Quote:
|
When you can support your lifestyle off gambling. Since his lifestyle is being supported by a inheritance he isnt a professional gambler. If for instance you ate top ramon everyday and rented a room for $100 a month and you only made 2,000 a year gambling you could say you were a professional gambler. Whereas if you made 6 figures gambling but you made 7 figures working for a company i wouldnt consider you a professional gambler if you couldnt support your lifestyle off of the 6 figure gambling salary.
|
The above quote is not mine, I googled and found it on another forum, where a similar question was suggested.
It illustrates a scenario where a punter was asked how many days a week he is at the casino, he said almost every day, therefore considers himself a "professorial gambler". The twist is, the money used to bet with is inheritance money, possibly with enough money, so that when losing there is still more where it came from.
In my own experience, I met a punter, seemed he knew all about the racing game. He had a very smart looking car. So I asked him, specifically,
"did you buy that car by going to the TAB to withdraw actual winnings to purchase the car"? His reply was "No", he has a high roller job/business in a professional field and for tax purposes his nice looking car was on lease.
So to me the bench-mark is a few pages from the Pittsburgh Phill book, but he and a few others were rare and not of our time.
Is it the size of our bets,the money to pay bills and living derived exclusively and solely from the punt day in day out?
Is one who bets let's say once week more or less professional than the daily punter. Is winning constantly more professional than losing, but getting back in profit after a losing streak?
What is the benchmark or criteria?
Your car, your house, kids at private schools, or is it a double life where no one, not even your closest relative knows what you do?