I like Shaw and Grabe a lot and think the world of them as players, but ...

... in the end, what any of the men think an event ought to pay is of no import. Equally true is that what I think an event should pay is of no import.

Producers of men's events must pay out to the extent that revenues allow, and if they pay amounts that are irreconcilable with revenue (as the 2006 IPT did), their events will fall off the map quickly enough. Each male pro can determine the payouts prior to making each participation decision and must evaluate when/whether their participation is justified.

Whether smaller events offer Matchroom ranking points has almost no impact on stars of the game like Shaw, who can qualify for the Mosconi with or without these events. These events are, to a greater extent, for those either a) hoping to climb the ladder by earning ranking points without having to do much travel, or b) strengthening their case for Mosconi Cup inclusion.

I'd like to see the men earn more, but they're not likely to strongarm event producers into raising prize funds unless they are able to help them to build a revenue stream that justifies increased prize funds. If they are unable to do so, then they make such revenue growth far less likely and hurt their own prospects.

At this point, we know that Shaw, SVB, Fedor and Josh all skipped the PLP event in favor of the Las Vegas Open, and SVB and Shaw did not play in the European Open, either. If this is the beginning of a decline in loyalty to WNT events among the game's most recognizable players, and we do not yet know whether this is the case, the revenue growth needed for prize money increases will not be realized and, ultimately, what they are paying over at the Predator PBS is irrelevant, for that tour, over time, will be similarly constrained by the revenue it generates. Here in America, we have already seen Predator walk away from the US Pro Billiard Series, so there is precedent for the presumption that Predator would discontinue the new tour if the finances don't add up.

Right now, men's pro pool needs both the WNT and the Predator PBS and earnings opportunities will be plentiful for the pro players as long as both survive. At least for now, there is little evidence that many male pro players can make a solid living if one of these goes away.

Hence, I think it's a bad time in the history of our sport for top male pros to be publicly denouncing the organizations that are giving them a chance to earn a living. To me, that is biting the hand that feeds you.

GideonF said:

Bob,

Are you aware of any such unpublished guidelines? I mean obviously if they exist I’m presuming they don’t say that, but what DO they say?

Click to expand...

The guy who claimed they exist did not respond to my request for more info. My guess is that if there are such guidelines, they were created by someone who doesn't follow the WSR (World Standardized Rules).

With the stories about LIV Golf on life support coming out last week, the theme of many of these articles is that the Saudi PIF has been divesting from sports in recent months and scaling back (sold their interest in a soccer team and some other stuff). I know that pool is a drop in the bucket for them but that's still a million dollar prize fund every year plus operating costs.

Bump

dquarasr said:

I am not a golfer. I tried it many years ago and decided it wasn’t for me.

I am watching The Masters. I have previously thought that golf is inherently harder and crueler than pool. And pool can be pretty darned cruel: the rattle leaving the $ ball in the pocket; the roll that lands 1/4” too long or too short hooking yourself; the scratch after hitting a ball on the table you didn’t account for; the missed straight-in long shot where the CB is 4’ from the OB and OB in turn 4’ from the pocket. All these can be avoided or fixed by experience, and better focus.

But playing pool I’ve never missed a shot by fractions of an inch and had the OB run down a hill dozens of yards away. I’ve never had an OB land in sand or water because I misjudged a shot maybe 1% short of the power I needed, or behind a tree. I’ve never had to calculate how much the CB or OB will curve because the slate is uphill the first half of a shot and downhill the second half (well, maybe at some halls, lol.)

Pool is tough and frustrating enough for me. Golf seems much more so.

Click to expand...

Another consideration "playing pool" is easy, actually learning how to play pool well at the upper levels is a long and difficult undertaking (my experience). I would argue that mastering pool is impossible. Most guys that have ever ran 7-8 straight, strung 50 balls playing 14.1 etc. remember each time that has happened. (I know many very good players that may have never strung 8 or ran 50. Ralph Greenleaf, Willie Hoppe and a few others may have played 100 or better to score but that is an amazing and very difficult thing to pull off. Playing pool is easy, understanding the whole game and the intricacies is much more challenging and none of us know what we don't know. Golf I think is the same on a bigger less predictable playing surface.

El Toro said:

And how can you make your comment about how cheap the aim tool is? Do you know how much it is? Or are you making that comment out of ignorance? Until you hear from that horse's mouth, then I guess you don't know.

Click to expand...

El Toro said:

I will be waiting for you to upload a video of you using that device and consistently making a ball through it without hitting it. Since you're a betting man, I bet you couldn't do it twice in a row!

Click to expand...

I know you like your device. And for very specific situations it may be cool (like for a true beginner and maybe for gimmicky training / funsies). And, admittedly, the auditory feedback and movement of the hoop is a plus. But even with that, hoop trainers really aren't a great tool for a host of reasons. For example, with the 2.75" (well, with any of them really), you can still hit the cue ball with unintended English and have it go through the hoop. It's actually pretty easy to shoot through 2.75" side. That's about 1/4" of room on each side of the hoop. If you hit an object ball 1/4" off target, you will almost certainly miss the shot. [even the 2.375" hoop has plenty of room]. So you need to be pretty new to the game for that to have any value.

As Bob was alluding, you can accomplish the same level of training without hauling around something relatively large (with a cost component).

It's also super easy to replicate (and improve on the design). Maybe a 15 minute design and 45 minutes to print at this size with one color change (and you could streamline it and make it print even faster).

Definitely an "A" for effort and trying to bring something to the pool masses. But low marks for the somewhat confrontational attitude.

-td

(Edit: I designed and printed one in under an hour)

dquarasr said:

I am not a golfer. I tried it many years ago and decided it wasn’t for me.

I am watching The Masters. I have previously thought that golf is inherently harder and crueler than pool. And pool can be pretty darned cruel: the rattle leaving the $ ball in the pocket; the roll that lands 1/4” too long or too short hooking yourself; the scratch after hitting a ball on the table you didn’t account for; the missed straight-in long shot where the CB is 4’ from the OB and OB in turn 4’ from the pocket. All these can be avoided or fixed by experience, and better focus.

But playing pool I’ve never missed a shot by fractions of an inch and had the OB run down a hill dozens of yards away. I’ve never had an OB land in sand or water because I misjudged a shot maybe 1% short of the power I needed, or behind a tree. I’ve never had to calculate how much the CB or OB will curve because the slate is uphill the first half of a shot and downhill the second half (well, maybe at some halls, lol.)

Pool is tough and frustrating enough for me. Golf seems much more so.

Click to expand...

The person that I learned the most about playing pool from had a saying "Pool is the second hardest game in the world" The only game he considered harder was golf. He also referred to pool as "the game of kings"

Bob Jewett said:

The most irritating to me was the guy on YouTube who said I said you should not use any physics knowledge, just go with the order of the contacts you can actually see. He said that after I objected to:

[BeginGarbage] BCA/WPA referee guidelines (which are different from the rulebook available to players) specify that the referee must see the foul itself in these situations. Watching for after-the-fact "evidence", such as the direction the cue ball travels after contact, is not the correct way to referee. You must actually SEE the wrong ball be hit first, to call it a foul shot .And as we all know, it's very difficult to see, especially when the shot is played with speed. Benefit of the doubt goes to the shooter. [EndGarbage] ​

Click to expand...

Bob,

Are you aware of any such unpublished guidelines? I mean obviously if they exist I’m presuming they don’t say that, but what DO they say?

You didn't Just another healthy perspective like yours.
I worked on golf courses in my early yrs in the midwest/Wisconsin especially, and totally understand play conditions, cup setting and the frinkin' weather.
I worked at the Playboy Club in Lake Geneva WI in my college yrs, where the members complained about the sand traps.
One of em, if you landed there, you could NOT see the flag, or anything cept the sun.
We hauled in many semi flat beds of rolled up grass to cover/remove at least 15 sand traps.
bm