Can You Lose Your Amateur Status - Brian Parks

The fact that Brian Parks is sponsored by a cue mfg. is a legitimate reason to give him professional status
It sure would for most, if not all, other sports

Not so much. In other sports there is a threshold of sponsor value that defines the terms. Thus someone can be sponsored by many companies, as long as their income from those companies doesn't exceed a predetermined amount.
 
So....if you win a tournament FOR AMATEURS you should then be considered a pro? What kind of logic is that?
Tiger Woods won the US Amateur 3 times - did not make him a pro. he could have still played in any state or local tournament as an amateur. He could have still played in the club championship as his home course.

The fact that Brian Parks is sponsored by a cue mfg. is a legitimate reason to give him professional status
It sure would for most, if not all, other sports

TW was an amateur, and was in college (so that isn't a good comparison). That is why once you sign a contract in baseball, football, basketball, track, golf, tennis, hockey...... or almost any sport with a governing body you are no longer allowed to compete with an amateur.

My question was more of a philosophical one (and it looks like this is the wrong forum) concerning when should someone be kicked out of the baby pool and forced to play with other top players. Or should you indefinitely allow the the top player to beat up on lesser talent. Brian was just an example that I know because I am in APA.

My question was answered though. Sounds like on this forum the majority of pool players would rather leave the big fish in a small pond.
 
The fact that Brian Parks is sponsored by a cue mfg. is a legitimate reason to give him professional status
It sure would for most, if not all, other sports


Lots of amateurs are sponsored by cue makers too. Even some Junior players. Getting a few cues and some new shafts each year is not exactly a down payment money on a Ferrari ;)
 
So......do I understand this right?
The definition of a Professional, is a really really good amateur!
 
So......do I understand this right?
The definition of a Professional, is a really really good amateur!

According to Merriam-Webster a professional is "participating for gain or livelihood in an activity or field of endeavor often engaged in by amateurs." I don't know, but it seems pretty clear to me.....:rolleyes:

My question was more of a philosophical one (and it looks like this is the wrong forum) concerning when should someone be kicked out of the baby pool and forced to play with other top players. Or should you indefinitely allow the the top player to beat up on lesser talent. Brian was just an example that I know because I am in APA.
 
Last edited:
TW was an amateur, and was in college (so that isn't a good comparison). That is why once you sign a contract in baseball, football, basketball, track, golf, tennis, hockey...... or almost any sport with a governing body you are no longer allowed to compete with an amateur.

My question was more of a philosophical one (and it looks like this is the wrong forum) concerning when should someone be kicked out of the baby pool and forced to play with other top players. Or should you indefinitely allow the the top player to beat up on lesser talent. Brian was just an example that I know because I am in APA.

My question was answered though. Sounds like on this forum the majority of pool players would rather leave the big fish in a small pond.

That answers your question right there! Without contract who decides in N. America?

Certainly not the APA. There is no PROFESSIONAL governing body for billiards in N.

America. And when there is they will be able to make those decisions. As for sponsorship,

that does not imply being a pro, but if you owned OB, and you had a chance of sponsoring

the 5 time amateur APA champion, who apparently all APA members know, why not?

It is better than sponsoring a 'Pro" who a vast majority of the APA never heard of.
 
JIM THORPE

That was the flash point for a turn in Thorpe's life. Although he would continue to write his legacy as an athlete nonpareil, he was stripped of his gold medals in 1913 after it was discovered he had violated amateur rules by being paid to play minor league baseball in 1909 and 1910.
 
BCAPL doesn't allow anyone over 720 fargorate to play in the national championships in Vegas. Brian Parks is a 721
 
TW was an amateur, and was in college (so that isn't a good comparison). That is why once you sign a contract in baseball, football, basketball, track, golf, tennis, hockey...... or almost any sport with a governing body you are no longer allowed to compete with an amateur.

My question was more of a philosophical one (and it looks like this is the wrong forum) concerning when should someone be kicked out of the baby pool and forced to play with other top players. Or should you indefinitely allow the the top player to beat up on lesser talent. Brian was just an example that I know because I am in APA.

My question was answered though. Sounds like on this forum the majority of pool players would rather leave the big fish in a small pond.

If your concern is The APA I think you should probably contact them. Start with your LO, just so
follow the proper chain, then contact the corporate offices in Lake St. Louis.
Big fish - small pond, small fish - big pond, shark in the pool, or whatever......
I suspect that many of us know what answer you'll wind up with. Believe me when I
tell you - This is well covered territory. The dictionary definition means little.
 
Last edited:
How about winning a pro tournament at Hard Times and beating the likes of Bustamante, Rodney Morris and a few other monsters? He did this last year I believe which in my eyes makes him a pro.

That might mean you're a pro, but the OP said nothing about that. The OP post implied that he should no longer be an amateur because he'd won a number of amateur titles.
 
TW was an amateur, and was in college (so that isn't a good comparison). That is why once you sign a contract in baseball, football, basketball, track, golf, tennis, hockey...... or almost any sport with a governing body you are no longer allowed to compete with an amateur.

My question was more of a philosophical one (and it looks like this is the wrong forum) concerning when should someone be kicked out of the baby pool and forced to play with other top players. Or should you indefinitely allow the the top player to beat up on lesser talent. Brian was just an example that I know because I am in APA.

My question was answered though. Sounds like on this forum the majority of pool players would rather leave the big fish in a small pond.

If your concern is The APA I think you should probably contact them. Start with your LO, just so
follow the proper chain, then contact the corporate offices in Lake St. Louis.
Big fish - small pond, small fish - big pond, shark in the pool, or whatever......
I suspect that many of us know what answer you'll wind up with. Believe me when I
tell you - This is well covered territory. The dictionary definition means little.

Once again, my question was more of a philosophical one concerning when should someone be kicked out of the baby pool and forced to play with other top players. I will never play at that level so I don't care if the APA does anything with Brian. Seems like a nice guy and I would like to play him.

As far as "well-covered," I searched the post titles and didn't see one (in the recent past) that appeared to address my question so I asked it. I will not make that mistake again.

As far as the dictionary definition "meaning little", that is only true for people who do not value things like education and facts. Also, I only gave the definition in response to a smart alik response from GB Basher (see below).

So......do I understand this right?
The definition of a Professional, is a really really good amateur!

My definition of a professional is exactly what nicksaint said "How about winning a pro tournament at Hard Times and beating the likes of Bustamante, Rodney Morris and a few other monsters? He did this last year I believe, which in my eyes, makes him a pro."

That is all I have to say about that.
 
Last edited:
How about winning a pro tournament at Hard Times and beating the likes of Bustamante, Rodney Morris and a few other monsters? He did this last year I believe, which in my eyes, makes him a pro.

That might mean you're a pro, but the OP said nothing about that. The OP post implied that he should no longer be an amateur because he'd won a number of amateur titles.

You are incorrect sir. The OP says "I feel it overwhelmingly cheapens the victory; especially given the fact he has played in, and won, open tournaments. In fact, he even is sponsored by OB."

That was exactly my point, the winning 5 US Amateur titles only lends more support. :rolleyes:
 
Last edited:
Professional players are not allowed to participate in the U.S. Amateur Championship. APA will consult with several professional tours concerning the status of any player. In addition, players who possess professional characteristics will not be allowed to participate. Professional characteristics include, but are not limited to: making the majority of one’s income giving exhibitions, giving lessons or playing pool. Please contact the APA if you think there is any possibility that you possess professional characteristics.
APA has a nationwide network of representatives and maintains a list of professional players throughout the country. APA intends to check the amateur status according to the above guidelines on every entrant into the U.S. Amateur Championship. Those entrants found to be in violation will be consulted and given an opportunity to appeal; however, APA has the final authority to make the judgment. Entry fees for those entrants found to be in violation will not be refunded.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro
 
All players are encouraged to seek sponsorship (businesses, Host Locations, clubs, etc.) to help pay costs associated with participating in the U.S. Amateur Championship.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro
 
You are incorrect sir. The OP says "I feel it overwhelmingly cheapens the victory; especially given the fact he has played in, and won, open tournaments. In fact, he even is sponsored by OB."

That was exactly my point, the winning 5 US Amateur titles only lends more support. :rolleyes:

From your OP: "After Brian Parks won his 2nd US Amateur Title I figured he would no longer be allowed to compete as an Amateur."
 
Back
Top