Mizerak complained because he got beat, competition in 2020 has waay more depth the sixties. We never had the player count of 256 in the Open, wasn't quite there yet. 2020 is quite different than 40+ yrs ago.
How to Increase Play/All Levels
- Thread starter Island Drive
- Start date
As much as I like pool- I can't think of much more boring to watch than someone like Jason Shaw playing someone that he has to give 8 games on the wire- in a race to 11. I would have 0 interest in watching those matches - you have a better chance of beating Shaw if you have to go to the 3 or 4 ball with winner break; than getting games on the wire, all you have to do is win a game and then you can run out to the 3 or 4 ball for several racks; or perhaps he gives you the last 6 or 7 balls on the table - now he has much more pressure on him for EACH RACK!
Ball bangers getting games on the wire against the best in the world is just a waste of time- unless he is not allowed to use chalk either- LOL
I wouldn't watch that match either.
I would go to another table, but if it was the finals, and Shaw had to play a player that gets 7 on the wire or 6 and it's a 64 man field, that would be exciting for the GAME....Especially if the opponent ties it at 10 each, that would be a great sweat.
That alone would increase player participation with the weaker players, they actually have a ''chance''.
Keep in mind, this is to increase play and fill the pool room with spectators and keep em there and keep em spending and coming back.
If that happens, the room owner might hold two events a yr because of it's success.
I've seen quite a few pros playing other pros, lose 11-0. I found those matches very exciting.
But if you Mosconi Mike, got 6 on the wire, and tied SVB at 10-10, I'd love tah sweat that.
Last edited:
Given that most high profile tournaments have full fields, why would anyone, player or spectator, want that field to be comprised of anything but the highest caliber players?
There are/were/still are many large rooms in the US with 9' tables.
With with High the cost of everything it's tough to fill the fields ( and the room owner needs body$ to succeed) and if 4 pros show up at a 9-11-64 event, everyone KNOWs they are playing for 5th and down, that alone can be an event killer, especially if the pros register EARLY and the weak players see them on the player sheet.
Like the US Open, it will Now/still accept players that aren't pros, BUT if it continues to be a success, it will eventually be All pros and amateurs will not be allowed. All pros were amateurs.
I don't know the answer to increase play, I'm just offering up ideas.
Nothing in the past has held up the test of time better than the US Open 9 ball event/FORMAT/period.
The format works, this handicap is SIMPLE.
I don't golf at all, never have, but I'd enter an event for fun, getting a stroke per hole, if I'm lucky I'll get one par legally.
If you go hill hill with jayson shaw you have a TON more pressure because the odds of him winning are still so much higher.
I think you should reconsider. Don't think of an idea like this as lobotomizing anything. It doesn't REPLACE champion-style tournaments. It is in addition. Most of the top 50 Europeans have games from handicapped events in FargoRate, and most of the top 50 US players don't. USA has, I think, some weird views about them.
Here is the Oslo Open, in Norway, as one example. 128 players. Race to 11. People get 6,5,4,3,2,1 or 0 games on the wire.
50 players got 4 or more games on the wire.
If you are rated around 700, you get just one game.
We've seen similar thing in Sweden (Interpool Open) and in Estonia (just a short ferry ride from Helsinki)
Demi you have Greek heritage, right? Kazakis and Ekonomopolous (average over 790) both seem to play in two handicapped tournaments most weeks, and there are some bigger handicapped events as well.
Know what they call a 680 in Poland? A C player. Yes they have handicapped events that world-class players play in.
Simonis Oslo Open 2019
Oslo Biljardklubb is proud to host the Simonis Oslo Open 2019! Our club celebrates its 30th anniversary this year and invite you to join us in the celebrations. Oslo Biljardklubb is Norways largest club with our 700 members, and proudly welcomes you to this event. We have been blessed with...
cuescore.com
You are not making a fair comparison. This doesn't DECREASE $$ to the top players. It increases it. Increases $$ to the top players.
Increases opportunities to the wannabe top players.
Increases the interactions that lead to supportive relationships that nurture aspiring players and players at all levels.
You can't compare the 128-player Oslo Open to an imaginary 128-player tournament with no handicaps because the latter doesn't exist. That's where the idea comes from that this is net negative for the pros--it's an unfair comparison.
When they do the Oslo Open, there is also a straight-up high-roller event, and there are various warm-up events as well.
One day event, no one has to be away from family for two days, and many do church on Sun.
32 player field, Best 2 outta three sets, races to 3.
Your room has 8 tables.
11 am Round 1....8 matches start.
1 pm Round 2....8 matches start.
3 pm Round 3....8 matches start
5 pm Round 4.....4 matches start
Once round four winds down, 4 tables are Open for the sat. night crowd regulars that pay the rent.
7 pm Round 5.....2 matches start.
9 pm Round 6....FINALS
Players that finish their matches early, have time for a snack/rest to get ready for the next round.
Room owner, does NOT lose his Sat. night business with this format.
32 player field, Best 2 outta three sets, races to 3.
Your room has 8 tables.
11 am Round 1....8 matches start.
1 pm Round 2....8 matches start.
3 pm Round 3....8 matches start
5 pm Round 4.....4 matches start
Once round four winds down, 4 tables are Open for the sat. night crowd regulars that pay the rent.
7 pm Round 5.....2 matches start.
9 pm Round 6....FINALS
Players that finish their matches early, have time for a snack/rest to get ready for the next round.
Room owner, does NOT lose his Sat. night business with this format.
Hey Mike!I think you should reconsider. Don't think of an idea like this as lobotomizing anything. It doesn't REPLACE champion-style tournaments. It is in addition. Most of the top 50 Europeans have games from handicapped events in FargoRate, and most of the top 50 US players don't. USA has, I think, some weird views about them.
Here is the Oslo Open, in Norway, as one example. 128 players. Race to 11. People get 6,5,4,3,2,1 or 0 games on the wire.
50 players got 4 or more games on the wire.
If you are rated around 700, you get just one game.
We've seen similar thing in Sweden (Interpool Open) and in Estonia (just a short ferry ride from Helsinki)
Demi you have Greek heritage, right? Kazakis and Ekonomopolous (average over 790) both seem to play in two handicapped tournaments most weeks, and there are some bigger handicapped events as well.
Know what they call a 680 in Poland? A C player. Yes they have handicapped events that world-class players play in.
Simonis Oslo Open 2019
Oslo Biljardklubb is proud to host the Simonis Oslo Open 2019! Our club celebrates its 30th anniversary this year and invite you to join us in the celebrations. Oslo Biljardklubb is Norways largest club with our 700 members, and proudly welcomes you to this event. We have been blessed with...
Deep down I have a very strong distaste for handicapped tournaments. I lose interest in the game once it's not an even up test of skill. I would have zero interest in watching Magnus Carlson playing amateurs without a rook and losing, Conor McGregor getting knocked out with a hand tied behind his back, or watching Daniel Negreanu forfeit the winning pot to an amateur that got to use one eyed jacks as wilds. I have equally little desire to have my own hand tied behind my back and get beat, nor to knock out a celebrity by taking advantage of such a handicap.
It's not up to me to decide what others do. I only have control over two things: 1) How I cast my vote, and 2) Where I decide to participate. My one vote is cast against handicapped events. And for my own peace of mind I'll only participate in events that are even up. This is the same reason I've stuck almost exclusively to 9' pool competitions the last couple of years.
There are millions more casting their vote. If the majority feels differently and wants to run and play handicapped events they are free to do so. If they want to play nothing but 7', that is similarly their choice. There are a lot of good reasons as both accomplish a similar goal; closing the skill gap to encourage turn out. If that is what pool needs to do to stay alive then the masses will speak.
I also understand change is part of all sports. Pool used to be on a 10' table playing straight pool. Most generations feel the games have degenerated when they just evolve. And I can handle a large degree of evolution. If we all want to use jump cues then so be it. I think where it stops being evolution and starts becoming an abomination (in my eyes) is when only one side gets to use jump cues to eliminate the skill edge. That's where I bow out.
But I think we are close to the same page. I'm fine with the ADDITION of handicapped events that people can chose to participate in. I would just like to see the top events remain as they are, even up, and I believe you agree. I don't see handicaps in major league baseball, football, or any of the other games I mentioned above. But as you move down from the pro level I'm sure they all have their versions of handicaps that are gaining popularity. No skin off my back. Let the amateurs have their freely distributed first place trophies and let the championships be decided by grit.
D
It is interesting to me that your examples here all involved fundamentally changing the game. I am not in favor of ball spots or giving people extra ball-in-hands, i.e., creating a new game to make a competitive situation.
[...]
Yes, we agree
In football, there are no high-school teams who play against Alabama; the best in one county plays against the best in another county. They are purposefully seeking out competitive situations. There are a number of ways to do that. The main way it is done in the NFL is through the draft, where the best performing team chooses last amongst the next year's new players. It is a system designed to keep matchups competitive.
This has nothing to do with how championships are decided. Championship events are just that: everybody competing to see who can lift the most weight. If you can lift 400 lbs and I can lift 300 lbs, you beat me in the competition.
But the next week, when we are training in the same gym, things are different. You spend time doing 360 pounds repeatedly and occasionally trying to lift 410. I spend time repeatedly doing 260 lbs and occasionally trying 310. I admire you, the guy who can lift more weight. And I may aspire to be like you or better. But my way to do it is not to try to lift 360 lbs repeatedly. That's futile. And you really get nothing out of beating me by lifting 320 lbs. If we compete by you trying to exceed 400 and me trying to exceed 300, then the winner between us truly is determined by grit. If everybody in the weight room is competing like that once a month, then we are really all supporting each other's development. We really are a community where the best are most admired and the connections are strong. And then when it's championship time, we are proud to give you a big sendoff and cheer you on.
In pool we do a lot of our training by competition. Our opponent is the weight we put on the bar, the resistance we experience. I think of us like teenaged tigers play fighting. If we can get regular competitions that look like and feel like championship competitions but really are challenging all of us to be the best that we can be, that's a good thing.
If you play me a race to 11 even,
you win whether you focus or not.
You win whether you make good decisions or bad decisions.
You win whether you pay attention to your shot routine or ignore it.
You win whether you are drunk or not.
You win whether you got decent sleep and ate a good breakfast or are existing on no sleep and donuts.
You win whether you get down low on the shot and keep your body still or not.
I lose with all the same "whethers."
You playing me an even up race to 11 is like you (the 400 lb weightlifter) putting 300 lbs on your bar and me putting 400 points on mine. The winner is not determined by grit at all. There is no grit involved for either of us.
Think of handicapped competitions like play-fighting that gets us as ready as we can be for championship competition. Isn't it better is hundreds of pool players around you can make you sweat when they have a good day or you have an off day rather than just a handful?
Having played in 2 US Opens finishing 17-24 and having played in Two WPA world events, and turned down one because of MacKey. (Spelling) and having won one pro event I have A clue on the game itself and how it works.
There are Many matches at EVERY pro event that I've played in that I would not watch, why, because in the early rounds there ARE allot of weaker up and coming players, and I prefer to either watch my next opponent play or watch a good match/period.
Every pro event that I've played in, always has had some weak/player matches PERIOD.
In Germany at the Worlds, Souquet and Mika were there, but there were many matches much better to watch, like Chang, or Liscotti etc.
Would you go to a PGA US Open event and watch the players that shoot above par or choose to watch another like Tiger?
9 ball Format Single Elimination best 3 outta Five Sets
Lag, winner breaks the first three racks, loser racks. Next, reverse positions. Best 2 outta five sets, 10 minute break between sets, if it goes to the third/final set have a 15 minute break? How many of us have won our first match and then waited forever for our next match? This format would...
forums.azbilliards.com
Mike, you make a very good case here. The quote that comes to mind is "In theory, there is no difference between theory and practice. But, in practice, there is."
I understand the aims of handicapping pool. Getting more players into the game. Reducing the skill gap to increase turn out and prize money. Allowing more opportunities for players at all levels to compete. Supporting each other's development and making sure we are all training hard, etc. It sounds like a utopia. But we've learned from sci-fi there is often a thin line between a utopia and a dystopia. Artificial intelligence that could help us make good decisions and protect us from self destruction could easily take away our freedom and humanity. All of that good stuff. So however well intended handicapped events were to improve the social and economic landscape of pool, and however heart warming the stories you can write about imagined pool player populations, I have my own direct personal experience to draw on. I don't find it pretty at all.
For one I never felt the respect and admiration you sited in your example. My personal experience with handicaps was the opposite, being perpetually eliminated by lower level players with disrespectful attitudes that seem to say "You think you're so good that I can't win, well I'm underrated and have got three games to eight now so let's see how YOU like it". While being a punching bag for the masses I was also no longer winning prize money locally that in the past I used to fund my way to pro events. Worst of all it hurt my mojo. Rhythm and confidence are big parts of pool. When I played open events I felt like a winner, and had confidence I'd find a way to get the job done in the clutch. After being beaten down for a couple of years with insurmountable handicaps by beer guzzlers with tattoo sleeves, backwards hats, and hustlin gear, I just started to lose my own sense of self. I was playing worse, not better. Funny once I started playing non-handicapped national events against good players I found myself again.
I also object to the idea that games on the wire don't change the game fundamentally. The problem is this doesn't account for the profound role that mental game has in pool. When a lower level player plays a champion a big part of the game is managing their mind because they will be under siege from doubts and fears. Giving them a massive head-start and assuring them the cobra they're charming has had it's teeth pulled changes the game tremendously.
In the end we can both debate how handicaps should work, but we have to look at how they do work in the real world. And the best solution is to let each person decide where they want to participate. I'm the first to agree handicapped events seem to work for the vast majority of players and I won't get in their way. But I can't deny my first hand experiences or violate my own boundaries by being any part of them.
Sorry I didn't reply earlier. I began ignoring the thread once I saw the bile being tossed about.
However, you are completely right. I don't want a handicap against anyone. I don't believe in participation ribbons either.
Yay, SVB gave me the world and I managed a win. Nah, I'd rather get destroyed and take pride in taking it like any other pro...lol
I understand the desire to motovate players to enter bigger tournaments with the elite. However, punishing pros just isn't going to make it happen. Unfortnately, it seems as though the days are gone wherein amatuers were willing to get hammered to learn the ropes. ...so how about some type of pro/am like they do in golf...?
I think you have played in tournaments around MN for which the "B" division always has a few AA players and the A and AA divisions always seem to find a few master-level players who have been hiding in the weeds. And this is all part of the game... If that's what you mean by "real life," then I invite you not so much to change your mind but instead just to open it to the possibility that it doesn't have to be like that, that it isn't that way everywhere, and the attitudes don't have to be what you experienced.
I've run over 1,000 tournaments in the last decade, and they are pretty close to half straight-up and half handicapped. For most of the decade, I've run a straight-up big table 9-Ball tournament and a handicapped 8-Ball tournament on 7-ft tables each week. You've played in some of my bigger straight-up tournaments. For all but a small handful of those 1,000 tournaments, every player on the planet has been invited to enter and play.
We (FargoRate) take in maybe 7,000 tournaments a year. Bouncing around to different pool "communities" gives us a sense of the real-world range of attitudes about the local culture and that players have toward one another. We work to understand what makes the healthy communities healthy and what encourages growth and development. Increasing numbers isn't just about increasing alcohol sales with more out-for-a-good-time weak players. It's about increasing the number of players who get the bug and think about pool when they are going to sleep and when they are driving to work.
[...]
I get that you are butting heads with better players when you fly out to turning stone. And I love that. But don't fall into the trap of thinking that because you step up and play better players there that local players stepping up and playing you even is kinda similar. It isn't. First TS is a culminating event of a decent size pool tour. And second, you are in the black bar here. Sure there are players a bar or two above you. But the majority even at TS are well below you. And the average level of play for people who would like to play tournaments in your area is 4-5 bars below you.
This sounds like you are only valuing “grit” expended at the time of a competitive event. What about the lifetime of grit training and practicing and creating the ability to life 400 lbs? (Kind of a not so apt analogy to start given that physical strength has a huge genetic component...lots of people are freakishly strong with absolutely no training).
I guess my point is that the investment (grit) in an event consists in the life leading up to that event. While I respect anyone wanting to improve themselves at anything, I’m not sure I see the intrinsic value of someone who may slack off and not try to hard, establish a fairly mediocre baseline, and then surpass it by a larger margins than I, a person who has invested decades in an activity, who is vastly further along in my learning curve, and who has significantly less headroom to improve into. And then a few months later, another new person in their learning curve, who stands to make giant qualitative improvements, comes along and surpasses their novice level with a slightly better than novice showing. Carry this concept through to its conclusion, and the awards will go to the newest and least skilled players who strive for a brief time to surpass their introductory skill set. And the most invested players will ultimately lose all the time, because they have built a game that is close to the ceiling, or their ceiling, and further improvement will be in much tinier increments than the beginner. This is the ultimate conclusion of handicapped pool. Perhaps I’m wrong, but this is how I see it.
KMRUNOUT
Sent from my iPhone using AzBilliards Forums