US Amateur

Celophanewrap said:
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.
Click to expand...

Yeah, I know Tony Robles' game quite well and saw Brian in the finals yesterday. I would bet the house on Tony over Brian (no offense to Brian).

That said, my opinion is, Brian should definitely be allowed to play. I thought it was an entertaining event that showcased a fun talent pool, slightly under the pro-level we're used to seeing on streams (Brian is not the exception).

If people think Brian is professional, they should consider this - can he win an event like Turning Stone or the US Open? Of course, I'm not a fortune-teller but in my opinion, it would be extremely unlikely for him to win 3 or 4 matches in a row against players with FargoRatings above 700, let alone the 6 or 7 times it would likely take to win. At the US Amateurs, he's beating guys who hover around 600. It's not surprising to me that he's such a strong favorite.

I believe the APA would rather see a field of players as strong as Brian Parks than a field without Brian Parks. Unfortunately, until they expand their payout structure, that's unlikely to happen.
 
ChicagoRJ said:
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 of his last pro game. 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.
Click to expand...

Jude Rosenstock said:
Yeah, I know Tony Robles' game quite well and saw Brian in the finals yesterday. I would bet the house on Tony over Brian (no offense to Brian).

That said, my opinion is, Brian should definitely be allowed to play. I thought it was an entertaining event that showcased a fun talent pool, slightly under the pro-level we're used to seeing on streams (Brian is not the exception).

If people think Brian is professional, they should consider this - can he win an event like Turning Stone or the US Open? Of course, I'm not a fortune-teller but in my opinion, it would be extremely unlikely for him to win 3 or 4 matches in a row against players with FargoRatings above 700, let alone the 6 or 7 times it would likely take to win. At the US Amateurs, he's beating guys who hover around 600. It's not surprising to me that he's such a strong favorite.

I believe the APA would rather see a field of players as strong as Brian Parks than a field without Brian Parks. Unfortunately, until they expand their payout structure, that's unlikely to happen.
Click to expand...

I agree with these two posts....why should improving be penalized?

In the gambling world “You’re too good” becomes an accusation...I can live with that...
...we’re a predatory bunch and want to make winning games.

This thinking should not be at the amateur level...excellence should be encouraged.
 
pt109 said:
I agree with these two posts....why should improving be penalized?

In the gambling world “You’re too good” becomes an accusation...I can live with that...
...we’re a predatory bunch and want to make winning games.

This thinking should not be at the amateur level...excellence should be encouraged.
Click to expand...

YES! We have to be very careful when it comes to banning any player from any competition. Besides, I think the APA has created plenty of opportunities for all of the hacks in the world to make thousands of dollars. Nothing like seeing someone who can't make one ball in a row score a 15k payday, thanks APA! Leave the US Amateurs alone and allow anyone who isn't interested in money to compete.
 
Jude Rosenstock said:
Yeah, I know Tony Robles' game quite well and saw Brian in the finals yesterday. I would bet the house on Tony over Brian (no offense to Brian).

That said, my opinion is, Brian should definitely be allowed to play. I thought it was an entertaining event that showcased a fun talent pool, slightly under the pro-level we're used to seeing on streams (Brian is not the exception).

If people think Brian is professional, they should consider this - can he win an event like Turning Stone or the US Open? Of course, I'm not a fortune-teller but in my opinion, it would be extremely unlikely for him to win 3 or 4 matches in a row against players with FargoRatings above 700, let alone the 6 or 7 times it would likely take to win. At the US Amateurs, he's beating guys who hover around 600. It's not surprising to me that he's such a strong favorite.

I believe the APA would rather see a field of players as strong as Brian Parks than a field without Brian Parks. Unfortunately, until they expand their payout structure, that's unlikely to happen.
Click to expand...

Brian's current Fargo Rating is 722 so I think he can win against players above 700. I think that BCA considers a pro level at 720 or higher and players 720 or higher can't play in the BCA amateur events. Can anyone verify this?
 
Last edited:
TWOFORPOOL said:
Brian's current Fargo Rating is 722 so I think he can win against players above 700. I think that BCA considers a pro level at 720 or higher and players 720 or higher can't play in the BCA amateur events. Can anyone verify this?
Click to expand...

Correct, all csi events cap at 719, a 720 or above is no longer ameteur level
 
Csi womens ameteur caliber players cap out at 659, 660s and above are considered professional level
 
TWOFORPOOL said:
Brian's current Fargo Rating is 722 so I think he can win against players above 700. I think that BCA considers a pro level at 720 or higher and players 720 or higher can't play in the BCA amateur events. Can anyone verify this?
Click to expand...

Not necessarily. It's *currently* 722. BCAPL rules state you can't be over 720 at the time of registration. Do you know what his FargoRating was a couple months ago?
 
Jude Rosenstock said:
Yeah, I know Tony Robles' game quite well and saw Brian in the finals yesterday. I would bet the house on Tony over Brian (no offense to Brian).

That said, my opinion is, Brian should definitely be allowed to play. I thought it was an entertaining event that showcased a fun talent pool, slightly under the pro-level we're used to seeing on streams (Brian is not the exception).

If people think Brian is professional, they should consider this - can he win an event like Turning Stone or the US Open? Of course, I'm not a fortune-teller but in my opinion, it would be extremely unlikely for him to win 3 or 4 matches in a row against players with FargoRatings above 700, let alone the 6 or 7 times it would likely take to win. At the US Amateurs, he's beating guys who hover around 600. It's not surprising to me that he's such a strong favorite.

I believe the APA would rather see a field of players as strong as Brian Parks than a field without Brian Parks. Unfortunately, until they expand their payout structure, that's unlikely to happen.
Click to expand...

The dude snapped off a tourny recently in CA beating numerous monsters like Bustamante. Dude plays pro speed if by some technicality you wanna say he ain't a pro because that's not how he makes his living then be it but I don't think it's right to let him play against actual amateurs (ABC players)
 
Jude Rosenstock said:
[...]? [...]it would be extremely unlikely for him to win 3 or 4 matches in a row against players with FargoRatings above 700, let alone the 6 or 7 times it would likely take to win. [...]
Click to expand...

It's not Turning Stone, but he had a good run winning Swannee undefeated in February: last 4 matches were Rodney Morris, Mitch Ellerman, Francisco Bustamante, and Oscar Dominguez.
 
nicksaint26 said:
The dude snapped off a tourny recently in CA beating numerous monsters like Bustamante. Dude plays pro speed if by some technicality you wanna say he ain't a pro because that's not how he makes his living then be it but I don't think it's right to let him play against actual amateurs (ABC players)
Click to expand...

I don't think it's right to ban anyone from playing in anything.

And, you're right. I just read the article about the tournament he won and saw who he beat. That's not the player I saw on the stream this weekend. The player I saw this weekend looked like a high caliber amateur.
 
mikepage said:
It's not Turning Stone, but he had a good run winning Swannee undefeated in February: last 4 matches were Rodney Morris, Mitch Ellerman, Francisco Bustamante, and Oscar Dominguez.
Click to expand...

Yeah, just saw that. That's not the player I saw yesterday on the stream.
 
hang-the-9 said:
Walks like a duck, quacks like a duck...
Click to expand...

Probably a duck, one of many species.

I'm a musician, been one most of my life. Performed with many professional musicians,
people that make their living making music and people pay to come and see them perform.
I have been paid for my services as a musician, well paid, my services ain't cheap. It supplements my current income.
Professionally I work in the legal community, but I love music,, and I wouldn't consider
myself a professional musician, it's just not what I do for a living.
Are you paid for anything you do other than what you do as your normal job?
 
Last edited:
Celophanewrap said:
Probably a duck, one of many species.

I'm a musician, been one most of my life. Performed with many professional musicians,
people that make their living making music and people pay to come and see them perform.
I have been paid for my services as a musician, well paid, my services ain't cheap. It supplements my current income.
Professionally I work in the legal community, but I love music,, and I wouldn't consider
myself a professional musician, it's just not what do for a living.
Are you paid for anything you do other than what you do as your normal job?
Click to expand...

Being paid or not for doing something is not a measure of how good you are at it, how good you are at it is a measure of how good you are. I have a friend that is an electrician, but is also good at fixing cars, if he calls himself a mechanic, it does not make him any less of an electrician and vice versa.
 
Last edited:
Jude Rosenstock said:
If people think Brian is professional, they should consider this - can he win an event like Turning Stone or the US Open? Of course, I'm not a fortune-teller but in my opinion, it would be extremely unlikely for him to win 3 or 4 matches in a row against players with FargoRatings above 700, let alone the 6 or 7 times it would likely take to win. At the US Amateurs, he's beating guys who hover around 600. It's not surprising to me that he's such a strong favorite.
Click to expand...

Oscar Dominguez and Mike Dechaine are both highly unlikely to ever win the US Open (with the current fields).

Would you also consider them to be amateurs?

If not, why?
 
hang-the-9 said:
Being paid or not for doing something is not a measure of how good you are at it, how good you are at it is a measure of how good you are. I have a friend that is an electrician, but is also good at fixing cars, if he calls himself a mechanic, it does not make him any less of an electrician and vice versa.
Click to expand...

Ok, if you say he’s a professional, then he is - a professional that gets to compete in
amateur events, like Tiger Woods before he turned pro. I think he won the US Open
amateur event at least a couple of times before he entered the pro event.

I’ll concede, Brian is a pro.

However, what ever label we put on him here doesn’t seem to matter all that much.
The US Amateur championship event will likely continue see him as an amateur,
don’t you think?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top