US Amateur
- Thread starter captainjko
- Start date
Playing devil’s advocate here. Should any APA player who has won prize money from competing in pool events be considered pro’s and disqualified from league play? If so then a lot of APA players would be disqualified.
I bring it up because that seems to be the standard Parks is being held to - he competed in events and won money therefore he is a pro.
I bring it up because that seems to be the standard Parks is being held to - he competed in events and won money therefore he is a pro.
I tried to use this Fargo rating system as an example. Here's an excerpt from APA's Team Manual regarding professional players:
Brian Parks seems to be well off financially, so he's not a so-called money player, but he is a "billiards professional." I'll wait until I become an underrated semi-pro to play in one of these US Amateur Championships.
Brian Parks seems to be well off financially, so he's not a so-called money player, but he is a "billiards professional." I'll wait until I become an underrated semi-pro to play in one of these US Amateur Championships.
Every time I read about a debate on whether or not Brian is an amateur, it reminds me that we are the very reason why pool is dying. Not the rack. Not the game of choice. A genuinely nice guy, family person, who works full time, who loves pool, who finds time and resources on his own to look for success, only to get crucified for getting there.
Here's Brian Parks' man cave - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=McBD33P-ywA. Not even APA can take away his love for the game!
APA also considers a pro as someone who is a "billiards professional," albeit a highly subjective term. Anyone who is a perennial US Amateur champion is a professional of the game of billiards. I consider skill a more important criteria than pool earnings.
When we get bumped up from a C to B, or even A to Open, it's done almost purely on player skill evaluation. When you win so many games and/or tournaments, you will get bumped up. Same standard should apply to Brian Parks.
Brian Parks participates in the Mess West State tour and in a few local tournaments. Being recognized by APA as a professional will not hurt Park's love for the game or take away opportunities for him to play pool for cash or trophies (he seems to love trophies).
Agreed. People don't seem to realize that being a pro has nothing to do with how good you play.
No one here said Brian Parks isn't a genuinely nice guy, nor have people tried to diminish his accomplishments.
Pool in the US suffered a precipitous decline long before Brian Parks became active and recognized in pool, and we can primarily attribute that to weak promotion and greed. Seems like a great topic for another thread.
Being a pro has nothing to do with how good you play?
I dare you tell this to Earl Strickland. lol I know you're referring to a player's character and integrity, and I'm going to assume you're not discounting skill.Being a pro has nothing to do with how good you play?
Has to do with how you make your living.
If you're a world class guitar player who is an attorney, are you a professional guitar player??
Their US Amateur Championship rules have different wording. It basically says a professional is someone who makes the majority of their living either playing, teaching, or exhibitions.
He is none of those.
His skill level is pro class, money made from playing does not matter. Issue is that the APA has as much to do with real pool as me or you driving to work has to do with NASCAR. Since there is no "pro" tour, the definition of a pro vs amateur has to be done with skill level. Setup two or three different championships and get rid of the "Amateur" name in the title. Just APA National Turnament and divide it up into 1/3rds for skill levels.
I know several people (90% women) that say they are "pro" players on their facebook profiles and other places, but enter as, and are allowed into B level events or handicapped as B players. So who is a "pro" and who is not?
Last edited:
Again, why does anyone give a shit? It doesn't affect you whatsoever that this guy is going in the hole to play in APA.
It's not a matter of skill and what he can do, it's a matter of the setup of the tournament. He got better, too good to play in the APA "Amateur" tournament. Move on up, lots of events don't have an upper skill limit. And yes then the second best player will then be the best player, but who else in that event has won it that many times?
Couple precedents I know about.
When I was a kid, the best golfer (arguably) in Ontario was an amateur....
...he won the Ontario Open more than any pro...but he sold real estate and wasn’t
interested in turning pro.....and wasn’t forced to.
My father was an undefeated heavy weight amateur boxer...he was told he had to go pro..
...so he quit boxing.
I like how golf handles it
When I was a kid, the best golfer (arguably) in Ontario was an amateur....
...he won the Ontario Open more than any pro...but he sold real estate and wasn’t
interested in turning pro.....and wasn’t forced to.
My father was an undefeated heavy weight amateur boxer...he was told he had to go pro..
...so he quit boxing.
I like how golf handles it
Was that Ontario Open actually "Open"? So anyone can enter? This APA thing is for "Amateurs" not an Open. If they changed the event to be a true "Open" event, then sure, any skill level can play. I would not like anyone playing in a division with lesser players with the only reason being is because of their title not skill level. If you can play at the top level of your sport, you are a "pro", how much money you make or what your business card states you are does not matter. Choosing not to be called something does not mean you are not that something. "Alternate News" is still lying and not facts, "Troubled Youths" are still criminals, "Antique" is usually just old crap. What you call something does not matter, what that thing IS matters.
I met Brian this past summer, he seems like a good guy and I really don't think he makes
a substantial portion of his income from playing pool. As far as the Fargo system goes
I would suspect that he's played in more "Fargo" type events than Tony Robles.
Now then, that being said I can say I think he plays pretty good. In The APA him being a
7 and a 9 he is definitely in the 7 Plus and 9 Plus (or "Super 7") category of The APA.
As far as the US Amateur event, it might be OK if The APA asked him to lay off for a
year or two, but it is an open amateur tournament and he is technically an amateur.
I don't wanna play him, but I'm sure there are people that relish the thought, and they
hope to face him in The US Amateur Event.
a substantial portion of his income from playing pool. As far as the Fargo system goes
I would suspect that he's played in more "Fargo" type events than Tony Robles.
Now then, that being said I can say I think he plays pretty good. In The APA him being a
7 and a 9 he is definitely in the 7 Plus and 9 Plus (or "Super 7") category of The APA.
As far as the US Amateur event, it might be OK if The APA asked him to lay off for a
year or two, but it is an open amateur tournament and he is technically an amateur.
I don't wanna play him, but I'm sure there are people that relish the thought, and they
hope to face him in The US Amateur Event.
So there is the issue, with no pro tour or national ranking system, the only way to label someone a pro is if they say they are or if they decide to play for money? Skill has nothing to do with it? My son makes all of his money from pool, is he a pro at 17 when he makes maybe $30-60 a week from tournaments as a B+ player? It's ALL skill, what label someone sticks on you, or you choose to stick on yourself does not matter.
I don't play in this event, I do know a few that play in that event and none of the complain, but in general terms, winning multiple times, cashing in events with pro players, having an official skill rating in the range of other "known" pros, makes you a pro.
He's not a professional pool player. He might be as good as one, but who cares. I've played baseball with a guy who should have been pro, if he was not such a lazy arse. Got a college scholarship, but blew that. Can literally hit the snot out of the ball at will against amateur pitchers. He routinely batted .600 or higher in the league we played in.
He doesn't hit many singles Hits the ball 450 feet with ease, just pure stroke. But, it was not meant to me. Oh, who knows how he does against major league pitching, but he certainly would have been drafted to play in the minors (which is still being a pro)
He's a monster player mixed in with real amateurs of HS and college caliber. He's the guy who would have been drafted but didn't stick it out. Thus, our "no pro" tag does not apply as he never played professionally, ever. He's not a professional baseball player no matter how good he is. Just a fact.
If he had been pro, he could played after 5 years after his last pro game was played. Thus, we've had ex major leaguers play, when they were 40 or 50. Nobody cared. It was fun playing against them. Of course, I was not a pitcher so they may have a different opinion on the matter
I hope Brian wins for the next 20 years. Why the hell not.
He doesn't hit many singles
Hits the ball 450 feet with ease, just pure stroke. But, it was not meant to me. Oh, who knows how he does against major league pitching, but he certainly would have been drafted to play in the minors (which is still being a pro) He's a monster player mixed in with real amateurs of HS and college caliber. He's the guy who would have been drafted but didn't stick it out. Thus, our "no pro" tag does not apply as he never played professionally, ever. He's not a professional baseball player no matter how good he is. Just a fact.
If he had been pro, he could played after 5 years after his last pro game was played. Thus, we've had ex major leaguers play, when they were 40 or 50. Nobody cared. It was fun playing against them. Of course, I was not a pitcher so they may have a different opinion on the matter
I hope Brian wins for the next 20 years. Why the hell not.
Last edited: