The first question is fairly easy to answer ..if I read their website correctly
.they held 3 single elimination qualifiers to Ente the main event. The qualifiers were called...first chance...second chance...third chance. So i guess you had 3 chances to make the main event .
The second question is pretty much open to interpretation since there is no pro tour or pro association to determine what exactly does it take to be a pro.
It seems like the main issue with most people is the fact that Brian has won this tournament 5 times. What about the times he did not win it. ? Should whoever beat him in those tournaments also ne banned ?
The second issue is his level of play ...fargo rating. I will admit he is right up there with some low level pros.
The next issue is does holding down a full time job keep you from being a pro ? No. Donny mills is a perfect example. However according to apa guidelines holding down a full time job and not relying on playing pool for your income is one of apa's criteria for bejng rated an amateur. Some people have tried to turn this around and say ...well if xxx pro goes and gets a job he should be classified an amateur. That statement is not logical at all and i use mike dechain as an example.
One criteria none of the brian is a pro posters has mentioned is giving lessons and using that income to help support yourself. Cross that off since Brian does not do that.
Another criteria apa uses is conferring with pro tournament promotors . None of them have declared Brian a pro. Just a bunch of experts on this forum declaring that.
Another criteria would be traveling and playing pro tournaments as most pros do to support themselves . Brian does not do that.
So .....it seems the only legitimate argument people have that think Brian should be a pro is that he plays damn good. He does not meet all the rest of the criteria apa deems necessary to be classified a pro.
I listed 5 criteria that needs to be met according to apa guidelines.
I am going to repeat an analogy I used earlier that every has seemed to not notice.
You are up for a promotion. You must meet 5 criteria. You happen to be better than every one else at one of those criteria but do not meet the other 4. You don't get promoted because you did not nee all the criteria...well neither does Brian .
Lets use this
You know, I’ve never known The APA to actually have a criteria when making a decision
about who’s a pro and who isn’t, in the conversations that I’ve had with people in
St. Louis it’s always been that they decide on a case by case basis. One time I was told
(and I quote): “if you’ve ever been paid for playing pool the APA would consider you a pro”.
That turned out to be incorrect. That quote came from a person that at that time was a
little inexperienced as an APA administrator.
I can think of a couple of players that we’ve had here, one stopped playing in pro events
because he lost his sponsor. He came back home played APA, no problem, another one
played in events, wrote for one of the billiard publications, was a house pro, and for a
while he took students. He thought it would be fun to put together a team of his students.
So he did and he played with them in The APA. While he wasn't actively traveling and
competing in pro events on a regular basis they wouldn’t consider him a pro, pro event
every now and then, or a local pro type event that was fine, it seemed to be the travel.
And there have been others.
Brian’s a pretty good pool player, but even in The APA on league night I’ll bet though it
don’t happen often, he does get beat.
Maybe he plays pretty sporty, maybe he’s won a few bucks and a plaque or trophy, he
might even have a sponsor, none of that makes him a pro. So what if it did, who cares?
or more to the point, why would you care?
