expect it to fall back to; right now it is much higher. Posting high numbers on an insignificant sample is silly. I feel that I can make $60/hr here in the long run, but I figure $50/hr into my calcuations so I am not overestimating. I'd rather understimate anyday. However, I am playing very strong poker, and I feel I'm the best or the 2nd best at the majority of the tables I am playing at. So I've been thinking of moving up to the $100 tables to test it out. I am very honest with my play and can tell if I am being outplayed or not, getting lucky or not.

$50/hr is realilistic with playing 2 tables at once. I suspect you thought I was still playing some $30 tables.

I keep a bankroll of $1k on the site and cash out anything over at the end of the month. If I decide to try the 100's, I'll push my bankroll up to $2k. Bankroll should never be an issue for anyone. If you have the skill to play at a level, you should never allow your bankroll to get below what you will need. Be responsible and plan ahead. Put some money aside for emergencies. I have $13k sitting in my bank account right now. I'm ready for a lot of things.

I play strictly NLHE Sng's. I've been playing poker off and on for 4 years now. I've read multiple poker books, and read this site at least 30 minutes a day. I analize my hand history for Sng's I've played everytime for good/poor plays for every tourney.

I lost $1500 in my 1st year, broke even for a year, made a little for a year, and now am making some good money. So I don't feel like I'm some whiz poker player who's going crazy too fast. I feel the urge to go up in stakes all the time when I think about the money. But, I am also realistic and responsible. I feel like I've been taking enough time to prepare myself for the next step everytime I've gone up.

Now I do feel that if I jump up to the 100 tables, I am taking a bit of a risk because I would have only played 100 $50 Sng's. We'll see how I feel about my game in a week or so. I'll play a couple 100 tournies if I think I can beat them and examine the quality of players there. If I think I'm good enough to play there, I'll play 10 or 20. If I think I'm outclassed, I'll drop back down to the $50's. No big deal. The benefits outweigh the risks right now though.

I have found my niche in the poker world with NLHE Sng's. I have found that I am far better at Sng's than any other type of game I've played. I've tried my share of different types of poker. I understand that the poker world could change and that Sng's could become unprofitable for me. But, this is where I excel and feel comfortable. If it happens, I'll deal with it then.

I have no desire to become a professional poker player for a career. This is strictly to get my through school to get my Engineering degree. I get no job satisfaction out of poker. Although I do enjoy the game. I may stop when I become an Engineer or I may play poker as fun and to suppliment my income. I'd love to work my way up to the $200 Sng's, but if this is as far as my skill takes me, so be it. I think I've been more successful than 90% of poker players will ever reach in my short time.

Thank you for your post Brad. I always read your posts when I see them. I look forward to hearing any comments you have. Hopefully you get this, for my thread has been pushed down a few pages.

Take care,
HC

[Don_Lapre]

"You are certainly not a professional unless your sole source of income is poker. "

I think it's that simple, if poker is your only profession than you can be classified as pro.

DL

[t_perkin]

Don't forget to factor in your time reading this forum and reading other books etc. into your hourly rate when comparing poker to a job.

Also other fixed costs such as upgraded internet connection, new computer/monitor etc.

It all counts.

Tim

[HC5831]

Good call. Time reading up on poker should be considered part of that time. However, I don't have to commute to work or use gas to get there. Less wear and tear on my car. What about work attire? Lunch out in town? So it either evens out or I save money by working at home playing poker.

As for the computer, computers are a hobby for me, so I'd have a bad ass computer, internet connection, moniter regardless. /images/graemlins/cool.gif

Ian

[tolbiny]

i cant believe how often this thread comes up...

"You are certainly not a professional unless your sole source of income is poker."

This is untrue- unless you are saying that an engineer who picks up 10-15k on the side playing poker is no longer a professional engineer. Also i painted houses as the sole source of income for a while and i would never have called myself a professional painter. To be a professional implies alot about your intentions of your career choice, and you interest and ability to move up in that career.

[jakoye]

From your results, I think it would be very interesting if you were to write a strategy guide yourself, for all us schlubs who are still duking it out on the $10 and $20 dollar tables.

I would especially be interested in knowing what you changed to go from losing $1500 in your first year to being even and then profitable in succeeding years.

[AleoMagus]

I agree

As I said in my other post, I think it's a somewhat pointless distinction anyways (the tax man might think otherwise)

But, as long as we are talking about it, I'd bet that the vast majority of so-called 'pro' players do not make their living exclusively from poker winnings alone. I am talking about guys like Johhny Chan, Doyle Brunson, Phil Hellmuth, etc...

I suspect that there are also people who win the lottery and live off the jackpot for a few years with no other income. Are these people professional lotto players?

If I had to define what makes a 'pro' poker player (for me), it is a combination of things.

First, it seems to imply that the standard of living enjoyed by said player would be completely different if poker winnings were taken out of the equation. This does not mean that a person's whole income is derived from poker, but a significant portion of it should be, and that portion should be comparable on it's own to at least full time earnings of a minimum wage job.

Secondly, I think that being a professional poker player implies investing a considerable amount of one's time and energy in the game. This means playing, or at least reading/thinking/researching poker almost every day.

Thirdly, being a pro implies having skill. If I found a 30/60 game filled with players who played every hand and called all the way to every river, beating it for thousands would not make me a pro. I'm not saying that you have to be world class, but I think you have to be better than the vast majority of players. You need to be an upper-echelon player comparable to at least a low-level professional athelete (minor league baseball or hockey, for example). Otherwise, your so-called profession is contingent on the particular game you are able to beat. I realize this point could be debated a lot, but this is just how I feel.

Finally, I think that at least to some extent, being a pro involves a state of mind. If you meet the previous criteria, I suspect that this final point is automatic, but I'm mentioning it anyways. This state of mind is not some kind of unshakable poker-zen. Many pros are basket cases with all kinds of personal problems and tempers. This state of mind is more about an understanding of the game and your place in it. It is confidence and the self-knowledge of your own professional status.

In a sense then, anyone wondering if they are a pro is automatically not quite there yet. You need to decide and know for yourself that you are.

Well, these are my thoughts, and they don't amount to much as I still think the whole distinction is arbitrary.

Regards
Brad S

[Kurn, son of Mogh]

I believe every time *I've* answered this I've said you're a pro if it's your "primary" source of income. But I think the best answer is you're a pro if that's what it says on your tax return.

[AleoMagus]

/images/graemlins/smirk.gifNo offense intended about the 'college kid' comment, as I am hardly more than college kid myself (or maybe I just like to think so). I'm 28 and am also ex-military (Canadian).

Still, I'd be inclined to continue thinking that $50/hr is an unrealistic expectation at this stage.

Make no mistake about what I am saying here. It's not that I don't think you can make $50/hr, but I think it's gonna take a lot more time in order to say that with confidence and I definitely think it's gonna take a lot more time to start describing that income as 'semi-pro' poker earnings.

I'll explain a bit. If you have only played 70 $50+5 sngs at this point and you play 2 at a time averaging 45 min/sng, that would mean you are basing this claim on... about 25-30 hrs of play.

Given the statement that you made about putting in an average of 11 hrs/week, this is less than 3 weeks. It's hard to say that you make 2200/mo on poker when you have played at this level for less than a month. I suspect that you have already made over 2200 last month already as you said that you are running well, but the point rests on the time, not the money.

Now I know what you are thinking. But what about the 300ish 30+3 prior to that? 37 bucks an hour there has to count for something. Sure, it does, but it's still not a terribly long time. 300 samples is a pretty good indication that you can beat the game and it's even a pretty good indication that you can beat it for a lot. But it is only a few months. Like I said, you seem to have gone through the paces, but it's still a little quick as far as sng play is concerned.

I just think caution is in order. Give it some more time.

Now I'm not saying that you shouldn't move up to the $100 games, and frankly, who am I to be giving advice anyways? You seem to be playing above my head so perhaps these questions are better answered by our higher limit players.

And who knows? Maybe if I threw caution to the wind now and then I'd be moving up faster myself?

I guess all I'm saying is that when running well, it's easy to get excited about poker in ways that skew your perception.

Suppose for example you are making $50/hr and will continue to do so for the next couple years. It might seem like you have no desire to expand your repertoire now, but that might be because you are currently making money. A lot of money actually.

If you make a 'supplementary income' of 2000+ each month for too long, you are really gonna miss it if it dries up. You say that you are saving, and that is good. Treat that money like it is not even there and don't inflate your lifestyle too much until you are sure that you can maintain it.

And for goodness sake, build a separate bankroll and keep letting it grow no matter how big it gets. One day, you might find that you NEED to expand your repertoire and you will be glad to have that cushion when you do.

Oh well. Keep us informed about your progress. And post a lot more. This forum needs new life and someone playing at your level should really be contributing. It's scary how many people are blindly following the advice of Partypoker 10+1 experts. /images/graemlins/grin.gif

Regards
Brad S

[HC5831]

No offense taken. /images/graemlins/cool.gif I only mentioned how old I was and some of what I've done to show that I am not a snot nosed kid right out of high school.

I hear exactly what you are saying. I may be being overly optimistic, but I am sure that I am beating the $50+5 tables soundly. I am also sure that I will make $50/hr in the long run. I feel this way not because of my results, but because of the players I am playing. I am certain that I am one of the top 3 best players at the table everytime I sit down. I am rarely outplayed, and make few mistakes (as far as I know). They cards will come as they come, but the skill of the players at the table is constant. This is why I say I make $50/hr even though I just moved up 3 weeks ago. Remember that I am making $72/hr over the past 3 weeks running well. Also, I believe $50 is an underestimate of what I will make at this level. This is pointless however. I just wanted to post my thoughts on this. Oh yeah, I made $2690 last month and am up $870 in the first 3 days of this month. I'm in for a losing streak to balance this out unfortunately. /images/graemlins/frown.gif

Do you still play at the $30 tables? If so, you need to move up. It is a big mistake to be too cautious with your poker advancement. If you know you have the game beat and you think you can beat the next level, move up. I can't believe it when I see people playing 500 to 1000's of games at one level when they are beating the game soundly. You are costing yourself money if you have the ability to move up. If your playing for fun, or if your ROI isn't up to par, then stay where you are at.

Thanks for your support to have me post more. I've posted a few posts, but I feel like they are getting ignored. I don't want to waste my time. I see bad advice all the time on here though, and it is scary. Maybe I'll start posting a little more.

HC

[HC5831]

I lost $1k in my 1st month of playing. I got extremely lucky in my 1st week of playing and I ended up playing at the 20/40 LHE tables at Paradise. I was up $1k in that week and thought I was a poker natural. I had no clue what I was doing, the luck ran out and I preceded to lose that thousand and a thousand more. I then stopped playing poker and read some poker books. I started playing again a few months later and slowly lost $500 over the next 8 months. I improved as the months wore on (mostly from experience), found this forum and read some more poker books. I played LHE ring games, then multi-table tourney and finally started NLHE Sng's 9 months ago. By the time I started the Sng's, I was able to solidly beat the $10+1 tables and have moved up fairly quickly. I'm currently at the $50 Sngs and looking to move up to the $100's. I'm undecided, but leaning toward the 100's right now. I realise that I am running well, but I feel that I am one of the best player at the $50 tables I play at.

I'm a bit of a risk taker, but I don't do anything stupid. Which is why I have moved up so quickly.

I've read AleoMagus's strategy guide and it's sold poker. I don't agree with everything on there and strongly disagree with a few things, but that's just my style. There is an important aspect of poker that is left out of the guide however: your opponent and stack sizes. In his defense it's just too much to factor these aspects into a post on here. I'll explain a couple things a player needs to think about.

I separate people into the following groups. Fish, strong non-tricky players, strong tricky players, overly aggressive players, and way too tight players. When I sit down at my tables I try to group all the players into these categories based on any notes I have (which happens 5-10% of the time) and they play as we play the lower limits. I've played enough Sng's to figure how players will play in the categories and what my best option is to deal with them.

I'll stear clear of the strong players, I'll try to get the overly aggressive players to bluff their chips to me, I'll bluff the overly tight ones, I'll try to double up on the fish (and be wary of scary board that they are involved in).

In addition to knowing how they play, you have to look at the situation. Position is very important. And your play and that of your opponents differ based on where they are at. Did someone just take a bad beat? Are they on tilt because of the beat? Or do they keep their head. You have to pay attention to this. Is there a short stack who may go all in behind you if you limp?

I'm not going to try to post how you would react in these situations. It's too much. Experience will show you the way. If you start thinking about these questions, you're well on your way. Playing your opponents is just as important as your cards. Which is why most people lose money; they only play their cards! Playing my opponents has been my biggest improvement in my game and continues to be so.

HC

[Nepa]

I myself wouldn't even worry about the title. I have heard ppl say thought to be a pro you have too make 90 percent of your income from poker for 3 years st8.

[AleoMagus]

[ QUOTE ]
I've read AleoMagus's strategy guide and it's solid poker. I don't agree with everything on there and strongly disagree with a few things, but that's just my style.

[/ QUOTE ]

Me too /images/graemlins/crazy.gif

[Al_Capone_Junior]

My opinion is that if you get more than half your total income from playing poker, then you are a pro poker player.

This is why I say I have been an on again/off again pro for years. On three occasions now, I have gotten all my money from poker (over a significantly long period of time). However, it's always great to have a side job, no matter what you do. I personally think poker makes a better side job than primary job. Since I recently acquired an income other than poker through an internet company, now I am once again a part-time pro, tho probably close to half my income is still coming from poker.

al