There are a lot of ways to preserve the economics of the venue agreement. The most obvious is just to have players pay a $100-200 facility surcharge if they don’t stay at the hotel.
Kaci, pro pool and prize money
- Thread starter jbart65
- Start date
or they book the room and let another stay in it or share the cost. no big deal. just part of the costs of going to that tournament and entering.
and maybe they do not want really to cater to those with little money to spend. thats their prerogative although it my seem distasteful.
they dont make much from a player that just enters and doesnt spend more than a pittance. and the venue wants to make money off the players.
and maybe they do not want really to cater to those with little money to spend. thats their prerogative although it my seem distasteful.
they dont make much from a player that just enters and doesnt spend more than a pittance. and the venue wants to make money off the players.
David, you are arguing with a phantom strawman. I don't even like or watch the WNBA—I just hate bad math and unverified forum talking points.
We don't even disagree on the economic state of pool, and I am not the one who brought it up. You only tried to pivot the conversation back to pool because you realized your WNBA claims were completely dead. I simply wouldn't let you get away with your lies.
The Deflection Is Over:
Trying to hide behind the phrase "you just like the WNBA" is a weak attempt to dismiss hard financial data as emotional fandom. You got completely cornered on the facts, you tried to run away back to pool, and now you are making up fake motivations for why I corrected you.
Changing the subject won't hide the scoreboard. Just take the L and move on.
That
Last edited:
big kaci went another event 1-2 out, in phoenix. little brother is playing better and hasn't lost a match
Bad math?
Sports is a business. The only reason anyone pays athletes is that they get some return on their investment. The bigger the return, the larger the payday for the participants. That's how business works.
Pool doesn't provide much return. Compared to other major sports leagues, neither does the WNBA, Though admittedly, the league has finally climbed into the black, at least for the time being.
That's not a strawman, it's simple fact.
It's worth noting that the purses in golf grew exponentially when Tiger Woods arrived on the scene. His enormous popularity drove viewership and advertising revenues which directly impacted prize money. The WNBA is in a similar situation right now. It'll be interesting to see if they take advantage of it or screw it up.
Pool? Not so much.
Last edited:
David, you’re either too dishonest to engage with any further or too clueless to follow along—I’m not sure which. your word (I get it, you like the WNBA. Good for you. But try to understand my post in the context of this thread). I don’t like the WNBA, and that’s a textbook strawman. Again, you’re either too dishonest or too clueless—take your pick. Even though I’ve already said I’m not disagreeing with you on pool, apparently, I have to repeat myself, as that’s yet another strawman. I won’t be responding to you further on this topic, as you’re either too dishonest or clueless. I’ll give you the benefit of the doubt and go with dishonest.
Champion pool players aren't stars and that's the problem.
Champions can walk into a pool hall and most of the patrons have no idea who they are.
If they go to a super market, they are anonymous.
Until pool has real stars it won't have real money.
Content is sold by stars........
In Hollywood they can make movies without human actors but they haven't figured out how to sell them........
A good place to start is commentators having complete bios on every player...........
That's mostly true in the US, but my non-playing co-worker did know who the Black Widow was, and was delighted to get an inscribed poster from her.
In Vietnam, Fedor was mobbed and they tore his shirt off. He then got three body guards and moved to a different hotel.
You're not wrong.
Back to the Tiger Woods analogy. While he was a remarkable talent, his story was as responsible for his popularity as his talent...
Scrunge19
Registered
This sounds like a chicken or the egg situation. Does pool not have real stars because the players aren’t engaging enough or is it because people don’t care enough about pool to know who the top guys are? My money is on the latter.
insidesp.in
Member
For Kaci, here are the *actual* numbers. Check the WNT earnings vs Est. Expenses vs Net Winnings.
You'd be surprised how few players are NET positive.
We add up the wins by tour, you input an estimate travel amount expense then we subtract that out of all the winnings per event you play. One caveat, if you travel to a tournament that has multiple events (say Ultimate Pool), we only count that as 1 travel expense.
You'd be surprised how few players are NET positive.
We add up the wins by tour, you input an estimate travel amount expense then we subtract that out of all the winnings per event you play. One caveat, if you travel to a tournament that has multiple events (say Ultimate Pool), we only count that as 1 travel expense.
insidesp.in
Member
Probably a little bit of both. Most of these players are have 0 personality/charisma during a match.
Counterexample:
I once read/heard an interview Michael Mizrachi who preferred to be aggressive early in a tournament. It would either provide him with a big stack or get him eliminated early. Getting knocked out early has a much lower opportunity cost than being eliminated just out of the money.
Eklent was 4 and out in Phoenix -- L W W L -- 49th/64th, losing to Asis and Teutscher.
Play better.
Or get a job like the rest of us......
Or get a job like the rest of us......
insidesp.in
Member
sjm,
sure there might be a bunch that pay $25k, but when 15-20 different guys can win what is 1 25k payday going to cover? 6 months of tournaments?
last i checked 15 different people won the last 15 matchroom events
just saying the pie of available money is spread super thin in pro pool, it’s not like tennis where the same 2 or 3 guys win every event
Correct on all counts. A top TV director told me decades ago "You need to create stars!"
stars sell, and that is all there is to it.
pool lost almost all stars and exciting to watch players. some have the
potential but are not paid to show it.
in other sports people watch for out- bursts from exciting players doing even little things. boring players have no audience.
long ago people watched golf just waiting to see tommy bolt fire his club someplace after hitting a bad shot.
or john daly pull his antics.
in pool when fats, crazy bruce, ronnie allen, corn bread, etc. played. there was a crowd around just them everytime.
if people were playing they would quit to watch the show.
tennis has mansour bahrami, when he is around a tournament all the attention is on him.
even ice skating was watchable with scott hamilton. and got even better with the kerrigan, harding episode . soon after ice skating was all over tv.
pool lost almost all stars and exciting to watch players. some have the
potential but are not paid to show it.
in other sports people watch for out- bursts from exciting players doing even little things. boring players have no audience.
long ago people watched golf just waiting to see tommy bolt fire his club someplace after hitting a bad shot.
or john daly pull his antics.
in pool when fats, crazy bruce, ronnie allen, corn bread, etc. played. there was a crowd around just them everytime.
if people were playing they would quit to watch the show.
tennis has mansour bahrami, when he is around a tournament all the attention is on him.
even ice skating was watchable with scott hamilton. and got even better with the kerrigan, harding episode . soon after ice skating was all over tv.