1) The ability to discern what the best deck of the format at that moment is. So in other words someone who can read the meta well.
2) The person who constantly makes the right plays. Not good plays but correct plays. You can become really good by just learning to constantly play correctly.
3) Experience also does make a difference.
Disagree on all three counts. IMO these points can differentiate good players from average players. But what I think makes a pro from regular folks like us, is the urge to succeed. Most players are content in winning a few games or playing their deck they built. Pros do that too, to a certain degree, but they always take in account what choices will increase his chances of success. Even if that choice goes against his own inclinations.
As far as I'm concerned, a pro is someone who is currently a platinum level player. Gold level players are "pros" with quotes, in that WotC would like to market them as professionals, but I don't really agree.
As for common denominators for these pros, here are some:
They make few mistakes.
They recognize it when they make mistakes, and don't blame their losses on bad luck or whatnot, or pretend that they play perfectly. They are honest with themselves and others.
They maintain a relatively healthy lifestyle in order to be in good physical shape at events, and keep a good diet before and during important events.
They enjoy the game, but events it's more important to win than to play or draft decks that are fun.
They are used to and able to cope with being under pressure, in terms of high stakes & being followed and watched by thousands.
They are able to make smart metagame decisions.
They are exceedingly good at sculpting a gameplan that is correct for the situation, and following through.
They are respectful individuals, graceful in victory and defeat.
Not all of these apply to every pro, but I'd say most do.
Professional - Engaged in a specified activity as one's main paid occupation rather than as a pastime.
There you go.
Same goes for Magic. People are reading into this too much. lol
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Currently Playing: Standard:
Nothing, the format Bores me! Legacy: RBurn (Made on the Cheap!)R RGBelcherRG WSoldier StompyW BReanimatorB EDH: BUGRWSliver OverlordWRGUB BGeth, Lord of the VaultB
Same goes for Magic. People are reading into this too much. lol
Pro can also be used to determine a skill level. Yes, the literal definition is making a living off it, but the term pro connotes many things besides that.
I do agree people often read to much into what it takes to gain a certain level of capability in a skill. It's not Magic, it's not mind games, or little tricks, or being able to guess cards in people hands. It's just experience.
I really learned this when I started playing pool somewhat competitively. You would see people come in and always use an open bridge, and always always try jumpshots and banks because they thought "that's what makes a pro a pro", the ability to do all those special things. They were wrong. Play a tight game with proper fundamentals, with no flash, sizzle, or tricks, and you will beat them 99.9% of the time. Knowing how to stand correctly is more important than every pool hall trick there is combined.
Same thing with Magic. Playing tight, correct Magic trumps every tip, trick, edge, or flashy stunt there is combined. Poker is big in this regard too, people will say they are good at poker because they claim they can guess hole cards and read tells notice how people put thier chips in the pot or how they are sitting and that makes them good. Then you play them and they suck, because they don't know how to calculate pot odds, a basic fundamental skill.
People like to try and replace fundamentals with tricks because getting good at the fundamentals is hard and takes a lot of work. Edge sharking is really just being lazy.
There are a few players out there that are just better players than everyone else. Jon Finkel, Wrapter, Huey, Yuuya Watanabe, Reid Duke come to mind. The rest of the "pro" community are people who got a few lucky breaks (running above average to get on the train), found a good testing group, and have the time and resources to travel to events and stay on the train. Obviously the are very good players, but they're really not much better than the players you find consistently at the top tables of local PTQs.
Seriously, if you put one of the best players at your local store on the Channel Fireball or SCG Black testing them and gave them their deck for the tournament, they'd be a "pro".
The skill barrier is not the difficult one to overcome. It's finding a testing team.
I didn't even realise that the win% of 'pro' players were, on average, only about 60%.
Then again, I remember that in something like StarCraft Broodwar, having a win% around there was also considered really frickin' good.
But it does help put some things into perspective. I guess I know a lot of people who say that a big part of Magic is based on luck, and while I personally don't doubt that there's a lot of skill in it, I just wish that there was something a little more concrete I could point to when talking about high-level Magic to other players.
Perhaps you mean that a Pro would get paid as much as a sustainable salary (which I know is open to interpretation by many). I think many Pros make under $40,000 per year, so I'm not sure if that definition holds well. I think that the Pros that made more than that this year are probably Huey Jensen, Reid Duke, and Josh Utter Leyton only.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Legacy - Sneak Show, BR Reanimator, Miracles, UW Stoneblade
Premodern - Trix, RecSur, Enchantress, Reanimator, Elves https://www.facebook.com/groups/PremodernUSA/ Modern - Neobrand, Hogaak Vine, Elves
Standard - Mono Red (6-2 and 5-3 in 2 McQ)
Draft - (I wish I had more time for limited...)
Commander - Norin the Wary, Grimgrin, Adun Oakenshield (taking forever to build) (dead format for me)
Perhaps you mean that a Pro would get paid as much as a sustainable salary (which I know is open to interpretation by many). I think many Pros make under $40,000 per year, so I'm not sure if that definition holds well. I think that the Pros that made more than that this year are probably Huey Jensen, Reid Duke, and Josh Utter Leyton only.
Actually, I would accept "I get paid in credit" as acceptable evidence of being PRO if you do so in such a way that it is regular, reliable, and sustaining the game.
For example, at my FNM there are PRO players who don't really pay for drafts or singles. They play enough, win enough, and take credit enough to be able to get the cards they need wholly off credit. They win enough at draft and then sell all their cards back to the shop to pay for the next draft (or damn near).
So basically, where an amateur enthusiast such as myself pays out of pocket to play and construct, the pros are able to win enough that they don't have to (or that they barely have to).
In a way, its the reliable skill and use of it that I am using as a qualifier for "PRO". Also, I'd then go one step further and say that they play in the PRO tour and are somewhat successful.
There are a few players out there that are just better players than everyone else. Jon Finkel, Wrapter, Huey, Yuuya Watanabe, Reid Duke come to mind. The rest of the "pro" community are people who got a few lucky breaks (running above average to get on the train), found a good testing group, and have the time and resources to travel to events and stay on the train. Obviously the are very good players, but they're really not much better than the players you find consistently at the top tables of local PTQs.
Seriously, if you put one of the best players at your local store on the Channel Fireball or SCG Black testing them and gave them their deck for the tournament, they'd be a "pro".
The skill barrier is not the difficult one to overcome. It's finding a testing team.
You're right, although it still comes down to the "10,000 hours" concept. The best players at your local store probably could be a pro, but they're not because they haven't put in the time. This is not an insult to them... most people don't have the time because they have, you know... jobs and families and stuff. The actual pros made sacrifices to be on those teams, and now they get paid to play magic. Probably paid a lot less than the guy at your local store. The proof is in their ariticles... how often do they contain a thank you to a couple guys or a store for letting them borrow cards or an entire deck? Even if they got a "lucky break" (and a LOT of them did), they still have to take it... most people would say "no thanks, I'd rather keep my current job." There are also probably a handful of exceptions... guys with enough money to afford all the cards and travel as much as they feel like, who are very passionate about the game and don't have to worry about the money/travel problem. Those guys are unlikely to be at the very top levels, but it doesn't mean they're not close to it.
You're also right that some people are just better than others. Those who are both "just better" AND put in the practice are the ones that everybody knows. It's just like sports. Michael Jordan was "just better," but he still had to work as hard as everyone else. Guys like Jon Finkel are no different.
I didn't even realise that the win% of 'pro' players were, on average, only about 60%.
context is important. Take a pro to FNM, and they're going to win a lot more than 60% of games. There are plenty of guys just at my local shop that win more like 75%+. They wouldn't be as high at a GP, and they'd be lower than that at a pro tour.
context is important. Take a pro to FNM, and they're going to win a lot more than 60% of games. There are plenty of guys just at my local shop that win more like 75%+. They wouldn't be as high at a GP, and they'd be lower than that at a pro tour.
Yep. You can look at a pro player's win % on the PT and think "hey, my win % is higher than that", but if you consider that in terms of DCI rating (long gone, I know, but still), your average opponent at FNM might have a rating of 1650, while the average opponent at the PT might have a rating of 2000. So they don't translate well.
Also, @ "10,000" hours etc: I think almost everyone could reach a certain level, but to say that anyone could get there with enough practice is a bit shortsighted. We're born with different skillsets, and there's only so much practice can do for you. The right combination of memory/math/etc & practice (and correct practising, attitude, etc) will get you there, but it's not enought with ONLY practice or ONLY natural talent. I know people who have played thousands and thousands of tournament matches, but they never improve. At some point you reach your cap, regardless of how much you try. It's a bit taboo, but it's reality.
...
Also, @ "10,000" hours etc: I think almost everyone could reach a certain level, but to say that anyone could get there with enough practice is a bit shortsighted. We're born with different skillsets, and there's only so much practice can do for you. The right combination of memory/math/etc & practice (and correct practising, attitude, etc) will get you there, but it's not enought with ONLY practice or ONLY natural talent. I know people who have played thousands and thousands of tournament matches, but they never improve. At some point you reach your cap, regardless of how much you try. It's a bit taboo, but it's reality.
I think the important thing to remember is that those 10,000 hours to become an expert at something dont just need to spent doing that thing. They need to be spent actively trying to improve yourself and get better at it.
If someone plays thousands of tournament matches, but they just assume they arent going to get any better and dont actively try to figure out where they are making mistakes to fix them, then of course they wont get any better. Thats the difference between practice and just repetition.
Pros dont just play Magic, they learn it as a skill, and sacrifice a lot of time and hard work to do so.
I know I wouldnt personally want to be in that situation. I dont think I'd enjoy Magic as much if I was relying on it for a sizable part of my income.
Also, @ "10,000" hours etc: I think almost everyone could reach a certain level, but to say that anyone could get there with enough practice is a bit shortsighted. We're born with different skillsets, and there's only so much practice can do for you. The right combination of memory/math/etc & practice (and correct practising, attitude, etc) will get you there, but it's not enought with ONLY practice or ONLY natural talent. I know people who have played thousands and thousands of tournament matches, but they never improve. At some point you reach your cap, regardless of how much you try. It's a bit taboo, but it's reality.
You are correct.
The activity I am perhaps most accomplished at is 4-way formation skydiving. Although I was never a "pro", in 2006 when I went to nationals I was probably in the top 1% of all jumpers nationwide. Myself and my team were, by a large margin, the 4 best jumpers locally (although compared to the real pros we were not that good!). Part of it was innate skill, but it was by far mostly because we were there EVERY weekend, and videoed and critiqued each jump, and practiced a lot of moves on the ground.
I was fortunate to have had a good amount of natural talent for skydiving. That said, I have jumped with people I considered to have greater natural talent who were not nearly as skilled, because they did not make an effort to develop their talent. I have also jumped with people with literally 10 times my experience who were not as skilled... one in particular actually HAD made considerable effort, but never could get it. He wasn't a bad skydiver, just not a great one.
Magic is the same. Most people, with enough work, can be at the top or nearly the top of their local scene, unless their local scene happens to have a lot of pros. Only the most talented could ever get to the top of the pro level, though. And even they will only get there if they work hard at it.
I didn't even realise that the win% of 'pro' players were, on average, only about 60%.
Then again, I remember that in something like StarCraft Broodwar, having a win% around there was also considered really frickin' good.
But it does help put some things into perspective. I guess I know a lot of people who say that a big part of Magic is based on luck, and while I personally don't doubt that there's a lot of skill in it, I just wish that there was something a little more concrete I could point to when talking about high-level Magic to other players.
You have to remember that those 60% win rates are against good players. Holding 60% at PT's is considerably different from 60% at GP's, which is different from 60% at SCG Opens, all of which are much tougher than 60% at FNM. A player that wins 60% at PT's is going to win almost every match at an event with lots of lower level players.
Perhaps you mean that a Pro would get paid as much as a sustainable salary (which I know is open to interpretation by many). I think many Pros make under $40,000 per year, so I'm not sure if that definition holds well. I think that the Pros that made more than that this year are probably Huey Jensen, Reid Duke, and Josh Utter Leyton only.
Most of the money in Magic comes from writing, not from winning. Many pro's have stated over and over again that if you average it out they only break even on a good year from their tournament winnings. Usually they lose money by attending events. They make it up though on the writing side of things. Travis Woo once mentioned on his stream what he gets paid for article and video content on Channel Fireball and that was $1400/month. I'm sure it varies a little bit by the player and the site but that's likely a good baseline. Sam Black also supports himself entirely on his SCG writing, but if you've ever watched his stream you probably know he has a ton of roommates, so I'm sure that keeps his expenses very low (aside from travel fees, since he attends every North American GP).
When you consider a say $30,000 average income as well you have to take into account that they spend a lot of money on hotels and travel fees, especially the gold and platinum level players so they have high out of pocket expenses too.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
Disagree on all three counts. IMO these points can differentiate good players from average players. But what I think makes a pro from regular folks like us, is the urge to succeed. Most players are content in winning a few games or playing their deck they built. Pros do that too, to a certain degree, but they always take in account what choices will increase his chances of success. Even if that choice goes against his own inclinations.
As for common denominators for these pros, here are some:
There you go.
Same goes for Magic. People are reading into this too much. lol
Currently Playing:
Standard:
Nothing, the format Bores me!
Legacy:
RBurn (Made on the Cheap!)R
RGBelcherRG
WSoldier StompyW
BReanimatorB
EDH:
BUGRWSliver OverlordWRGUB
BGeth, Lord of the VaultB
Pro can also be used to determine a skill level. Yes, the literal definition is making a living off it, but the term pro connotes many things besides that.
I do agree people often read to much into what it takes to gain a certain level of capability in a skill. It's not Magic, it's not mind games, or little tricks, or being able to guess cards in people hands. It's just experience.
I really learned this when I started playing pool somewhat competitively. You would see people come in and always use an open bridge, and always always try jumpshots and banks because they thought "that's what makes a pro a pro", the ability to do all those special things. They were wrong. Play a tight game with proper fundamentals, with no flash, sizzle, or tricks, and you will beat them 99.9% of the time. Knowing how to stand correctly is more important than every pool hall trick there is combined.
Same thing with Magic. Playing tight, correct Magic trumps every tip, trick, edge, or flashy stunt there is combined. Poker is big in this regard too, people will say they are good at poker because they claim they can guess hole cards and read tells notice how people put thier chips in the pot or how they are sitting and that makes them good. Then you play them and they suck, because they don't know how to calculate pot odds, a basic fundamental skill.
People like to try and replace fundamentals with tricks because getting good at the fundamentals is hard and takes a lot of work. Edge sharking is really just being lazy.
Seriously, if you put one of the best players at your local store on the Channel Fireball or SCG Black testing them and gave them their deck for the tournament, they'd be a "pro".
The skill barrier is not the difficult one to overcome. It's finding a testing team.
Signature courtesy of Rivenor and Miraculous Recovery
EDH Altered Cards by Galspanic (Seriously, this guy's awesome.)
My Pauper Cube
Tapped-Out Simulator
My Trade Thread
-Decks-
Commander:
GWR Rith, the Awakener RWG
U Kami of the Crescent Moon U (Flagship Deck)
BW Teysa, Orzhov Scion WB
Under Construction:
UBR Crosis, the Purger RBU
Cube:
WUBRGX Pauper XGRBUW
And a good team of equally loaded time wasting friends to test with, can't forget that.
I didn't even realise that the win% of 'pro' players were, on average, only about 60%.
Then again, I remember that in something like StarCraft Broodwar, having a win% around there was also considered really frickin' good.
But it does help put some things into perspective. I guess I know a lot of people who say that a big part of Magic is based on luck, and while I personally don't doubt that there's a lot of skill in it, I just wish that there was something a little more concrete I could point to when talking about high-level Magic to other players.
How To Keep Your FOIL Cards From Curling: http://youtu.be/QTmubrS8VnI
The Best Deck Boxes: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uEwgLph_Pjk
The Best Binders: http://youtu.be/H5IauASYWjk
I get paid, in credit at FNM.
Perhaps you mean that a Pro would get paid as much as a sustainable salary (which I know is open to interpretation by many). I think many Pros make under $40,000 per year, so I'm not sure if that definition holds well. I think that the Pros that made more than that this year are probably Huey Jensen, Reid Duke, and Josh Utter Leyton only.
Premodern - Trix, RecSur, Enchantress, Reanimator, Elves https://www.facebook.com/groups/PremodernUSA/
Modern - Neobrand, Hogaak Vine, Elves
Standard - Mono Red (6-2 and 5-3 in 2 McQ)
Draft - (I wish I had more time for limited...)
Commander -
Norin the Wary, Grimgrin, Adun Oakenshield (taking forever to build)(dead format for me)Actually, I would accept "I get paid in credit" as acceptable evidence of being PRO if you do so in such a way that it is regular, reliable, and sustaining the game.
For example, at my FNM there are PRO players who don't really pay for drafts or singles. They play enough, win enough, and take credit enough to be able to get the cards they need wholly off credit. They win enough at draft and then sell all their cards back to the shop to pay for the next draft (or damn near).
So basically, where an amateur enthusiast such as myself pays out of pocket to play and construct, the pros are able to win enough that they don't have to (or that they barely have to).
In a way, its the reliable skill and use of it that I am using as a qualifier for "PRO". Also, I'd then go one step further and say that they play in the PRO tour and are somewhat successful.
40k a year playing Magic? That beyond PRO.
How To Keep Your FOIL Cards From Curling: http://youtu.be/QTmubrS8VnI
The Best Deck Boxes: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uEwgLph_Pjk
The Best Binders: http://youtu.be/H5IauASYWjk
You're right, although it still comes down to the "10,000 hours" concept. The best players at your local store probably could be a pro, but they're not because they haven't put in the time. This is not an insult to them... most people don't have the time because they have, you know... jobs and families and stuff. The actual pros made sacrifices to be on those teams, and now they get paid to play magic. Probably paid a lot less than the guy at your local store. The proof is in their ariticles... how often do they contain a thank you to a couple guys or a store for letting them borrow cards or an entire deck? Even if they got a "lucky break" (and a LOT of them did), they still have to take it... most people would say "no thanks, I'd rather keep my current job." There are also probably a handful of exceptions... guys with enough money to afford all the cards and travel as much as they feel like, who are very passionate about the game and don't have to worry about the money/travel problem. Those guys are unlikely to be at the very top levels, but it doesn't mean they're not close to it.
You're also right that some people are just better than others. Those who are both "just better" AND put in the practice are the ones that everybody knows. It's just like sports. Michael Jordan was "just better," but he still had to work as hard as everyone else. Guys like Jon Finkel are no different.
context is important. Take a pro to FNM, and they're going to win a lot more than 60% of games. There are plenty of guys just at my local shop that win more like 75%+. They wouldn't be as high at a GP, and they'd be lower than that at a pro tour.
Yep. You can look at a pro player's win % on the PT and think "hey, my win % is higher than that", but if you consider that in terms of DCI rating (long gone, I know, but still), your average opponent at FNM might have a rating of 1650, while the average opponent at the PT might have a rating of 2000. So they don't translate well.
Also, @ "10,000" hours etc: I think almost everyone could reach a certain level, but to say that anyone could get there with enough practice is a bit shortsighted. We're born with different skillsets, and there's only so much practice can do for you. The right combination of memory/math/etc & practice (and correct practising, attitude, etc) will get you there, but it's not enought with ONLY practice or ONLY natural talent. I know people who have played thousands and thousands of tournament matches, but they never improve. At some point you reach your cap, regardless of how much you try. It's a bit taboo, but it's reality.
I think the important thing to remember is that those 10,000 hours to become an expert at something dont just need to spent doing that thing. They need to be spent actively trying to improve yourself and get better at it.
If someone plays thousands of tournament matches, but they just assume they arent going to get any better and dont actively try to figure out where they are making mistakes to fix them, then of course they wont get any better. Thats the difference between practice and just repetition.
Pros dont just play Magic, they learn it as a skill, and sacrifice a lot of time and hard work to do so.
I know I wouldnt personally want to be in that situation. I dont think I'd enjoy Magic as much if I was relying on it for a sizable part of my income.
You are correct.
The activity I am perhaps most accomplished at is 4-way formation skydiving. Although I was never a "pro", in 2006 when I went to nationals I was probably in the top 1% of all jumpers nationwide. Myself and my team were, by a large margin, the 4 best jumpers locally (although compared to the real pros we were not that good!). Part of it was innate skill, but it was by far mostly because we were there EVERY weekend, and videoed and critiqued each jump, and practiced a lot of moves on the ground.
I was fortunate to have had a good amount of natural talent for skydiving. That said, I have jumped with people I considered to have greater natural talent who were not nearly as skilled, because they did not make an effort to develop their talent. I have also jumped with people with literally 10 times my experience who were not as skilled... one in particular actually HAD made considerable effort, but never could get it. He wasn't a bad skydiver, just not a great one.
Magic is the same. Most people, with enough work, can be at the top or nearly the top of their local scene, unless their local scene happens to have a lot of pros. Only the most talented could ever get to the top of the pro level, though. And even they will only get there if they work hard at it.
You have to remember that those 60% win rates are against good players. Holding 60% at PT's is considerably different from 60% at GP's, which is different from 60% at SCG Opens, all of which are much tougher than 60% at FNM. A player that wins 60% at PT's is going to win almost every match at an event with lots of lower level players.
Most of the money in Magic comes from writing, not from winning. Many pro's have stated over and over again that if you average it out they only break even on a good year from their tournament winnings. Usually they lose money by attending events. They make it up though on the writing side of things. Travis Woo once mentioned on his stream what he gets paid for article and video content on Channel Fireball and that was $1400/month. I'm sure it varies a little bit by the player and the site but that's likely a good baseline. Sam Black also supports himself entirely on his SCG writing, but if you've ever watched his stream you probably know he has a ton of roommates, so I'm sure that keeps his expenses very low (aside from travel fees, since he attends every North American GP).
When you consider a say $30,000 average income as well you have to take into account that they spend a lot of money on hotels and travel fees, especially the gold and platinum level players so they have high out of pocket expenses too.