PDA

View Full Version : TV? Foget About It


Johnnyt
05-22-2009, 12:28 PM
I wish people would stop basing decisions in pool on what TV wants in an event. TV wants jump-cues; TV wants short races, TV wants 7-ball and 9-ball, TV wants a limited # of safes, and last but not least they want clapping on every shot, weather itís a good shot or bad shot.

Well TV got ALL these things and still wonít show any pool live on TV. The little pool shown on TV is a joke. Itís put on months after the original event is over. They still donít show all the games in 7 game races, and production is awful.

F*** TV. When they want to show pool like they show bowling, golf, and tennis, then worry about them. Until then donít let them ruin our game anymore than they already have over the last 20 years. JMOÖbut Iím right :). Johnnyt

Rob_jerrylee
05-22-2009, 12:49 PM
I'm right with you on that JohnnyT , I do like some events but others are horrible , like sudden death 7 ball who really wants to watch that , and they should have live events on tv , but as of late watching tv is overrated , I'd rather just go down stair as shoot on my own table instead of watching tv .

muddawg
05-22-2009, 12:53 PM
completely 100% agree with both of you

nathandumoulin
05-22-2009, 01:11 PM
Failing to produce good pool on TV hurts the industry. Less exposure results in generating less money, and less money for the sport means less money for the players.

In other words, I strongly disagree.

I think a compromise needs to be made. You can please the players by sticking with what they want....longer races of 10ball. You then edit the match down to a condensed version consisting of the highlight racks. This way the players get to play a proper game, but the viewer isnt stuck watching safety battles. The match will also fit within the required time limit for TV.

If you want to solve the slow play, just add in a medium length shot clock. The players wont mind if the time is reasonable, and it makes for better TV.

The players are happy, and the TV audience is entertained. Seems pretty simple to me.

While we're on the subject, I want to bring something up. Every sport has its recognizable figures. These people are constantly featured on TV and are given the maximum exposure in order to turn them into icons and sport heroes. The general public wants to pull for these figures (or teams). They want to be able to follow progress easily...to watch them as much as possible. All sports understand this and utilize it to the benefit of the industry.

Pool however does not do this. We pick the TV table matches randomly. Although this is more fair, it's not the proper way to give the sport the necessary exposure. Watching two unknows play really isnt all that exciting. You dont know who to route for, and in the end, arent nearly as concerned with the outcome of the match. It makes for less drama, less excitement, and ultimately less viewers.

And lastly....we cant keep changing games. Baseball is baseball, hockey is hockey, soccer is soccer, etc. But pool....its 10ball, 9abll, snooker, 7ball, 6ball, bank pool, etc. This just doesnt work. The general population (especially the TV watching population) doesnt want to have to think about what they're watching, and they certainly dont want to have to go research the rules of a game they are unfamiliar with. Just stick to one game and quit confusing the casual viewers, as realistically, the casual viewer is the demographic that we're trying to gain. Die hard fans will always find a way to watch and play the game. Its exposing the game to new people that is important.

Just my 2 cents.

muddawg
05-22-2009, 01:18 PM
Failing to produce good pool on TV hurts the industry. Less exposure results in generating less money, and less money for the sport means less money for the players.

In other words, I strongly disagree.

I think a compromise needs to be made. You can please the players by taking longer races, say a 3 hour 10 ball match. You then edit the match down to a condense version consisting of the highlight racks. This way the players get to play a proper game, but the viewer isnt stuck watching safety battles.

If you want to solve the slow play, just add in a medium length shot clock. The players wont mind if the time is reasonable, and it makes for better TV.

Seems pretty simple to me.

While we're on the subject, I want to bring something up. Every sport has its recognizable figures. These people are constantly featured on TV and are given the maximum exposure in order to turn them into icons and sport heroes. The general public wants to pull for these figures (or teams). They want to be able to follow progress easily...to watch them as much as possible. All sports understand this and utilize it to the benefit of the industry.

Pool however does not do this. We pick the TV table matches randomly. Although this is more fair, it's not the proper way to give the sport the necessary exposure. Watching two unknows play really isnt all that exciting. You dont know who to route for, and in the end, arent nearly as concerned with the outcome of the match. It makes for less drama, less excitement, and ultimately less viewers.

Just my 2 cents.

You do make a good point... little exposure is better than no exposure at all, and some sort of compromise is needed... but I just feel that as of right now, pool on TV is horrible (in the USA, that is).

SJDinPHX
05-22-2009, 01:20 PM
I wish people would stop basing decisions in pool on what TV wants in an event. TV wants jump-cues; TV wants short races, TV wants 7-ball and 9-ball, TV wants a limited # of safes, and last but not least they want clapping on every shot, weather it’s a good shot or bad shot.

Well TV got ALL these things and still won’t show any pool live on TV. The little pool shown on TV is a joke. It’s put on months after the original event is over. They still don’t show all the games in 7 game races, and production is awful.

F*** TV. When they want to show pool like they show bowling, golf, and tennis, then worry about them. Until then don’t let them ruin our game anymore than they already have over the last 20 years. JMO…but I’m right :). Johnnyt

Many good points well made Johnny. Pool has not adapted well to TV, and vice-versa.
However, it has gained some measure of acceptance in other markets with larger purses. Asia, England, the Philipines, to name a few.

It's all dollar driven. No big purses, small audience interest = no sponsors.
No sponsors = no reason for TV to ever care, one way or the other.

All the theories on how to change that, without a solid business model are just wishful thinking.

Until pool acquires some of the aforementioned attributes, plus a larger fan base, plus a viable, solid Pro organization for TV to deal with...nothing is likely to change.

I recently sent a long presentation to Mark Griffin, on a possible way to generate more interest in our great game.
It ain't a "magic bullet", but in the hands of someone like him, who knows what could happen.
I'm sure I'll hear back from him as soon as he has had time to evaluate the feasability of it, from the business end.

Still hoping for the best,

Dick

nathandumoulin
05-22-2009, 01:21 PM
You do make a good point... little exposure is better than no exposure at all, and some sort of compromise is needed... but I just feel that as of right now, pool on TV is horrible (in the USA, that is).

I agree with you 100%. Most of the pool on TV is awful.

I really wish Billiard Club or someone would hire me. Just like everyone else, I feel I could make a difference in the way the game is portrayed on TV.

Johnnyt
05-22-2009, 01:35 PM
Failing to produce good pool on TV hurts the industry. Less exposure results in generating less money, and less money for the sport means less money for the players.

In other words, I strongly disagree.

I think a compromise needs to be made. You can please the players by sticking with what they want....longer races of 10ball. You then edit the match down to a condensed version consisting of the highlight racks. This way the players get to play a proper game, but the viewer isnt stuck watching safety battles. The match will also fit within the required time limit for TV.

If you want to solve the slow play, just add in a medium length shot clock. The players wont mind if the time is reasonable, and it makes for better TV.

The players are happy, and the TV audience is entertained. Seems pretty simple to me.

While we're on the subject, I want to bring something up. Every sport has its recognizable figures. These people are constantly featured on TV and are given the maximum exposure in order to turn them into icons and sport heroes. The general public wants to pull for these figures (or teams). They want to be able to follow progress easily...to watch them as much as possible. All sports understand this and utilize it to the benefit of the industry.

Pool however does not do this. We pick the TV table matches randomly. Although this is more fair, it's not the proper way to give the sport the necessary exposure. Watching two unknows play really isnt all that exciting. You dont know who to route for, and in the end, arent nearly as concerned with the outcome of the match. It makes for less drama, less excitement, and ultimately less viewers.

And lastly....we cant keep changing games. Baseball is baseball, hockey is hockey, soccer is soccer, etc. But pool....its 10ball, 9abll, snooker, 7ball, 6ball, bank pool, etc. This just doesnt work. The general population (especially the TV watching population) doesnt want to have to think about what they're watching, and they certainly dont want to have to go research the rules of a game they are unfamiliar with. Just stick to one game and quit confusing the casual viewers, as realistically, the casual viewer is the demographic that we're trying to gain. Die hard fans will always find a way to watch and play the game. Its exposing the game to new people that is important.

Just my 2 cents.

And I agree with eveything you just said. One game, races long enough to to get a win for the better player a good percentage of the time. Edit it for TV, and start interviewing players that are good, that are interesting, and have some pazazzz. Johnnyt

Johnnyt
05-22-2009, 01:38 PM
Many good points well made Johnny. Pool has not adapted well to TV, and vice-versa.
However, it has gained some measure of acceptance in other markets with larger purses. Asia, England, the Philipines, to name a few.

It's all dollar driven. No big purses, small audience interest = no sponsors.
No sponsors = no reason for TV to ever care, one way or the other.

All the theories on how to change that, without a solid business model are just wishful thinking.

Until pool acquires some of the aforementioned attributes, plus a larger fan base, plus a viable, solid Pro organization for TV to deal with...nothing is likely to change.

I recently sent a long presentation to Mark Griffin, on a possible way to generate more interest in our great game.
It ain't a "magic bullet", but in the hands of someone like him, who knows what could happen.
I'm sure I'll hear back from him as soon as he has had time to evaluate the feasability of it, from the business end.

Still hoping for the best,

Dick

I agree, if anyone in the US can do it it would be Mark Griffin. Johnnyt

nathandumoulin
05-22-2009, 01:40 PM
Who is Mark Griffin?

Richardson
05-22-2009, 01:43 PM
I make a mention here for a show. And if someone uses it and it becomes popular i want my name in the credits somewhere. Just a honorable mention.


You call around to 20 of the best gambling/action halls around the country. You tell them in 2 months we will be there with TV cameras and a crew. BE READY

Then you tell them you want to see the highest action in the middle and action on the side that anyone in the world has ever seen. I wanna see pregame $100 coin flips on the table. I wanna see 5k -10k sets with LOTS of money side bet. I wanna see trash talk, i wanna see barking. Show people matching up. I wanna see hustles(HUSTLE OF THE WEEK) --Who cares if they are fake, TV people wont know the difference.

People want to see other people lose money. Just like poker, and just like seeing a guy rack his balls on a rail while falling off his skateboard.

Pool has a image of people up all night, and high stakes gambling/hustling. Why are people always trying to pretty it up with tournaments, OBVIOUSLY after years and years of this the general public dont care anyhow.

Nostroke
05-22-2009, 01:48 PM
I wish people would stop basing decisions in pool on what TV wants in an event. TV wants jump-cues; TV wants short races, TV wants 7-ball and 9-ball, TV wants a limited # of safes, and last but not least they want clapping on every shot, weather it’s a good shot or bad shot.
Johnnyt


Just to correct an ongoing misunderstanding. Neither TV nor the WPBA have ever indicated they want clapping on every shot. Ive been to quite a few TV matches and for the WPBA, Steve Tipton is the MC.

Before the TV matches Steve tells the audience that there have been studies done and the thing that holds the TV audience is if there is a feeling of excitement around the match which is of course generated by the audience. Then he usually goes on to describe a player who plays a "lock-up" safe and how the audience should cheer for a great safe just as much as for a great shot pocketing a ball!

That is really about it and somehow the audience takes this request to show some enthusiasm and excitement and responds with a weak smattering of applause after each shot. Beleive it or Don't!!

PS- I once saw Karen Corr play a deliberate foul and she got the same applause.

BryanMordt
05-22-2009, 01:56 PM
I think the future for viewing pool will lean on the web. Companies like Kozoom are really offering a great production and it should only get better with time. The streaming & video quality will improve and the content is geared more to the enthusiast. The other benefit will be more interactivity with the viewers. I like what I am seeing from Kozoom, I hope they or businesses like them and pool grow together.

I forgot to mention TAR as well, I think they have a lot of potential too!

NewStroke
05-22-2009, 02:02 PM
Excuse my ignorance, but what exactly is TAR (not the stuff on roofs)? I have seen it mentioned multiple times but no explanation.

crawfish
05-22-2009, 02:03 PM
Good point. I feel that the internet is the wave of almost all media. It won't be long until there is no Netflix, dvd's, maybe even tv. A new show will be broadcast, and you download it. This stuff is right now happening. Streaming is the nuts.

muddawg
05-22-2009, 02:04 PM
Excuse my ignorance, but what exactly is TAR (not the stuff on roofs)? I have seen it mentioned multiple times but no explanation.

The Action Report (http://www.theactionreport.com/)

Two players get together to have a match, and TAR streams the matches, sometimes for free, sometimes its PPV. They also record the matches and make them available on DVD. TAR is basically one of the best things to happen to pool in recent years. I'm pretty sure that a good majority of the money they make goes into buying better equipment to make the streams better quality and more exciting. They give back way more to the game then any other organization I can think of at this moment. I, as well as many others, really appreciate all that they do for the game we all love.

nathandumoulin
05-22-2009, 02:05 PM
It's going to be a good decade before streaming events can generate enough profit to justify high-end production expenses.

Sure, eventually all media will head that route...but we're talking about the present here. We need a solution now.

poolsnark
05-22-2009, 02:24 PM
Who is Mark Griffin?

Are you serious?

This is the reason why you should do your own research when it comes to getting contacts in the industry instead of just asking people to give you names and numbers (like you were doing in that other thread (http://forums.azbilliards.com/showthread.php?t=143230)).

As for bashing the production of the existing programming, all I can say is that I've seen your Mika videos and they aren't exactly "The Matrix" either. Don't get me wrong, the videos are fine as pool production goes, but they certainly didn't strike me as anything revolutionary (or evolutionary for that matter).

D C 6 Pocket
05-22-2009, 02:33 PM
I wish people would stop basing decisions in pool on what TV wants in an event. TV wants jump-cues; TV wants short races, TV wants 7-ball and 9-ball, TV wants a limited # of safes, and last but not least they want clapping on every shot, weather itís a good shot or bad shot.

Well TV got ALL these things and still wonít show any pool live on TV. The little pool shown on TV is a joke. Itís put on months after the original event is over. They still donít show all the games in 7 game races, and production is awful.

F*** TV. When they want to show pool like they show bowling, golf, and tennis, then worry about them. Until then donít let them ruin our game anymore than they already have over the last 20 years. JMOÖbut Iím right :). Johnnyt

Johnny, I think you have some valid points and would like to add something to think about. My expierence with the corporate world and their desire to get involved with pool tells me this............when someone can show them a business plan that they feel comfortable will gain them a reasonable share of the 32 million recreational players in the USA that play for all kinds of reasons BUT..are not on a league, not a pro, not a "Player looking for action" and chances are they don't even know about the az forum but just someone that plays for grins, giggles and braging rights.

How do you suppose we get those players interested?

I may have an answer after July!!

nathandumoulin
05-22-2009, 02:37 PM
Are you serious?

This is the reason why you should do your own research when it comes to getting contacts in the industry instead of just asking people to give you names and numbers (like you were doing in that other thread (http://forums.azbilliards.com/showthread.php?t=143230)).

As for bashing the production of the existing programming, all I can say is that I've seen your Mika videos and they aren't exactly "The Matrix" either. Don't get me wrong, the videos are fine as pool production goes, but they certainly didn't strike me as anything revolutionary (or evolutionary for that matter).

Wow, where did this come from? :eek:

I asked a simple question and you flammed me. And for that matter, where did I ever say anything about being comparable to the Matrix or being revolutionary?

I make my movies because its something I love, and because I thought people could benefit from it. I dont appreciate someone like yourself flamming me over my efforts.

And as for doing my own research, I created my business from nothing. I didn't know a single person in the industry 2 years ago when I was still in school. I worked my way up the ladder and did what I needed to do to get the job done. As far as Im concerned, that's an achievement that I should be proud of.

I'd say an apology is due here....but whatever. I'd rather contribute than argue over this anymore.

Johnnyt
05-22-2009, 02:45 PM
Johnny, I think you have some valid points and would like to add something to think about. My expierence with the corporate world and their desire to get involved with pool tells me this............when someone can show them a business plan that they feel comfortable will gain them a reasonable share of the 32 million recreational players in the USA that play for all kinds of reasons BUT..are not on a league, not a pro, not a "Player looking for action" and chances are they don't even know about the az forum but just someone that plays for grins, giggles and braging rights.

How do you suppose we get those players interested?

I may have an answer after July!!

I hope the new game goes well for you. I keep forgeting to try it. I just wrote myself a note to try it...old and losing it here:o. Johnnyt

D C 6 Pocket
05-22-2009, 02:51 PM
I hope the new game goes well for you. I keep forgeting to try it. I just wrote myself a note to try it...old and losing it here:o. Johnnyt

I'll trade you, 67 in November:o best game yet, and something for you to shhot for.....101:thumbup: Good luck!

poolsnark
05-22-2009, 03:35 PM
Wow, where did this come from? :eek:

I asked a simple question and you flammed me. And for that matter, where did I ever say anything about being comparable to the Matrix or being revolutionary?

I make my movies because its something I love, and because I thought people could benefit from it. I dont appreciate someone like yourself flamming me over my efforts.

And as for doing my own research, I created my business from nothing. I didn't know a single person in the industry 2 years ago when I was still in school. I worked my way up the ladder and did what I needed to do to get the job done. As far as Im concerned, that's an achievement that I should be proud of.

I'd say an apology is due here....but whatever. I'd rather contribute than argue over this anymore.

When you come out with a statement that "pool on TV is awful" and then go on to say "I really wish Billiard Club or someone would hire me. I know it sounds ridiculous, but I feel I could make a huge difference in the way the game is portrayed on TV" you can expect that not everyone will want to hear you stroke your own ego and watch you throw out your shoulder vigorously patting yourself on the back.

Pool in its current form on TV is not great but its a shitton better than nothing. The WPBA and Billiards International spend quite a bit of money getting these shows produced and make very little from it, as the only way ESPN will take billiards programming is to swap content for ads. These producers are neither lazy or complacent. They are doing the best they can with the funds they have.

Instead of crapping on those who are at least trying while saying how much better you can do, why don't you go and produce some televised billiards events? Clearly you are more talented than those currently doing it and could teach everyone a thing or two about how to do it right.

As for the asking for contacts thing, all it takes is about five minutes of Googling along with picking up the phone and making a few calls to find all the contacts you need.

nathandumoulin
05-22-2009, 04:07 PM
You're entitled to your opinion about my movies, but I don't think you're being very fair. I'm not a giant TV network. I wrote, directed, filmed, edited, and produced those movies single handedly. They took me like 3 whole years, without any pay, and were made with hardly any budget. Everything was paid for out of my own pocket.....and haven't made a single penny from them yet.

Bash them all you like, but all things considered, I feel I did a pretty damn good job. Considering the reviews I've had, most other people will agree.

Anyway, enough about that.

When you come out with a statement that "pool on TV is awful"

Most people feel they can make a difference. I'm one such person. Saying that I'd like to make a run at it doesn't imply that I'm stroking my ego. It simply means that I think I have some good ideas and could contribute to make things better than they currently are. You are right though and I can see how you misunderstood my original message about this, as my message was poorly worded.

These producers are neither lazy or complacent. They are doing the best they can with the funds they have.

Almost everyone who experiences success at some point becomes satisfied with their achievements, and eventually becomes partially complacent. Some companies in the billiard industry have become this way. Many people will argue that Predator is one such company. I feel that *some* TV programming suffers from this complacency. Last time I checked, I was entitled to my opinion.

As for the asking for contacts thing, all it takes is about five minutes of Googling along with picking up the phone and making a few calls to find all the contacts you need.

Making phone calls to ask someone for an email contact is no different than posting on here with a similar request. Either way I'd be asking someone to help me out. Besides, there's nothing wrong with asking for a hand sometimes. Im more than eager to help others out (and have provided people with industry contacts twice this week alone), so why can't I request that other forum members help me out as well? I see no problem with any of this.

cleary
05-22-2009, 04:28 PM
Are you serious?

This is the reason why you should do your own research when it comes to getting contacts in the industry instead of just asking people to give you names and numbers (like you were doing in that other thread (http://forums.azbilliards.com/showthread.php?t=143230)).

As for bashing the production of the existing programming, all I can say is that I've seen your Mika videos and they aren't exactly "The Matrix" either. Don't get me wrong, the videos are fine as pool production goes, but they certainly didn't strike me as anything revolutionary (or evolutionary for that matter).

You are way off base here. Nathan's "Mastering Pool" was LEAPS AND BOUNDS better than any other pool instructional video I've ever seen. Not to discredit anyone else's efforts, but Nathan is one of the very few in this industry that "get it". As for your critics, you clearly don't get it.

JimS
05-22-2009, 04:40 PM
I wish people would stop basing decisions in pool on what TV wants in an event. TV wants jump-cues; TV wants short races, TV wants 7-ball and 9-ball, TV wants a limited # of safes, and last but not least they want clapping on every shot, weather it’s a good shot or bad shot.

Well TV got ALL these things and still won’t show any pool live on TV. The little pool shown on TV is a joke. It’s put on months after the original event is over. They still don’t show all the games in 7 game races, and production is awful.

F*** TV. When they want to show pool like they show bowling, golf, and tennis, then worry about them. Until then don’t let them ruin our game anymore than they already have over the last 20 years. JMO…but I’m right :). Johnnyt


Mark Griffin owns the BCA pool league and is doing what he can to develop a mens tour. If you want to be in on the ground floor of a movement that may change pool then you should contact Mark.

poolsnark
05-22-2009, 04:49 PM
I don't believe I ever said his videos were bad. In fact, I believe I said "the videos are fine as pool production goes". My issue is with the fact that he's bashing some very hard working people. The WPBA and Billiards International are not created by "giant TV networks". They are put on by very small groups and then the content is given to ESPN in exchange for the rights to sell some of the commercials when ESPN runs the programming.

We all know there are issues with how pool is displayed on TV. There are a kabillion threads on this forum talking about it. The problem has everything to do with the lack of interactivity. To rehash this conversation, what launched poker into huge business was the "hole cam" and the stats so the layman could understand what was going on at the table. Pool does not have that killer app yet, but they are trying. They've played around with pocket cams, a mock "cue cam" that shows where the cue ball is being hit, even a radar gun for breaking. Just because they haven't found that killer app yet doesn't mean you need to bash these producers and say how you could do it better.

Like I said before, your videos are fine. I never said they weren't. If you think you can do better producing an event for TV though, I suggest you build your book, get some sponsors or investors and get it done.

nathandumoulin
05-22-2009, 05:20 PM
Any company that has $100k or more of production equipment and dozens of employees on set seems pretty big to me.

But anyway, other than that, I agree with you. Pool needs that 'extra something' to get it to appeal to the casual viewer.

I honestly think I know what that 'extra something' is....but...well. I've been flammed enough today for saying that I could contribute to the industry. :(

D C 6 Pocket
05-22-2009, 05:30 PM
Any company that has $100k or more of production equipment and dozens of employees on set seems pretty big to me.

But anyway, other than that, I agree with you. Pool needs that 'extra something' to get it to appeal to the casual viewer.

I honestly think I know what that 'extra something' is....but...well. I've been flammed enough today for saying that I could contribute to the industry. :(


Please PM me and I will share something exciting with you.

TX Poolnut
05-22-2009, 05:39 PM
I wish people would stop basing decisions in pool on what TV wants in an event. TV wants jump-cues; TV wants short races, TV wants 7-ball and 9-ball, TV wants a limited # of safes, and last but not least they want clapping on every shot, weather itís a good shot or bad shot.

Well TV got ALL these things and still wonít show any pool live on TV. The little pool shown on TV is a joke. Itís put on months after the original event is over. They still donít show all the games in 7 game races, and production is awful.

F*** TV. When they want to show pool like they show bowling, golf, and tennis, then worry about them. Until then donít let them ruin our game anymore than they already have over the last 20 years. JMOÖbut Iím right :). Johnnyt

Well said Sir.

sjm
05-22-2009, 06:20 PM
I think the entire argument is moot. I don't think it matters how pool is presented on TV, as long as it is on TV and doesn't present poolplayers as lowlife gamblers, because any telecast gives the sport recognition, and brings pool as a sport into the consciousness of viewers. Most viewers, including this one, could care less how long the races are, and don't much care what game is being played.

At least here in the USA, pool's biggest problem right now is the seedy image of the poolroom which, far too often, robs the pool scene of the youthful and the affluent, the two demographic groups that combine to hold the key to the future of the sport. Suggesting that TV has failed in its attempts to place pool in a positive light for viewers is, to me, very short-sighted, because until poolrooms follow suit and make their establishments a) the kind of place that the affluent will feel comfortable in, and b) the kind of place that parents will permit their kids to patronize, nothing TV can do will be enough to sell pool to those demographic groups.

One thing that helps poker's image a lot is the presence of so many well-educated, successful people in its highest ranks. Lawyers, CPA's, financiers, and stock/commodity/options traders, pop up on a regular basis on the poker telecasts I watch. Pool, still viewed by most as a game catering to the less affluent, does not enjoy this advantage.

In short, televised pool can be brought down to the level of the poolroom but I, personally, would hate to see that happen. My hope for the future is that the poolroom can stop negating the TV or internet message that pool is a game suitable for all, and not a game in which the gambling/hustler types will be far too numerous to steer clear of.

Just one man's opinion.

LPHooper03
05-22-2009, 06:32 PM
It would be nice if pool had it's own channel. Since there are so many different kinds of pool, they should televise them all. Let the viewers decide what they want to watch. But I can agree that the production of current pool matches leaves much to be desired.

I like the idea of showing hustling in pool as entertainment. No actors, I would just like to see the tension and the different style players from all around the country. Interviews would be nice, kind like they do with UFC fighters before their big matches. Just show their faces and let them talk smack about the other player.

No matter where you go in this country. There is usually a large pool following. Extrapalate that across the entire country. There are a LOT of pool players and a lot of people that like to watch pool. It's just never on to watch and it's not interesting enough.

LPHooper03
05-22-2009, 06:38 PM
I think the entire argument is moot. I don't think it matters how pool is presented on TV, as long as it is on TV and doesn't present poolplayers as lowlife gamblers, because any telecast gives the sport recognition, and brings pool as a sport into the consciousness of viewers. Most viewers, including this one, could care less how long the races are, and don't much care what game is being played.

At least here in the USA, pool's biggest problem right now is the seedy image of the poolroom which, far too often, robs the pool scene of the youthful and the affluent, the two demographic groups that combine to hold the key to the future of the sport. Suggesting that TV has failed in its attempts to place pool in a positive light for viewers is, to me, very short-sighted, because until poolrooms follow suit and make their establishments a) the kind of place that the affluent will feel comfortable in, and b) the kind of place that parents will permit their kids to patronize, nothing TV can do will be enough to sell pool to those demographic groups.

One thing that helps poker's image a lot is the presence of so many well-educated, successful people in its highest ranks. Lawyers, CPA's, financiers, and stock/commodity/options traders, pop up on a regular basis on the poker telecasts I watch. Pool, still viewed by most as a game catering to the less affluent, does not enjoy this advantage.

In short, televised pool can be brought down to the level of the poolroom but I, personally, would hate to see that happen. My hope for the future is that the poolroom can stop negating the TV or internet message that pool is a game suitable for all, and not a game in which the gambling/hustler types will be far too numerous to steer clear of.

Just one man's opinion.


Take UFC for example. This isn't exactly a sport that parents want to allow their children to harness. But it has made the biggest impact of any sport in the past 20 years. There's something about seeing a man beat the shit out of someone, that keeps people coming back. If pool was televised like it usually is portrayed (in real pool rooms), I think there is enough excitement and darkness that will bring more followers. Yea, comparing UFC to billiards is a long stretch. But, honestly, the more down to earth and nasty it is, the more the audience is going to want to watch it.

Nostroke
05-22-2009, 06:47 PM
The WPBA and Billiards International are not created by "giant TV networks". They are put on by very small groups and then the content is 'given' to ESPN in exchange for the rights to sell some of the commercials when ESPN runs the programming..


Thank you for the clear explanation. Everything i'd heard prior was fuzzy at best.

sjm
05-22-2009, 07:02 PM
Take UFC for example. This isn't exactly a sport that parents want to allow their children to harness. But it has made the biggest impact of any sport in the past 20 years. There's something about seeing a man beat the shit out of someone, that keeps people coming back. If pool was televised like it usually is portrayed (in real pool rooms), I think there is enough excitement and darkness that will bring more followers. Yea, comparing UFC to billiards is a long stretch. But, honestly, the more down to earth and nasty it is, the more the audience is going to want to watch it.

An interesting post, but pool isn't competing with boxing, wrestling, or UFC. If you think that the pro pool product can be redeveloped and remarketed as a man-to-man combat type of sport, all I can say is that I've never really thought about it.

djpstacked03
05-22-2009, 11:06 PM
Excuse my ignorance, but what exactly is TAR (not the stuff on roofs)? I have seen it mentioned multiple times but no explanation.

TAR stands for The Action Report. It's a group of people who help set up action matches between pro's in different billiard disciplines. They live stream the events also. Great site and good billiard influence. Check them out http://www.theactionreport.com/

djpstacked03
05-22-2009, 11:08 PM
whoops. I see muddog got that covered

softshot
05-22-2009, 11:13 PM
there is no effort being put into pool on TV in the US

no money in it...

but MAN O MAN look at snooker

the camera angles the sweet "Hawkeye" system...
that thing is cool it gives a tv viewer a 3D view of the shot..

check this out

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=llFk30Y8g6o&feature=PlayList&p=F30060495992E0D0&index=0

the first use of hawkeye is about 6 minutes in.. but they use it several times if you watch the whole match.

why are we not doing stuff like this for US pool

the camera angles the 3D view the overall production value...

snooker is done right... we should take some notes...JMO

CreeDo
05-23-2009, 12:03 AM
hawkeye is VERY slick. I love it. They do it so seamlessly.

DogsPlayingPool
05-23-2009, 12:11 AM
I think a compromise needs to be made. You can please the players by sticking with what they want....longer races of 10ball. You then edit the match down to a condensed version consisting of the highlight racks. This way the players get to play a proper game, but the viewer isnt stuck watching safety battles. The match will also fit within the required time limit for TV.

If you want to solve the slow play, just add in a medium length shot clock. The players wont mind if the time is reasonable, and it makes for better TV.

I have no explanation why races for TV are not longer. They already edit the shorter races for the one hour granted for a telecast, so what difference the race length makes to the network is beyond me. Why does it matter how long the race is, they will still only have time to show about the same number of complete games. So just show highlights and recap the games being edited out like they do already. I just don't get why the race length matters to television.


Pool however does not do this. We pick the TV table matches randomly. Although this is more fair, it's not the proper way to give the sport the necessary exposure. Watching two unknows play really isnt all that exciting. You dont know who to route for, and in the end, arent nearly as concerned with the outcome of the match. It makes for less drama, less excitement, and ultimately less viewers.

This one I don't get. How many TV telecasts are randomly choosing what matches to broadcast? They are quite deliberately chosen and the ones chosen are usually the semi-finals and final. Who plays in these matches is determined by the players in competition - it's not a random pick. Perhaps in some events like the Mosconi Cup they are choosing certain matches for the coverage of a day's matches to put on TV but I highly doubt they do it randomly. More likely it was the more interesting or exciting matches or matches involving known players. Again, not random. If you are saying that people would rather watch a first round match between Mika and Efren than the final involving two lesser knowns, I would say that is debatable.


And lastly....we cant keep changing games. Baseball is baseball, hockey is hockey, soccer is soccer, etc. But pool....its 10ball, 9abll, snooker, 7ball, 6ball, bank pool, etc. This just doesnt work.

Personally I think the variety of games that can be played is one of the great things about pool. But in any event television has chosen one game to represent pool to the masses and that is rotation play. Almost always 9 Ball, but once in a great while 10 Ball or that screwy 7 Ball. But the rules are essentially the same for all of them so I don't really see this as much of an issue.

I'm not sure what the problem is or how to fix it. Forget about the non-player for a moment. I'm not sure the non-player was ever a factor in ratings of pool on television even when the ratings were higher. But it just seems that for whatever reason, the pool playing public just doesn't watch pool on TV like they used to. Frankly I don't think the pool playing public supports professional pool as much as it used to in any way.

Straight pool used to be televised nationally on major networks, and thousands would attend these matches in person. Neither of these is true anymore. We all know it doesn't attract a TV audience. And I was at the recent Predator 10 Ball event. It was a terrific tournament full of world class players and compelling matches. Trust me when I tell you I doubt there more than 100 people in attendance at any session. If you watched the semis and final on the internet you would have noticed had you been there you could have sat at one of the empty seats ringside. And keep in mind that this was staged alongside the BCA 8 Ball Nationals where there were literally thousands of serious pool players no further than down the hall from the event that could have attended with very little effort.

So I just think the problem is way deeper seeded than longer races with marquee stars only playing whatever the one pool game is that is deemed most attractive to television.

DogsPlayingPool
05-23-2009, 12:20 AM
DP, sorry.

softshot
05-23-2009, 02:00 AM
.................................................. .......................

pocketspeed
05-23-2009, 06:00 AM
I think the entire argument is moot. I don't think it matters how pool is presented on TV, as long as it is on TV and doesn't present poolplayers as lowlife gamblers, because any telecast gives the sport recognition, and brings pool as a sport into the consciousness of viewers. Most viewers, including this one, could care less how long the races are, and don't much care what game is being played.

At least here in the USA, pool's biggest problem right now is the seedy image of the poolroom which, far too often, robs the pool scene of the youthful and the affluent, the two demographic groups that combine to hold the key to the future of the sport. Suggesting that TV has failed in its attempts to place pool in a positive light for viewers is, to me, very short-sighted, because until poolrooms follow suit and make their establishments a) the kind of place that the affluent will feel comfortable in, and b) the kind of place that parents will permit their kids to patronize, nothing TV can do will be enough to sell pool to those demographic groups.

One thing that helps poker's image a lot is the presence of so many well-educated, successful people in its highest ranks. Lawyers, CPA's, financiers, and stock/commodity/options traders, pop up on a regular basis on the poker telecasts I watch. Pool, still viewed by most as a game catering to the less affluent, does not enjoy this advantage.

In short, televised pool can be brought down to the level of the poolroom but I, personally, would hate to see that happen. My hope for the future is that the poolroom can stop negating the TV or internet message that pool is a game suitable for all, and not a game in which the gambling/hustler types will be far too numerous to steer clear of.

Just one man's opinion.

the real problem with pool on tv is just the fact that as a spectator sport pool is just boring to watch unless you already love the game (even then sometimes...). there all these millions of recreational players that play weekly who dont have a clue who the professional players are and thats your fan base? you think i am wrong here just go to your poolhall and take a poll and you'll find out. i dont think pool will ever be popular on tv no matter what we do. internet streaming, now i think thats the future. even thought the technology isnt perfect yet you still get to see live matches.


"I have no explanation why races for TV are not longer. They already edit the shorter races for the one hour granted for a telecast, so what difference the race length makes to the network is beyond me. Why does it matter how long the race is, they will still only have time to show about the same number of complete games. So just show highlights and recap the games being edited out like they do already. I just don't get why the race length matters to television"

the production companies charge wbpa etc by the hour. the longer the race the more the cost to produce, even if its all edited down to an hour or whatever. short race=less money to produce

brian

D C 6 Pocket
05-23-2009, 08:13 AM
the real problem with pool on tv is just the fact that as a spectator sport pool is just boring to watch unless you already love the game (even then sometimes...). there all these millions of recreational players that play weekly who dont have a clue who the professional players are and thats your fan base? you think i am wrong here just go to your poolhall and take a poll and you'll find out. i dont think pool will ever be popular on tv no matter what we do. internet streaming, now i think thats the future. even thought the technology isnt perfect yet you still get to see live matches.


"I have no explanation why races for TV are not longer. They already edit the shorter races for the one hour granted for a telecast, so what difference the race length makes to the network is beyond me. Why does it matter how long the race is, they will still only have time to show about the same number of complete games. So just show highlights and recap the games being edited out like they do already. I just don't get why the race length matters to television"

the production companies charge wbpa etc by the hour. the longer the race the more the cost to produce, even if its all edited down to an hour or whatever. short race=less money to produce

brian

How about this. Golf has a large audience, pros make lots of money, amateurs support the game and TV shows the events live. Maybe its because...... they are televising more than 1 hole and more than 2 Golfers playing at a time for the entire show and the game they are playing requires posting a score that the audience can relate to. When its over you can play and see how your game stacks up against the pros you just watched.

How do you do this in pool?

cleary
05-23-2009, 10:48 AM
the real problem with pool on tv is just the fact that as a spectator sport pool is just boring to watch unless you already love the game (even then sometimes...). there all these millions of recreational players that play weekly who dont have a clue who the professional players are and thats your fan base? you think i am wrong here just go to your poolhall and take a poll and you'll find out. i dont think pool will ever be popular on tv no matter what we do. internet streaming, now i think thats the future. even thought the technology isnt perfect yet you still get to see live matches.

100% agree, though at SJM's poolhall, it might be a different story. Most at Amsterdam are fairly/very knowledgeable.

But I do disagree with SJM. Presentation is EVERYTHING. Just showing pool isnt enough to draw people/sponsors in.

I think Matchroom Sports does a pretty good job with their film work/quality. Though their graphics need an extreme makeover.

nathandumoulin
05-23-2009, 11:28 AM
the real problem with pool on tv is just the fact that as a spectator sport pool is just boring to watch unless you already love the game (even then sometimes...). there all these millions of recreational players that play weekly who dont have a clue who the professional players are and thats your fan base? you think i am wrong here just go to your poolhall and take a poll and you'll find out. i dont think pool will ever be popular on tv no matter what we do. internet streaming, now i think thats the future. even thought the technology isnt perfect yet you still get to see live matches.

You might be right, but there's something I'm just not convinced about. Take golf for instance. It's even more boring to watch than pool. Sometimes it takes a guy over 5 minutes for one shot, and the rest of the footage is him walking to follow his ball around. It's really not a spectator sport either, and yet it's done fantastic on TV.

Is it's success due to the sports image, the large fan base, or the huge dollars behind it?

DogsPlayingPool
05-23-2009, 12:02 PM
Good question. I play golf and I enjoy watching it on TV just because as a golfer it interests me to watch a professional swing a golf club. I'm not sure this translates into watching a pro pool player stroke the cue ball. It is also inherently more picturesque than most sports.

One other important factor is that golf is LIVE!

Also, most other sports that are televised are more interactive and dynamic, meaning that both competitors are involved at the same time. Even in golf, because they have cameras all over the course, what one leader is doing can immediately be followed by what the other leader is doing, even if he is on a different hole. But pool is naturally less dramatic. It is not dynamic between the competitors. No matter what one competitor is doing, the other is not doing anything while he is sitting in his chair.

Yes, I think the dollars have something to do with it. How golf evolved into such a big money sport is another question, but the fact remains that there is something more compelling about watching what many consider a boring sport on television, when there is $1,000,000 at stake.

BVal
05-23-2009, 12:04 PM
Good question. I play golf and I enjoy watching it on TV just because as a golfer it interests me to watch a professional swing a golf club. I'm not sure this translates into watching a pro pool player stroke the cue ball. It is also inherently more picturesque than most sports.

One other important factor is that golf is LIVE!

Also, most other sports that are televised are more interactive and dynamic, meaning that both competitors are involved at the same time. Even in golf, because they have cameras all over the course, what one leader is doing can immediately be followed by what the other leader is doing, even if he is on a different hole. But pool is naturally less dramatic. It is not dynamic between the competitors. No matter what one competitor is doing, the other is not doing anything while he is sitting in his chair.
What if they made pool a little more like Hockey?

BVal

DogsPlayingPool
05-23-2009, 12:07 PM
What if they made pool a little more like Hockey?

BVal

Without a doubt Strickland would lead the league in penalty minutes. :grin:

nathandumoulin
05-23-2009, 12:15 PM
Without a doubt Strickland would lead the league in penalty minutes. :grin:

lol :thumbup:

BVal
05-23-2009, 12:47 PM
Without a doubt Strickland would lead the league in penalty minutes. :grin:
Dennis Hatch would probably be the best checker/defenseman imo.

BVal