Suggestion for the APA

Grilled Cheese

Grilled Cheese

p.i.i.t.h.
Silver Member
Future of pool on TV...

Should the future of pool on TV be the promotion of professional play, or amateur play?



Why it is always assumed that the pros are what people want to watch. In this era of reality TV...it seems to me that it would be more interesting for people to watch people just like themselves playing and winning. Wouldn't that draw more people into the game?
 
Last edited:
Grilled Cheese said:
Should the future of pool on TV be the promotion of professional play, or amateur play?



Why it is always assumed that the pros are what people want to watch. In this era of reality TV...it seems to me that it would be more interesting for people to watch people just like themselves playing and winning. Wouldn't that draw more people into the game?
Click to expand...

Maybe it would work if they followed these points for a reality tv show:

1. all players live together in a house/condo/ranch/desert for a period of a few weeks

2. must have the typical characters cast (tough guy, pretty girl, tom boy, nerd, ect.)

3. constant recaps and replays so the 41 minutes is actually only 25 minutes of new material (previously on, pre/post commercial break recaps)

4. elimination challenge at the end of each episode

5. enhanced drama from the producers


Although, based on my times in the pool hall, the characters alone could be worth watching.
 
I think it would be great to watch a National Championship, be it APA, or BCAPL, or VNEA, whomever. I don't know how any network would package it, but I'd try to watch as much as I could.
 
I would have zero interest in watching amateurs play pool on TV. If I want to watch a hack whack some balls around, I could film myself. JMO.
 
Ghosst said:
Suggestion for the APA: Sell out to Mark Griffin, he actually listens.
Click to expand...


Ouch!


At first I didn't think highly of Griffin's idea. But after giving it a lot of though, I think I understand what his ideas lead to down the road if they were executed perfectly. I think I see his vision of what pool could be if both amateur and pro pool were integrated somewhat, and each was supportive of the other. Under one roof, promoting each other and being a family. It might just be the solution pool has been looking for. Only downside for many is, it's not a get rich quick scheme or a magic bullet. It's growth over the long haul with hard work.
 
Mr Hoppe said:
I would have zero interest in watching amateurs play pool on TV. If I want to watch a hack whack some balls around, I could film myself. JMO.
Click to expand...


Well, a lot of people watch poker. Poker infests cable TV. Most of those people are amateurs that are playing. What makes them pro? The fact that they made it a few tables into a tournament where they catch a little camera time? I don't think so.


It wouldn't be about creating loyal constant TV watchers, but people who follow it somewhat, and who become inspired to go and try it themselves.


Exactly as you just said, the average person will watch those awful APA bangers drive balls into rails for 11 innings and then make the 8 ball to win, say $10,000...they will freak out and say "what the hell? I can do that too!" ...


Here's some out of the box thinking, don't give pros $10,000 winnings. For what? What does that accomplish?

Instead, give APA SL3's $10,000, $20,000...maybe even $50,000 winnings.



Crazy huh? Not if you think about it....want to attract large masses of players, then you have to make the attraction ACCESSIBLE to large masses of players. Most players who pick up a cue will never be better than a C level player. Thus, the competition and format must be one where C level players and lower have a chance.

Pro pool appeals to that 0.001% of the population....is it any wonder it's not successful.


Maybe pool has it backwards. Pro this, pro that. Screw the pros. Want fans and participants? Pool has to be accessible. Poker is. No physical skill needed. Plop your fat ass in a chair, memorize all the percentages for various hands and flops, gain experience and you're competitive with the top dogs. That's why every year in poker there's new champions no one ever seen before. Because there's no real elite skill that only a small percentage of people can acquire. There's tens of thousands of people capable of winning any tournament.
 
So amateur players are all "hacks"?

Mr Hoppe said:
I would have zero interest in watching amateurs play pool on TV. If I want to watch a hack whack some balls around, I could film myself. JMO.
Click to expand...

What planet do you play on?

Donny L
Amateur player
PPIA/ACS Instructor
Gainesville, Fl
 
Mr Hoppe said:
I would have zero interest in watching amateurs play pool on TV. If I want to watch a hack whack some balls around, I could film myself. JMO.
Click to expand...

The question I have for you is this: When you are playing in a tournament, do you watch the other matches? Aren't you interested in who is winning, and how the matches play out?

That's why I would watch. I'm interested in pool, and I like to watch others play. If there was a championship match on TV, no matter what level of player, I would try to watch it if I could. Whether they played better than me (likely) or just as poorly as me.

Could you get an audience for it, is the big question. I don't think so, but were such a match on TV, I would certainly enjoy it.
 
I stated my opinion, and labled it as such. I do not like to watch amateur pool, period. On the other hand, I spend more money than most people to watch professional level pool on streams and video.

Again, IMO, what pool needs is a junior development program, not a reality show.
 
Mr Hoppe said:
I stated my opinion, and labled it as such. I do not like to watch amateur pool, period. On the other hand, I spend more money than most people to watch professional level pool on streams and video.

Again, IMO, what pool needs is a junior development program, not a reality show.
Click to expand...

Will that make the prize money grow?
 
Does anyone think $50,000 prize money to SL3 level players is a radical idea? I think it is, but it makes sense to me.


Pool isn't much of a spectator sport, it's more of a participant sport. I've written essay sized posts on this board detailing why (about a year ago). If you want to attract participants, yet there's a skill component, you need to have money. And you can't be giving the money to that fraction of a percent that are good enough because they're the elite and the best of the best. You have to give it to the people who you want to attract.


When I see SVB win, I don't think to myself "I can do that too" ...but if I saw someone my skill level, I'd go give it a shot. What the current system of pool expects is for me to pay and watch others play and win money. For some reason, that works great for the major sports. Not in pool. Accept it for what it is.


Poker has a lot of viewers, but even more participants. Pool is the same way, participants. So find a way to make money from participation as oppose to spectators. To do that, the money must shift from the elite pros down to a level that is accessible to most people.


Sure, that means that every tournament will likely have a different winner, and almost never will there be any consecutive winner or two time winner. Well, guess what? That's just like poker. Most tournaments never see repeat winners. Always someone new due to the huge numbers of participants all of which have an almost equal chance of winning. When that happens, it's anyone's game. And that is attractive.

What is not attractive is being prey for others to make money off of you.


You have to provide a chance and hope.
 
Don't like to watch amateurs?

easy-e said:
Will that make the prize money grow?
Click to expand...

I've seen amateur players run 100 balls in 14-1, 13 racks of 9-ball and 8 racks of 8-ball. A former (amateur) teammate won $26,000 in a match game, and another $19,000. I guess that would be boring for you, but I enjoyed it!

Donny L
PPIA/ACS Instructor
Gainesville, Fl
 
Donny Lutz said:
I've seen amateur players run 100 balls in 14-1, 13 racks of 9-ball and 8 racks of 8-ball. A former (amateur) teammate won $26,000 in a match game, and another $19,000. I guess that would be boring for you, but I enjoyed it!

Donny L
PPIA/ACS Instructor
Gainesville, Fl
Click to expand...



I'm talking about real amateurs. Not that level where the line is blurred between amateur and semi-pro, or where the definition of amateur is one who doesn't make a living at it, even though they can play like a world champion.


Century runs in 14.1, 8 packs and all that...that's not what I call amateur.


I want to see an APA SL3, who has no stroke and has not yet developed the ability to draw the cue ball at all, be in a match battling for $50,000.


If they can do it, everyone will feel the same way and might be willing to pay to get into locale or regional tournaments.
 
Donny Lutz said:
I've seen amateur players run 100 balls in 14-1, 13 racks of 9-ball and 8 racks of 8-ball. A former (amateur) teammate won $26,000 in a match game, and another $19,000. I guess that would be boring for you, but I enjoyed it!

Donny L
PPIA/ACS Instructor
Gainesville, Fl
Click to expand...

Why would that be boring for me? I just wanted to know how promoting junior pool will increase prize money for everyone. I love pool (playing more than watching).
 
Mr Hoppe said:
With no future players will there be a need for prize money?
Click to expand...

How many of today's players came out of a "junior development program"? I think we will always have pool players, maybe we need to give them something to play for?
 
Donny Lutz said:
I've seen amateur players run 100 balls in 14-1, 13 racks of 9-ball and 8 racks of 8-ball. A former (amateur) teammate won $26,000 in a match game, and another $19,000. I guess that would be boring for you, but I enjoyed it!

Donny L
PPIA/ACS Instructor
Gainesville, Fl
Click to expand...
You are being difficult...obtuse, at best.

WHat you toss up is hardly the widely accepted definition of amature. In fact, that is certainly exemplary of pro-level pool.

One cannot use definition of 'pro' being one who makes living solely by playing, it is a skill level.

And regardless what it is called, I do not want to watch a couple of people bang balls into the rail, miscue 1/20 shots and win games by sinking an 8 that has hung in the pocket.
 
Obtuse?

Black-Balled said:
You are being difficult...obtuse, at best.

WHat you toss up is hardly the widely accepted definition of amature. In fact, that is certainly exemplary of pro-level pool.

One cannot use definition of 'pro' being one who makes living solely by playing, it is a skill level.

And regardless what it is called, I do not want to watch a couple of people bang balls into the rail, miscue 1/20 shots and win games by sinking an 8 that has hung in the pocket.
Click to expand...

First definition of obtuse: dull-witted.
Insults don't add to your argument.
I was responding to your disdain for league amateurs, calling them "hacks".
The fellows mentioned above were all AMATEUR league players. There are definitions for "pro players" used by all organizations, and they're fairly consistent. The "debate" between us is whether or not amateurs are hacks and not worth watching on tv. You say yes, and I say no. Can't we leave it at that?

Donny L
One of thousands of amateur players who most folks would not consider "hacks".
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top