pool and snooker

I watched a very good docu movie a few years back going over the beginning of the snooker explosion. It was the right place with the right characters at the right time. It’s that simple. BBC wanted a show to make the new color tv’s pop and it chose snooker and dumped a bunch of money into it. Snooker at characters that people either loved or loved to hate. It was just timing and good fortune.

I did post a link way back then to watch it. Maybe a search will find it.

You all need to try to find a copy of " The Rack Pack". Great flik about Steve Davis, Hearn and the "Hurricane" Alex Higgins. Takes place during snooker's transition from back-room old fart's game to big-time money and t.v. https://www.imdb.com/title/tt2464690/ Also, how can you NOT like this guy: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P6DB-Qspze0 Crazy out.

garczar said:

You all need to try to find a copy of " The Rack Pack". Great flik about Steve Davis, Hearn and the "Hurricane" Alex Higgins. Takes place during snooker's transition from back-room old fart's game to big-time money and t.v. https://www.imdb.com/title/tt2464690/ Also, how can you NOT like this guy: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P6DB-Qspze0 Crazy out.

Click to expand...

There's a few really good documentaries out there (mostly made by the BBC if you can get access), but the film version The Rack Pack, as mentioned by garczar is definitely worth a watch, it tells the story really well!

In answer to the original question though, yes snooker is far better organised.

Just look at the difference when Matchroom organise a pool event...now imagine they ran a proper tour!

difficulty might be part of the difference

garczar said:

You all need to try to find a copy of " The Rack Pack". Great flik about Steve Davis, Hearn and the "Hurricane" Alex Higgins. Takes place during snooker's transition from back-room old fart's game to big-time money and t.v. https://www.imdb.com/title/tt2464690/ Also, how can you NOT like this guy: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P6DB-Qspze0 Crazy out.

Click to expand...

Most pool games played today don't show much gap between amateurs and pro's. In truth, nine ball race to seven there may not be any gap. On the other hand, watching Higgins fire in shots like that five ball at warp speed with lots of spin on the cue ball, anyone that has spent time on a snooker table knows that is as special as some of Efren's wilder shots.

Maybe we need tougher tables or a different game, something that widens the gap between pro's and amateurs. Hard to be in awe of the player in flipflops, shorts, and worn out t-shirt that isn't a lock to win the local monthly tournament.

Hu

Did snooker ever have the seedy reputation that pool has?

pj
chgo

tough to get past ...

Patrick Johnson said:

Did snooker ever have the seedy reputation that pool has?

pj
chgo

Click to expand...

Watching a movie, as soon as the actors step into a place with a pool table you get ready for a fight scene. The pool table is like the music changing in an old horror flick. When is the last time you saw a movie with a fight scene around a snooker or carom table, even an old movie?

I can't remember the last time I have seen a bloody fight in a pool hall but my little ol' lady aunts and cousins think that there are only brief pauses between the fights to play a little pool now and then.

Tough to beat perception that is constantly being fed. Pool doesn't deserve the seedy reputation today if it ever did but try to persuade people that watch movies and TV shows that there aren't a dozen fights, brawls, shootings, or knifings a day in a pool hall!

Pool is stuck with a reputation, snooker isn't. Even The Music Man distinguishes between upscale billiards and evil pool.

Hu

Patrick Johnson said:

Did snooker ever have the seedy reputation that pool has?

pj
chgo

Click to expand...

Snooker halls definitely did, not really sure about the game as a whole, probably not to the same extent as pool.

Like one of my instructors has told me, the people running pool don't seem to know what they are doing. there are big enough events in the US to organize a proper tour, but no one wants to play nice and share.

Also, snooker is on TV and people are able to gamble(legally) on it. Those are some of the reasons why snooker players get paid as much as they do. Not to mention matchroom actually punishes players, but that's because they are organized.

I was talking to my league director, and it's funny how we both agree that getting pool on TV and having a better reputation is rocket science like some people think it is. I just think some people want to shoot for the stars right away instead of slowly building something up.

ShootingArts said:

Maybe we need tougher tables or a different game, something that widens the gap between pro's and amateurs. Hard to be in awe of the player in flipflops, shorts, and worn out t-shirt that isn't a lock to win the local monthly tournament.

Hu

Click to expand...

These are your games then, but americN pool players dont want any part of it,
3 cushion players arent even interested in playing any other carom game!

i tried and failed all yr to get league pool players interested, a few came around for a month or 2, 99.9 percent of all the pool players in houston i reached out to not interested

1 cushion

https://youtu.be/fS7SWnCEDyY

Straight rail

https://youtu.be/ZVQWqbZjJw0

These guys that go 400 in a single inning can still miss, as good as these guys are, its still an incredibly difficult game, demands 100 percent focus on every shot
Much less luck involved in these, alot of really techincal cueing and knowledge
Also, dress code is a part of the culture of these games


14.1 is another great game that can really show what you can do

garczar said:

You all need to try to find a copy of " The Rack Pack". Great flik about Steve Davis, Hearn and the "Hurricane" Alex Higgins. Takes place during snooker's transition from back-room old fart's game to big-time money and t.v. https://www.imdb.com/title/tt2464690/ Also, how can you NOT like this guy: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P6DB-Qspze0 Crazy out.

Click to expand...

That’s the show I was talking about ! It was great!

garczar said:

Also, how can you NOT like this guy: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P6DB-Qspze0 Crazy out.

Click to expand...

i agree, a classic working class hero. and when he was done, jimmy was the hero, and after jimmy came ronnie as the peoples champion. not everybody did like alex for obvious reasons, i.e. his poor manners, but those people had davis to cheer for, and later hendry as the impeccable gentleman. so there was always someone in the players gallery to pick and like, much like a tv series

in the greater scheme of things i would say the difference isn't that big between pool and snooker. they are difficult in different ways. two things that stand out though:

1. organization. there is one strong governing body in pro snooker. conform and accept its rules or go home basically. i think this concept is very foreign to the american culture of individualism and free-wheelin'. at least i have trouble imagining an pool players accepting being subjects to an organization with strict rules and punitive measures. oh, you forgot your chalk in the back room and went to get it, delaying the match? ticked a frame then. you said the ref is a slug racking s.o.b.? you missed a shot and said the f word? pay a hefty fine. been visiting betting sites to bet on some matches none of which you were involved in? that's against the rules mate, suspended 6 months.

the organization and the rules are needed though. snooker is a working class sport just as pool is, and the practitioners of both sports are naturally individualistic. they need to be reigned in for it to even work. snooker would be nowhere without it

2. colors. this may seem banal but i have been thinking of this quite a bit. when i first watched snooker i had no clue. two frames in i got it. red, color, red, color, etc. no commentary was even needed, it's simple to follow. simple and visually beautiful. now my girlfriend has been watching some mosconi cup on tv, and i don't think she still knows the 4-ball is pink and the 6-ball is green, and the 7-ball might be next because the 6-ball went in on the break, etc. the string of balls in the lower screen helps a little but not much.

i think another system is needed for 9-ball or 10-ball to succeed on tv (8-ball is easy enough to follow but not as exciting). maybe a graphic enhancement that makes the next object ball blink and the next ball in succession blink a little less. something like that? something not too intrusive and annoying for the pool fans but still helpful for the casual viewers

bonus ball got a lot of flak and i was no fan of the game. but color-wise it was quite appealing. and to paraphrase randall mcmurphy: they tried, damnit. at least they did that.

The 2006 and 2007 9 ball world championships in Manila were organised by Matchroom, had a first prize of $100k and were well run. Steve Davis had a wild card one of those years and if I remember rightly all of his group matches, last 64, 32 and 16 matches were on the TV table. The crowds loved him, which tells us something about the reverence for cue sports in general in The Philippines. Such a shame that the relationship with Matchroom ended after this - it could have spent many years in Manila and it would have pulled the San Miguel/Guinness Asian 9 Ball tour along with it.

Matchroom now has the Mosconi Cup and the US Open plus the World Cup of Pool. All it needs is the World Championship and then it will have an annual series of events where it can promote the game and the players and get them into the public conscious at least in a small way. They held a rival world championship once before, the WPA had enough sense to recognise it and then sanction it. Let’s hope they do it again.

Sounds easier said than done? Well they have a track record. If they can do it with darts they can do it with pool. World Cup of Pool in Europe, US Open in the USA, World 9 Ball Championship in Asia. Then add an 8 ball world championship, a “high roller” 10 ball where the players pay a fee to enter and this fee is matched by Matchroom - and you have the start of something big. Forget about reaching the level,of prize money of snooker, just decent prize money that reflects pool’s status as a “major cue sport” (something that Barry Hearn has stated he would like pool to be).

If anyone is interested in an indepth accounting of the snooker boom in the UK, I recommend Pocket Money by Gordon Brown.

https://www.amazon.ca/Pocket-Money-...1247&sr=8-2&keywords=pocket+money+gordon+burn

Absolutely there were certainly important factors like Alex Higgins and colour tv. It was also useful that prior to the game's surge in popularity players made most of their money from exhibitions, so they were not only great players some of them were showmen as well.

But none of that matters if you don't have smart people behind the scenes taking advantage of the increased interest. And you can not discount the contributions of Barry Hearn. He was great at enticing sponsors and promoting his teams of Matchroom players, which ultimately promoted the game as well.

The players were not playing for the kind of money they are now back in the early 80's. In 1977, near the beginning, the winner of the world championship received, adjusted for inflation, $45,000. In 1980 that grew to $77,000. The current state of affairs was due in large parts to the efforts of promoters. This organisation and promotion hasn't been consistent all of this time though. For a long time the game was in decline and was essentially just benefiting from the momentum of the 80's. But things have changed with Hearn back in the driver seat of World Snooker.

Pool has had surges in interest but there hasn't been the organisation to really take advantage of it. Pool also has the personalities to capture peoples attention. The game doesn't need a millionaire to fund the game, it needs someone who can organise and promote it without expecting players to be playing for $1 million in a year. And they need to do it without gimmicks. People play 8 ball, and they somewhat know 9 ball. Give them what they know and play.

Hard to Explain Clearly in Just a Post.

evergruven said:

hu/shootingarts, I nearly posted a thread recently regarding the very topic you brought up..does the gap between pros and amateurs need to be wider?
on one hand, you'd think how accessible pool is would be good for the sport..

I honestly haven't played snooker, so I don't know how difficult it really is, but is it much harder than pool?

I just watched darren appleton clean shane's clock 2012 mohegan..jay shaw, chris melling, karl boyes..before you even had steve davis and rocket ronnie shooting pool, with some success.

not to hijack the thread, but again, hu, maybe this has something to do with what you posted- the money seems to be better, why don't we see any(?) yanks potting reds?
is it more difficult to go from pool-snooker than snooker-pool?

so many questions, and a lot of good observations/insights on both pool and snooker here...thanks all for contributing!

Click to expand...

I moved my reply to a new thread. I wrote a tome to cover most of the ground, still more to cover, some people have met success in other fields including Efren and Alex.

https://forums.azbilliards.com/showthread.php?p=6285629#post6285629

45 grand is still more then our players our making for a 1st place finish 40 years later lol

Cameron Smith said:

If anyone is interested in an indepth accounting of the snooker boom in the UK, I recommend Pocket Money by Gordon Brown.

https://www.amazon.ca/Pocket-Money-...1247&sr=8-2&keywords=pocket+money+gordon+burn

Absolutely there were certainly important factors like Alex Higgins and colour tv. It was also useful that prior to the game's surge in popularity players made most of their money from exhibitions, so they were not only great players some of them were showmen as well.

But none of that matters if you don't have smart people behind the scenes taking advantage of the increased interest. And you can not discount the contributions of Barry Hearn. He was great at enticing sponsors and promoting his teams of Matchroom players, which ultimately promoted the game as well.

The players were not playing for the kind of money they are now back in the early 80's. In 1977, near the beginning, the winner of the world championship received, adjusted for inflation, $45,000. In 1980 that grew to $77,000. The current state of affairs was due in large parts to the efforts of promoters. This organisation and promotion hasn't been consistent all of this time though. For a long time the game was in decline and was essentially just benefiting from the momentum of the 80's. But things have changed with Hearn back in the driver seat of World Snooker.

Pool has had surges in interest but there hasn't been the organisation to really take advantage of it. Pool also has the personalities to capture peoples attention. The game doesn't need a millionaire to fund the game, it needs someone who can organise and promote it without expecting players to be playing for $1 million in a year. And they need to do it without gimmicks. People play 8 ball, and they somewhat know 9 ball. Give them what they know and play.

Click to expand...