I am not looking for the definition, I know the word. My question is more philosophical.
In sports, an amateur is simply a person who does not make their living from playing a particular game. It has no ties to their ability as can be seen in the Olympics where amateurs are every bit as good as the pros. That is in most sports.
In Golf there have been many amateurs who have been capable of competing at a professional level. Nevertheless it has been rare for them to win against a professional as the latter spends most of their time playing golf.
Pool is a bit odd though. There are many "professionals" who do not make the majority of their living from playing pool, but they are still considered pros. Many of these players by definition are amateurs, however they would not be permitted to compete in the US Amateur Open. Or maybe they can, but I doubt it. One example comes to mind of a pro who is technically an amateur is George Breedlove. However he has a tape on accu-stats where he shoots .900+.
I understand the reason why most pros have a legit job. The prize money is so low at the moment that only a very small percentage can sustain themselves from prize money and endorsements.
I don't really know what my point is anymore, as I am rambling a bit. But I think it is interesting that the term amateur has a different meaning for pool. It seems to denote a level of playing ability rather occupation.
When I first got the idea that I wanted to be able to play at a world class level, I thought it would be a cool accomplishment to be an amateur and win a major championship. Kinda like Bobby Jones jr. However if I were to accomplish this nobody would notice since, as far as pool is concerned, I would not be an amateur.
In sports, an amateur is simply a person who does not make their living from playing a particular game. It has no ties to their ability as can be seen in the Olympics where amateurs are every bit as good as the pros. That is in most sports.
In Golf there have been many amateurs who have been capable of competing at a professional level. Nevertheless it has been rare for them to win against a professional as the latter spends most of their time playing golf.
Pool is a bit odd though. There are many "professionals" who do not make the majority of their living from playing pool, but they are still considered pros. Many of these players by definition are amateurs, however they would not be permitted to compete in the US Amateur Open. Or maybe they can, but I doubt it. One example comes to mind of a pro who is technically an amateur is George Breedlove. However he has a tape on accu-stats where he shoots .900+.
I understand the reason why most pros have a legit job. The prize money is so low at the moment that only a very small percentage can sustain themselves from prize money and endorsements.
I don't really know what my point is anymore, as I am rambling a bit. But I think it is interesting that the term amateur has a different meaning for pool. It seems to denote a level of playing ability rather occupation.
When I first got the idea that I wanted to be able to play at a world class level, I thought it would be a cool accomplishment to be an amateur and win a major championship. Kinda like Bobby Jones jr. However if I were to accomplish this nobody would notice since, as far as pool is concerned, I would not be an amateur.
) Taking the cash takes you out of the amateur realm. That is impractical in pool. So I think my definition works in a sport with no real amateur rules. FWIW I think the USGA has failed to regulate amateurism sufficiently in golf, and golf is the sport with probably the strictest rules. I hate seeing "amateurs" wearing logos, especially when they turn pro a week later and somehow, magically, they sign a contract with the company whose logo they were wearing. An amateur pays to play, doesn't profit off of their play, doesn't give lessons for money, does not lend their name or likeness for money. So, who would play for the trophy?
