most choices don't apply to me....first of all, how do you define a pro?

1. I don't get paid for my music but I consider myself a pro
2. I am self-taught but taught myself formal training off university-level books
3. I am a proficient sight-reader but I also play by ear a lot. It's not that one is better than the other: a pro has to do both.
4. I trained my ear fairly heavily, and so have a trained ear
5. I am a composer and write my own music

and so on....

the only thing I have to keep working at, other than always improving on everything, is my keyboard technique. But I'll get there too, and my technique is by no means bad....basically piano grade 5. Not bad for a self-taught.

however, I am a late bloomer and my learning has been delayed by my own ignorance, but that's another story...

this is a good pro, to me:

1. he can read music and can play by ear, both to an high degree
2. he has a great piano technique
3. he writes his own music
4. he has studied harmony and composition

mmmmh....I think I am still forgetting something. Lol....

oh yes
whether he earns money or not for his music, doesn't change the rest: if he's an hobbyst, he's still an hobbyst, if he's a pro, he's still a pro.

I still intend to earn some money for my skills as a musician, but up to now I preferred to focus on developing my skills, which I keep doing of course.

There you have my 1 cent...