Players dropping out of the Matchroom/Predator CLP

[sjm]

Very few Asians in the field.

In my opinion, JL Chang, Dennis Orcullo, Ko Ping Chung, Anton Raga and Xiaohuai Zheng are all among the world's ten best male players. The two best female players on the planet are Siming Chen and Han Yu. I wonder if these seven superstars of the game were invited. Maybe so --- after all, many aren't willing to travel right now. If these stars of the game weren't invited, that's a shame, as Emily Frazer, in her AZB interview with Mike Howerton, noted that Matchroom's field filling methodology is flawed and that its revision is critical if they are to produce the best possible fields in their events.

That said, I'm pleased to see that Naoyuki Oi and Roberto Gomez are in the field. Overall, the event sports quite a strong field and should make for some very good viewing. All the details aside, Matchroom and Predator are both to be commended for the introduction of a new event at this troubling moment in both world and pool history. Wishing them every possible success with their new event.

 

[gerryf]

Very few Asians in the field.

In my opinion, JL Chang, Dennis Orcullo, Ko Ping Chung, Anton Raga and Zheng are all among the world's ten best male players. The two best female players on the planet are Siming Chen and Han Yu. I wonder if these seven superstars of the game were invited. Maybe so --- after all, many aren't willing to travel right now. If these stars of the game weren't invited, that's a shame, as Emily Frazer, in her AZB interview with Mike Howerton, noted that Matchroom's field filling methodology is flawed and that its revision is critical if they are to produce the best possible fields in their events.

That said, I'm pleased to see that Naoyuki Oi and Roberto Gomez are in the field. Overall, the event sports quite a strong field and should make for some very good viewing. All the details aside, Matchroom and Predator are both to be commended for the introduction of a new event at this troubling moment in both world and pool history.

I wondered the same. But with the size of the field purposely limited to 19 players, i guess it's not surprising that it was mostly Europeans, with two from Asia, and two from North America.

Isn't Matchroom 'thinking out loud' that they'll be hosting a world championship in Japan this year? They seem to want to spread out geographically.

 

[smoochie]

Very few Asians in the field.

In my opinion, JL Chang, Dennis Orcullo, Ko Ping Chung, Anton Raga and Xiaohuai Zheng are all among the world's ten best male players. The two best female players on the planet are Siming Chen and Han Yu. I wonder if these seven superstars of the game were invited. Maybe so --- after all, many aren't willing to travel right now. If these stars of the game weren't invited, that's a shame, as Emily Frazer, in her AZB interview with Mike Howerton, noted that Matchroom's field filling methodology is flawed and that its revision is critical if they are to produce the best possible fields in their events.

That said, I'm pleased to see that Naoyuki Oi and Roberto Gomez are in the field. Overall, the event sports quite a strong field and should make for some very good viewing. All the details aside, Matchroom and Predator are both to be commended for the introduction of a new event at this troubling moment in both world and pool history. Wishing them every possible success with their new event.

Where can I see the field? are there any brackets online, or live matches?

I already am a subscriber to matchroom live site and I am viewing snooker all week past and also this week a new tournament is happening in snooker where all old players are particapating and I am excited for it. But I couldn't find pool anywhere its all snooker and darts in matchroom site.

 

[sjm]

Where can I see the field? are there any brackets online, or live matches?

See post #127

 

[ChrisinNC]

Very few Asians in the field.

In my opinion, JL Chang, Dennis Orcullo, Ko Ping Chung, Anton Raga and Xiaohuai Zheng are all among the world's ten best male players. The two best female players on the planet are Siming Chen and Han Yu. I wonder if these seven superstars of the game were invited. Maybe so --- after all, many aren't willing to travel right now. If these stars of the game weren't invited, that's a shame, as Emily Frazer, in her AZB interview with Mike Howerton, noted that Matchroom's field filling methodology is flawed and that its revision is critical if they are to produce the best possible fields in their events.

That said, I'm pleased to see that Naoyuki Oi and Roberto Gomez are in the field. Overall, the event sports quite a strong field and should make for some very good viewing. All the details aside, Matchroom and Predator are both to be commended for the introduction of a new event at this troubling moment in both world and pool history. Wishing them every possible success with their new event.

Just curious if the women pros in the field that are playing are getting any kind of games on the wire handicap? I assume not? It’s certainly going to be tough on them, but they’ll clearly be far more pressure on their male opponents, although they’d never admit to that. Should be interesting to see how they do. I’m guessing they likely will win some matches, but I’d be surprised if any of them advance to the final 7. Maybe Siming if she was playing.

Although the overall winner could win up to $9000 if they win the qualifier as well as the overall, the $ payouts seem to be very minimal, in my opinion. Certainly not nearly enough to cover expenses, unless Matchroom is picking up travel and accommodations for all participating players.

 

[maha]

for those that do not understand how value is calculated here is an example.

you and another person flip a coin for ten dollars. i come along and say i will add ten dollars to who ever wins for free.
if you are the loser you have really made 5 dollars. and if you are the winner you made 5 dollars.

 

[sjm]

Just curious if the women pros in the field that are playing are getting any kind of games on the wire handicap? I assume not?

I didn't know that a gender-based handicap has ever been used in our sport. Can you provide an example?

 

[ChrisinNC]

I didn't know that a gender-based handicap has ever been used in our sport. Can you provide an example?

I don’t think it has. I just find it interesting that women pros with a Fargo rating of up to 100+ points less than some of the men pros have been invited to play in such a small select field.

 

[gerryf]

I don’t think it has. I just find it interesting that women pros with a Fargo rating of up to 100+ points less than some of the men pros have been invited to play in such a small select field.

I understand these are races to five, so the Fargo rating difference doesn't mean as much as it might in races to nine or eleven or thirteen.

 

[alstl]

This is standard fare for a lot of sponsored events. It's not new. I can see where the conflicts arise, though. With professional pool circling the drain, my opinion is that these pro players should think long and hard about not participating and/or ruffling Matchroom's feathers.

I'm not sure about Emily Frazer's stance on this kind of situation, as I'm not sure how she'd handle situations like this, but from reading numerous articles about Barry Hearn over the years, he likes to runs things his way and does not like people to go against the grain.

I agree. Perhaps they checked with their sponsors and the sponsors told them to drop out.

I have to say I've never paid attention to the patches on a player's shirt.

 

[Black-Balled]

for those that do not understand how value is calculated here is an example.

you and another person flip a coin for ten dollars. i come along and say i will add ten dollars to who ever wins for free.
if you are the loser you have really made 5 dollars. and if you are the winner you made 5 dollars.

So...loser is out 10, you are out ten you comtend the loser made $5.

Please, elaborate.

 

[jasonlaus]

So...loser is out 10, you are out ten you comtend the loser made $5.

Please, elaborate.

Research muh boy

 

[Black-Balled]

Research muh boy

Is it the value added to the loser's loss (actually only realized by the winner)?

I would not phrase that as 'making $5', as both payors are out 10, the same amount the flip loser was without the 3rd party's involvement.

 

[VVP]

Not that my views matter, but I buy everything Predator because they make great products and THEY SUPPORT THE SPORT unlike many cue manufacturers. I believe Predator has the right to restrict advertisements from competitors in a competition they are financing.

 

[DieselPete]

So...loser is out 10, you are out ten you comtend the loser made $5.

Please, elaborate.

Yep, that $0 the loser gets, while promoting a competitor to the business that pays him, suddenly has value! What is the purchasing power of this magical $0 in value, I wonder?

 

[justadub]

The grim reality here is that in pro pool, it's Matchroom and Predator that negotiate from a position of strength. The players, as a group, wield little power, and this has been the case for a couple of decades now.

The case history of late is that when players play hardball with event producers, sponsors and promoters, they usually fail to get the results they seek. Three examples in American pool in recent years are a) the CSI 10-ball event at the BCAPL Championships, eliminated in 2013, after some players harassed Mark Griffin over the entry fees and the payment deadline, b) the Ultimate 10-ball, eliminated in about 2015 after many players boycotted, and c) the Super Billiards Expo 10-ball, where the prize money was reduced after players demanded an increase in added money. These were events with high purses once upon a time, but the players just wouldn't leave well enough alone.

If the sport of pool grows, the players will wield more power and may prove well positioned to dictate terms in many situations, but until then, they need to get out of the way when event producers increase their investment in pro pool by creating new events. Obstructing the efforts of the few who are inclined to invest significant money in the pro pool product is not well advised at this time. The players (and their sponsors) need to swallow a little pride so that the sport can grow. Is that fair? Some will say yes and others will say no. Is it necessary? Yes, it is!

Comparisons to pro golf are comical. Golfers, who long ago established themselves as superstars who are capable spokespersons for products inside and outside of golf, negotiate from a position of power. That's why pro golfers bargain from a position of great strength.

You are obviously far more in touch with the goings-on in pro pool than I am, Stu, but if I recall correctly, one of the big issues that did in the Ultimate 10-ball was the conflict in scheduling with Bonus Ball. Bonus Ball scheduled right on top of the tourney, and players would have to skip one or the other (in most cases...I do recall someone trying to finagle a travel arrangement) so many of the players chose Bonus Ball. Bonus Ball wasn't interested in working around established tournament schedules...and we all saw how well that worked out....

 

[crazy8legs]

You are obviously far more in touch with the goings-on in pro pool than I am, Stu, but if I recall correctly, one of the big issues that did in the Ultimate 10-ball was the conflict in scheduling with Bonus Ball. Bonus Ball scheduled right on top of the tourney, and players would have to skip one or the other (in most cases...I do recall someone trying to finagle a travel arrangement) so many of the players chose Bonus Ball. Bonus Ball wasn't interested in working around established tournament schedules...and we all saw how well that worked out....

Off topic but I really liked Bonus Ball, to watch. For whatever reason the team dynamic worked well in their format to me, as a spectator.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[sjm]

You are obviously far more in touch with the goings-on in pro pool than I am, Stu, but if I recall correctly, one of the big issues that did in the Ultimate 10-ball was the conflict in scheduling with Bonus Ball. Bonus Ball scheduled right on top of the tourney, and players would have to skip one or the other (in most cases...I do recall someone trying to finagle a travel arrangement) so many of the players chose Bonus Ball. Bonus Ball wasn't interested in working around established tournament schedules...and we all saw how well that worked out....

You have a good memory. I hope mine's as good, but some of it is a blur. I'll take my best shot, recognizing I may get a detail or two wrong..

Although it wasn't the only issue, the conflict with Bonus Ball was an impediment for some of the players, despite the fact that the Ultimate 10-ball dates were known months in advance. Some who had signed on to Bonus Ball, despite having no scheduling conflict, boycotted the Ultimate 10-ball merely as an act of solidarity or, possibly, due to guidelines in the Bonus Ball Player's contract. This doomed a new and enthusiastic event producer who added a huge amount of money in his event, whose name I think was Badi Nazzat, to failure and both his event and his appetite for further investment in pro pool disappeared.

Years before, some similar issues had arisen with the IPT and player contracts and conflicting events. Kevin Trudeau went to great lengths to share that he had no intention of working with the WPA. Years later, our sport has yet to outgrow some of the conflicts that arise when players operating under the WPA umbrella play in events that coincide with WPA events. What the IPT and Bonus Ball had in common was that they ran independent of the WPA process.

This issues pertaining to playing in competing events is a big one again now, as prominent players have sometimes played in Chinese 8-ball events even if those events coincide with events on the WPA calendar. What Bonus Ball, the IPT and those that run Chinese 8-ball events have in common is that they run/ran independently of the WPA process. While WPA contends that these are conflicting events, many disagree, and pool needs to figure this issue out.

In the end, the difficulty has been getting the players and the organizations to work together so that attractive new events have every chance to succeed financially. As we see in the event being discussed in this thread, there are other potential impediments that need working out. It's less about who is at fault and more about removing some of the obstacles to the growth of the sport. At a moment in our sport's history when few are investing in production of pool events, the stage needs to be set in a way that doesn't make such investment less attractive.

 

[hang-the-9]

I feel you and JAM have an understanding of how things work. If Predator put up the money...they have a perfect right to promote only their brand.
I think it should be common courtesy to not promote another product.

Predator has been a sponsor for years, I have not heard them making non-Predator players wear their logo on the shirts before. If a player uses a competing product I can see an issue with them agreeing to this. Say if someone was sponsored by Brunswick but Diamond wanted their logo on all the shirts.

Seems like the first plan here was to have no other sponsors on the shirts, then they changed it to allow them but also have the Predator logon on the shirts.

Don't know why it's an issue for them, the logo would be all over the place at the event, on banners, TV graphics, I'm guessing on the side of the table, etc... Why the issue with having it on the shirt all of a sudden? The other promotion is not enough? They are actually creating active bad will towards the brands now instead of just letting things go and keeping things the same.

 

[Tennesseejoe]

for those that do not understand how value is calculated here is an example.

you and another person flip a coin for ten dollars. i come along and say i will add ten dollars to who ever wins for free.
if you are the loser you have really made 5 dollars. and if you are the winner you made 5 dollars.

The wording is a little confusing...we are flipping for $10....$10 each or $10 in the pot?