John & Mario Morra versus Oscar & ernesto be a great match to watch. Get this one on. I'll take Johnny and Mario no offence Oscar if your reading this
If that match ever goes off, you have a bet with me Sir!!
Open Offer to Danny Harriman and John Schmidt from TAR
- Thread starter JCIN
- Start date
If that match ever goes off, you have a bet with me Sir!!
One problem, why would the guy who lost the 1st 2 sets want to play the 3rd if he has no chance at winning anything.
One. They have to finish to get their loser's portion (1k)
Two. They hate each other.
Three. We don't need a three.
Nick
They can finish doesn't mean they will try.
Not to many are going to watch a match where one guy has nothing to gain by winning.
I like the bonus, but maybe offering 500 to the guy who that has already lost if he wins the 3rd set might work.
Gives him a reason to play hard.
How about the winner of each leg earns 1500 and the loser earns 500. Plus bring in a goat as the official mascot.
Last edited:
My first thought when reading the op was Danny would love the format. I remember watching him get smoked in the ten ball and then he posted how 10 ball was not his strength.
I'm very confident Justin will make sure the rubber match features all three disciplines like the first two.
I'm very confident Justin will make sure the rubber match features all three disciplines like the first two.
I wouldnt have a problem with just making each discipline worth $2000 and if someone loses all three sets they are just out of luck. Guessing the players wouldnt care for that but it is the simplest way to get all three games played.
After some thought I agree all three games need to be played. Just have to figure a way to make it work out.
Edit: Ok...we have $6K to work with so what if we guarantee each guy $1000 that leaves $4000 in the middle so each disciple would be worth $1000 and the over all winner gets $1000 bonus. ? I am liking the sound of this so someone poke some holes in it. Doing it this way means if if it goes 2-1 the loser actually makes $1000 more than originally stated but it makes getting all three games in a certainty.
After some thought I agree all three games need to be played. Just have to figure a way to make it work out.
Edit: Ok...we have $6K to work with so what if we guarantee each guy $1000 that leaves $4000 in the middle so each disciple would be worth $1000 and the over all winner gets $1000 bonus. ? I am liking the sound of this so someone poke some holes in it. Doing it this way means if if it goes 2-1 the loser actually makes $1000 more than originally stated but it makes getting all three games in a certainty.
Last edited:
I like it and here is why: Usually you would have a big difference between first and second prize money to ensure that the players play their hearts out. This match there is no chance of anyone sluffing or splitting or saving.
These guys are going to be out for blood and focused every shot.
What's all this "bad blood" about? I tried to search but came up with nothing
Very true, but something tells me neither one would be interested in cutting up the money.
2000$
You can make each set 2k. Then if the 10 ball comes off with someone having won the first two it's for 1K.
So if one player wins the first two sets they are +4k and the other gets 1k and they play for 1k. If they split, then the 10 ball is worth 2k.
You can make each set 2k. Then if the 10 ball comes off with someone having won the first two it's for 1K.
So if one player wins the first two sets they are +4k and the other gets 1k and they play for 1k. If they split, then the 10 ball is worth 2k.
I would love this to happen, but I do not think $6000 is enough to make it happen. Just saying.
a free shot at 6 dimes, all expenses paid, isn't enough? I think, and hope your wrong...
lol, because both guys are millionaires? just saying.
A free week in Vegas, guaranteed $1000 and a free shot at 5 more dimes?
<-------would be in shock if this generous offer isn't accepted by both parties.
Well when you figure most guys play for 30-40% on a $10K stake that puts the winner getting $3-$4K and the loser getting nothing. Figure TAR pays both guys a fee (usually less than a $1000 but for arguments sake lets call it that) so best case is the winner gets $5000 and loser gets $1000.
So from a players point of view this is exactly the same as if they were playing for $20,000 in the middle except they dont have to deal with finding a backer.
If the offer isn't good enough so be it...on to the next one.
I think you are crazy. Every time they played for $10,000 do you not think they had backers? Do you not think the backer wanted to make at least $4,000 if he was risking the whole $10,000. This is a much better deal than they had previously and neither one has to risk $10,000 of their backer's money.
I see a few good ways to do this. First and foremost though, aside from whatever fine structure is implemented, no matter what format is chosen it has to be stipulated that all three sets must be played and completed. If a player chooses to forfeit at any time, he forfeits any and all monies earned from all of the sets, including any previous ones.
The first way to do this is to play each set with the winner getting $1600 and the loser getting $400. If it goes 3-0, the winner will have earned $4800, and the loser $1200. If it goes 2-1, the winner will have earned $3600, and the loser $2400. This way they both earn pretty good money, particularly if the sets are split.
The second method helps to create a little more separation between what the winner and loser end up earning. Each set is played with the winner getting $1350, and the loser getting $350. Whoever has won the majority of the sets when it is over gets a $900 bonus. So if it goes 3-0, then the winner will take $4950, and the loser $1050. If it goes 2-1, then the winner will take $3950, and the loser $2050. At a minimum the winner will be winning about double what the loser takes, and if it is a sweep, nearly five times more.
Another idea that can be used with either of the above options is to secure an advertiser to sponsor a bonus of say $1000 (or whatever advertising charge is appropriate considering the risk) if one of the players can sweep all three sets, similar to the way that advertisers sponsor a prize for a hole in one in golf, or for a maximum 147 break in a snooker. I would think that this would be pretty appealing to sponsors because the chances of a sweep are fairly low and they may just end up getting their advertising for free. Obviously you would want it prepaid and just refund it if it doesn't happen.
Or you could structure it where you negotiate an amount you keep for yourselves as an advertising fee if there is no sweep, and you refund the rest. Of course the "usual" advertising rate that would have been charged would lay somewhere between these two numbers, and because of the risk involved they are actually paying less than usual if there is no sweep (and you earn a few bucks), and they are paying more than usual if there is a sweep, and it all averages out. Any number of ways you could work this.
Or you could just have the advertiser sponsor the bonus money for the overall winner instead of the sweep, which would work especially well with the first method.
Another way yet to work this is to have the advertiser sponsor a bonus for both. Say $300 for the person that takes the sets by a 2-1 majority, and an additional $700 if they can take it in a 3-0 sweep. Obviously you use whatever numbers are appropriate based on what you usually charge for advertising, with your "usual" rate falling somewhere between the two but probably closer the "majority win" number. Whether they sponsor just for a sweep, or just for the overall win, or for an overall win and also for a sweep, they could be billed as your "bonus money" sponsor for the event.
The first way to do this is to play each set with the winner getting $1600 and the loser getting $400. If it goes 3-0, the winner will have earned $4800, and the loser $1200. If it goes 2-1, the winner will have earned $3600, and the loser $2400. This way they both earn pretty good money, particularly if the sets are split.
The second method helps to create a little more separation between what the winner and loser end up earning. Each set is played with the winner getting $1350, and the loser getting $350. Whoever has won the majority of the sets when it is over gets a $900 bonus. So if it goes 3-0, then the winner will take $4950, and the loser $1050. If it goes 2-1, then the winner will take $3950, and the loser $2050. At a minimum the winner will be winning about double what the loser takes, and if it is a sweep, nearly five times more.
Another idea that can be used with either of the above options is to secure an advertiser to sponsor a bonus of say $1000 (or whatever advertising charge is appropriate considering the risk) if one of the players can sweep all three sets, similar to the way that advertisers sponsor a prize for a hole in one in golf, or for a maximum 147 break in a snooker. I would think that this would be pretty appealing to sponsors because the chances of a sweep are fairly low and they may just end up getting their advertising for free. Obviously you would want it prepaid and just refund it if it doesn't happen.
Or you could structure it where you negotiate an amount you keep for yourselves as an advertising fee if there is no sweep, and you refund the rest. Of course the "usual" advertising rate that would have been charged would lay somewhere between these two numbers, and because of the risk involved they are actually paying less than usual if there is no sweep (and you earn a few bucks), and they are paying more than usual if there is a sweep, and it all averages out. Any number of ways you could work this.
Or you could just have the advertiser sponsor the bonus money for the overall winner instead of the sweep, which would work especially well with the first method.
Another way yet to work this is to have the advertiser sponsor a bonus for both. Say $300 for the person that takes the sets by a 2-1 majority, and an additional $700 if they can take it in a 3-0 sweep. Obviously you use whatever numbers are appropriate based on what you usually charge for advertising, with your "usual" rate falling somewhere between the two but probably closer the "majority win" number. Whether they sponsor just for a sweep, or just for the overall win, or for an overall win and also for a sweep, they could be billed as your "bonus money" sponsor for the event.
http://forums.azbilliards.com/showthread.php?t=264305
It seems they were on speaking terms not too long ago. Someone should post a link in the 14.1 forum to get their attention.
I think this would be a great match and look forward to it going off!
It seems they were on speaking terms not too long ago. Someone should post a link in the 14.1 forum to get their attention.
I think this would be a great match and look forward to it going off!