Changing pool starts by giving weaker players a chance at some $$$.

G

GrandTourPromo

AzB Silver Member
Silver Member
When you hold a tournament where everyone buys in for the same amount, and you payout 100%+ to only the top 20% of the finishers, you can't expect anything different to happen.

But there is another way. I'm not talking about player's auctions or handicapping systems. Those also belong in the category of the 'same.'

I speak only from 15 years of playing pool in all of its forms. I've played leagues, weekly $10-$20 tournaments, played casually, and I've even been known to match up and play for some $$ every now and then. I've also ran more local tournaments here in Jacksonville, FL than I care to estimate.

On September 1st, 2012, I and another player began working on a new project that sprang up as the logical next step to me asking him the question, "What if you raffled off entry into a pool tournament?"

Think about it for a moment. More questions will arise and I'm ready to start answering them. So, fire away.

Robert Bowman
President, Grand Tour Promotions



Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk HD
 
GrandTourPromo said:
When you hold a tournament where everyone buys in for the same amount, and you payout 100%+ to only the top 20% of the finishers, you can't expect anything different to happen.

But there is another way. I'm not talking about player's auctions or handicapping systems. Those also belong in the category of the 'same.'

I speak only from 15 years of playing pool in all of its forms. I've played leagues, weekly $10-$20 tournaments, played casually, and I've even been known to match up and play for some $$ every now and then. I've also ran more local tournaments here in Jacksonville, FL than I care to estimate.

On September 1st, 2012, I and another player began working on a new project that sprang up as the logical next step to me asking him the question, "What if you raffled off entry into a pool tournament?"

Think about it for a moment. More questions will arise and I'm ready to start answering them. So, fire away.

Robert Bowman
President, Grand Tour Promotions



Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk HD
Click to expand...

Sounds to me like the Obama way, take from those that earn it and give it to those that don't want to work for it.
 
By raffle you mean select random numbers or sell to the highest bidder? Doubt any of that will work too well unless it's a once a year major event, then people may be curious to do that. I know I would not drive more than 10 minutes to find out how much I'd be paying to enter.

I was thinking that if the event is handicapped you offer prizes not only to the top finishers but also to the top finishers in the class. Like many do for "top woman finisher" even if that woman did not cash.

Even with handicaps, unless they are not well done and people of a higher skill are ranked low, the top shooters tend to win. So if you have a 3-4-5 ran, the people cashed are all 4 and 5, the highest 3 gets something.
 
hang-the-9 said:
By raffle you mean select random numbers or sell to the highest bidder? Doubt any of that will work too well unless it's a once a year major event, then people may be curious to do that. I know I would not drive more than 10 minutes to find out how much I'd be paying to enter.

I was thinking that if the event is handicapped you offer prizes not only to the top finishers but also to the top finishers in the class. Like many do for "top woman finisher" even if that woman did not cash.

Even with handicaps, unless they are not well done and people of a higher skill are ranked low, the top shooters tend to win. So if you have a 3-4-5 ran, the people cashed are all 4 and 5, the highest 3 gets something.
Click to expand...

I like this idea more than just trying to handicap an event. The problem with handicapping is 1) It's usually never handicapped correctly. 2) It's unfair to the players that worked hard to improve their game. 3) As you stated, usually the better players will get the money in the long run and if it is handicapped correctly (everyone has the same chance to win), the better players will quit playing in it.

There has to be an incentive to improve but also give weaker players a shot at some $$$.
 
Info

What you fail to mention, is that the lower handicaps progress faster through the handicaps than higher skilled players, but do not have their handicaps adjusted on a regular basis. They tend to think 'once a 2, always a 2' even when they are shooting 4 speed.

There is such a thing that is called 'climbing the ladder' in Pool. I played for 50 years, and I had to climb the ladder to be competitive, so why should the lower handicaps get a 'free ride'? Back when I learned it was all about getting good, now it is about participation. League Pool has done that for us.

Personally, I don't feel that lower players should get anymore than 90% handicap for leagues. They should have to shoot 10% better, at least, to beat a better player. Then the focus would go back a little to getting better. As it is though, they just want to be the best 'for their handicap', and much sandbagging occurs in leagues (as noted by all the APA threads).

And better players quit playing tournaments when their handicap get so high from winning, and they are playing 2's and 3's that really play 2 balls better. Better players do not like to play in tournaments, most of the time, that they don't feel like they got a shot at winning.
 
The IPT put more money into the game then had even been injected before...it went nowhere. After 2 years of trying, they couldn't attract major TV, couldn't get new fans behind pool, and it died as a result.

The reason I bring it up is the IPT gave the average Joe (that's me & probably you for that matter) a chance to play in qualifiers and advance to the big show. Further, they extended this to a Pro-Am format which I actually qualified for. It was absurd that someone of my speed could play in an IPT event, but I did. Maybe 50 people qualified. It was a dismal turnout for a $50,000 prize.
 
Last edited:
Snapshot9 said:
What you fail to mention, is that the lower handicaps progress faster through the handicaps than higher skilled players, but do not have their handicaps adjusted on a regular basis. They tend to think 'once a 2, always a 2' even when they are shooting 4 speed.

There is such a thing that is called 'climbing the ladder' in Pool. I played for 50 years, and I had to climb the ladder to be competitive, so why should the lower handicaps get a 'free ride'? Back when I learned it was all about getting good, now it is about participation. League Pool has done that for us.

Personally, I don't feel that lower players should get anymore than 90% handicap for leagues. They should have to shoot 10% better, at least, to beat a better player. Then the focus would go back a little to getting better. As it is though, they just want to be the best 'for their handicap', and much sandbagging occurs in leagues (as noted by all the APA threads).

And better players quit playing tournaments when their handicap get so high from winning, and they are playing 2's and 3's that really play 2 balls better. Better players do not like to play in tournaments, most of the time, that they don't feel like they got a shot at winning.
Click to expand...

This is why I stopped doing the house handicap leagues. I was beaten too many times by short races and rolls than being beat by a better player. Then when the lesser plays wins, they get real false sense of how well they play.

You want people in pool that like to play the game and not for what they are given when competing.

Where is the biggest problem in pool. I was a Cal Billiards practicing when a player comes in. One of the hot sticks asked him if he wanted to play. The first words out of his month was, "No way, you are to good". The person saying this is not a bad shooter.

The point is that the player did not want to play unless he knew he could win and not to play in order to learn, to test yourself. This is the result of handicap system players. Even if it was for money, this is no difference than playing for a lesson. Maybe better money spent in the long run.

I can not find anyone that will play me heads up. They want spots, so I don't play em. I will never give any player a spot of any kind. Or they have seen my level of play and just won't ask to play or learn.

This is the result of the idea that everyone is a winner idea and not the fact the some days you are the windshield and some days your are the bug.

Handicapping in any form actually discourages improvement overall, unless that player has the spark about pool that motivates them to improve.

It is this player that is being forgotten in the scheme to "fix" pool.
 
You can never make everyone happy.

One point of view is: If pool is to grow, you need to bring in more new players. Give them something to get excited about, create a system that gives them a legitimate chance of winning something.

Lucky for me, I live in a large city with leagues and tournaments for different levels of players. One beginner league has a handicapping system of spotting balls. Clearly the advantage is to the lower HC players. The more serious players improve, get frustrated with the beginner league HC system and move to the intermediate league where HC is games. The casual social players don't improve much, but have fun, stay in the beginner league, spend money. Having a good, fair league director who adjusts HC's is key.
 
Last edited:
duckie said:
... Handicapping in any form actually discourages improvement overall, unless that player has the spark about pool that motivates them to improve. ...
Click to expand...
This is false. There are handicapping systems that favor only those who improve.

Speaking of handicapped matches, I recently played in our league finals. We play straight pool. The match was I go to 130, my opponent goes to 15. My opponent is a beginner. After making a few mistakes early in the match, I realized that I would have to play far more carefully in this situation. I managed to win and I think going through the experience was good for my game. My opponent thanked me for a great learning experience.
 
DoubleD said:
... If there are a bunch of *****s who treat new players badly, no amount of winning will bring them back. ...
Click to expand...
Yes. People don't return if they don't feel welcomed. The other thing you have to do is make them feel like they have a chance to win. One way is by handicapping. Another is by arranging to match up players by ability.
 
BCA has handicapping..

APA has handicapping..

Both of those leagues have, uhh, quite a few members.

How many people show up at your tournament?

Doesn't GSBT do handicaps? They seem to be doing just fine.

What would happen to gambling without handicapping?

..as for that Obama comment - stick to crying about your Joss.
 
DoubleD said:
I don't know if I agree. I think the promise of improvement is enough for competitive players. I have seen people who have no chance return religiously to tourneys that were not handicapped, didn't pander and allowed anyone to play. Hell, when I started playing competitive foosball, I was that guy.

There is a fundamental difference between someone who values a win that they got because things were altered to make them "fair" and someone who wins and knows it is because he deserved it because of his talent and work.

I played at least two foosball tourneys a week for half a year before I won a single match. The moment I scored that last point, every bit of the previous six months added to the joy of the win.

I don't want to play with the people who want the playing field tilted on their behalf.

So, yes, giving lesser players better chances to win at the expense of those who put in the time will change pool, but will it make pool better?

dld
Click to expand...

My comment as well as Bob's quote is about new players. If you want to attract new players, I don't think having them play a game against a high level player, w/o some kind of handicap, is going to make them want to come back.

It is not easy to implement and maintain a fair handicapping system, but IMHO, it does make pool better by making it grow and keeping it competitive.
 
like it

Bob Jewett said:
This is false. There are handicapping systems that favor only those who improve.

Speaking of handicapped matches, I recently played in our league finals. We play straight pool. The match was I go to 130, my opponent goes to 15. My opponent is a beginner. After making a few mistakes early in the match, I realized that I would have to play far more carefully in this situation. I managed to win and I think going through the experience was good for my game. My opponent thanked me for a great learning experience.
Click to expand...

That sounds a lot like the handicapping Mike Page does for our new straight pool league. I really enjoy it. I am an average player so I have been on both sides; giving spots, and getting spots. Of course, as Bob knows playing at Fargo Billiards before and knowing Mike really well, Mike has an awesome handicap system for 8 ball also.
 
duckie said:
Handicapping in any form actually discourages improvement overall, unless that player has the spark about pool that motivates them to improve.
Click to expand...

I honestly believe that pool is so difficult to master that there does not exist an external stimulus that will motivate a person to practice and improve past a certain point.

To put that spark into people, you have to get them playing, and new players won't play if they think they're going to get crushed. The handicap encourages them to pick up a stick, which most wouldn't do otherwise, and then you can only hope that the spark will grow.


In regards to tournaments, I know this would be a managerial nightmare (not counting the fact that there probably aren't enough people to support it) BUT... when I played disc golf, the tournaments that I played in had "amateur" and "professional" divisions. The amateur division was cheap to play in and had very little payout (a lot of times, just new discs.) The professional division was more expensive and paid-out "real" money. So IF it wasn't a nightmare to manage, and IF you had enough players for both divisions, everyone can be happy and you don't need handicaps. Problem sort-of solved.
 
Last edited:
Robert: Nobody sane would argue that giving everyone money would be nice and give some incentive.

Where does the money come from? There are only X dollars to award as prize money. You either give three guys "decent" money (which isn't much compared to other sports anyway) or you give thirty guys pathetic amounts of money. And nobody's buying an airplane ticket or even gambling a tank of gas on pathetic money.

Poker does do a system where you can play in a satellite tournament and win an entry to the WSOP. Winning a US Open entry is worth about 500 bucks, I figure that's worthwhile to some players.

Mosconiac: I think a few players might argue the IPT could have gone somewhere if it had time to settle in. Two years may not be enough to 'fix pool' or whatever we wanna call it. I don't think it failed mainly due to lack of interest, but due to other reasons hashed out to death in other threads.
 
What would happen if ... let's say ... car racing had handicaps. "Rookie" has to run 100 laps before (insert name of your favorite driver) made 500?

I know; pine trees and apples don't make pineapples.

Even if "Rookie" made his 100 before "XYZ" made his 500 it wouldn't make "Rookie" a champion. But (there always has to be a "but") pool doesn't have money so you can't just say, "No pros allowed" in a tourney. But you can say "B players only" and no one complains.

Fact is, if I enter the US Open I don't expect or want a spot. I need to be able to play. Why do we have to dumb everything down? Learn in an amateur only event, league, etc. When you're ready to play, bring your game, not a list of demands to make it fair that you didn't put the time in to learn.
 
Bob Jewett said:
This is false. There are handicapping systems that favor only those who improve.

Speaking of handicapped matches, I recently played in our league finals. We play straight pool. The match was I go to 130, my opponent goes to 15. My opponent is a beginner. After making a few mistakes early in the match, I realized that I would have to play far more carefully in this situation. I managed to win and I think going through the experience was good for my game. My opponent thanked me for a great learning experience.
Click to expand...

130 to 15 is a hard handicap to out run. good job
 
Ghosst said:
What would happen if ... let's say ... car racing had handicaps. "Rookie" has to run 100 laps before (insert name of your favorite driver) made 500?

I know; pine trees and apples don't make pineapples.

Even if "Rookie" made his 100 before "XYZ" made his 500 it wouldn't make "Rookie" a champion. But (there always has to be a "but") pool doesn't have money so you can't just say, "No pros allowed" in a tourney. But you can say "B players only" and no one complains.

Fact is, if I enter the US Open I don't expect or want a spot. I need to be able to play. Why do we have to dumb everything down? Learn in an amateur only event, league, etc. When you're ready to play, bring your game, not a list of demands to make it fair that you didn't put the time in to learn.
Click to expand...

This sums is up pretty well. I don't think the idea is to give PoolKiller a chance at the all-around at the DCC, but to give him and his friends just enough incentive in events here and there(local?) to keep them interested and to get more people into the game. That's exactly what leagues are doing - they allow people to feel as though they're competing without it being a waste of their time.

For me, I have to outrun spots in league, while the beginners have to try to keep up. I don't see that as a bad thing. When you get to national events, skill groups are broken up into separate divisions(6/7s, A, etc). But, I know if I'm going to try a big tournament(DCC, US Open), I better be able to play or expect to pay for the entertainment value of it.
 
:boring2:

I've been saying this for years now but no one listens. In a tournament, not everyone is playing for first or second place. They are not good enough.

So, make first and second place close to the same money then payout more places. Tournaments are always top heavy with the payout and it hurts the game of pool. Give the weaker shooter a chance to win their money back.

If the best shooters don't like it...good, then they don't have to play. Seems they are usually greedy and just want to take advantage of the weak anyway.

Most people play in tournaments to have fun and compete. If you give them a chance to win their money back, more people will play.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top