skogstokig said:

i think the agreed upon opinion is that book wise, winning one pocket and tom wirth's book are the best books. i haven't read them, but i've read upscale one pocket and it's quite rudimentary. i wouldn't bother with it.

i think it's beneficial to watch videos/streams of older players of a slightly lower than top tier level, ike runnels, john henderson, etc. they have the moves, and they need to use the moves a lot more than a pure shooter. or than a wizard like chohan

Click to expand...

Tom Wirth has a YouTube channel with some excellent videos...

shits expensive bruh

trob said:

this is why…

Click to expand...

Maybe tax law has changed, but in my experience, tax paid to a foreign country is directly deductible from your tax on that money in the US. Also, there are individual tax treaties with each country, and that complicates things. Some foreign nationals are exempt from the 30% withholding on winnings in the US, for example.

JPB2 said:

I can’t think of a sport where the local level or amateur leagues fund the professional level. Why would they? ...

Click to expand...

My understanding is that in Europe, the lower levels of players partly fund the expenses of the higher-level players through their memberships in their clubs and leagues. There are also sponsors at the higher levels.

Why would they? To help the sport. Of course, not all people feel that way.

There are one or two snooker players who use the mechanical bridge (rest) with a normal stroking arm position by using a long extension. Corey Deuel has also done it. In both cases, they use normal mechanical bridges/rests.

Bob Jewett said:

The APA is a business. They cater to players who average an APA 4-5 skill level. They do sponsor top players for events, such as exhibitions. I think Earl did some and Jeanette Lee and Fedor certainly have. But their main goal is to make a profit and evidently they don't see a way to do that with pro events.

I don't think it's the prize money that brings the APA players to Las Vegas. I think there are over 10k players now at the APA national events and the CSI combined events in March bring in about 13,000 bodies. On average, it's a moderately expensive vacation.

I think it would be great if US league pool did support a pro tour, but beyond CSI hosting the PBS events in March, I don't see it happening. If each league player in the US paid $5 per year towards a pro tour, that would be over $3 million. If a million came out for production costs of a tour, that still leaves two million for added money. It's not going to happen because that money would effectively be coming out of the pockets of the league businesses.

Click to expand...

I can’t think of a sport where the local level or amateur leagues fund the professional level. Why would they? High school football doesn’t fund the NFL, beer league hockey doesn’t fund the NHL, etc…. Sure the participants may buy the product because they like the sport, but their costs to participate don’t include a direct subsidy. That’s why their tax dollars have to be used for the owners’ stadiums.

Governing bodies OTOH do fund pro events in some cases, but generally one championship. The USGA and R&A putting on the US Open and Open Championship respectively, as well as corresponding women’s and seniors opens. These events have some amateurs still, but are basically pro events now. Pro tours and governing bodies are separate in all the sports I can think of.

League pool has its own model and seems to work. Multiple leagues make a go of it. I think the UPL may use the league to promote professional pool. IIRC the website of the English business said that. I don’t know how the US UPL fits into that. We’ll see how that goes in time.

The formula for pro pool being a stable, successful spectator sport hasn’t been worked out/ stumbled upon. It would be nice if it did, maybe the WNT will work long term.

Still no 9-ball World Championship?