Bergman vs DeChaine

(((Satori)))

AzB Silver Member
Silver Member
Your last line
What player or backer would bet money off that?
If there wasn't a player or backer to bet we wouldn't have any matches .

I think that most players and backers would bet on their self or their horse in a race to one if that was all that was available. Guys like action. Of course they are looking to get the best of any action they can get but that would not stop them from betting in a short race if that was what was available in the big ppv events. These same guys bet big bucks in a casino while taking the worst of it. Wouldn't you play and bet on a shorter race with someone just below your level if it meant bringing in more fans and sponsors?

IMO, to bring in the big bucks, even to events like fight nights their needs to be fans. The fans lead to sponsors and the sponsors lead to money. In order to bring in the fans there needs to be entertainment and the best entertainment is short races where there is lots of emotion, every shot matters, and the fans at the events can get a little excitement going while watching. The atmosphere makes it more exciting even for the fans who are not present and watching online.

Plus the average fan has a short attention span.
 
Last edited:

Cory in DC

AzB Silver Member
Silver Member
Out of curiosity how many pro matches like this have ended up 100-99 or 100-98? Every one that I can remember seeing/hearing about had a wider gap.

The final score in the famous Reyes-Strickland Color of Money match was 120 - 117.

Speaking of which, you can watch the last two racks here: http://getbetteratpool.com/uncategorized/efren-reyes-winning-moment-in-the-color-of-money/.

It could easily have been closer (or reversed). Earl had two somewhat bad luck scratches, one in each of the last two games.
 

one stroke

AzB Silver Member
Silver Member
a race to 100 ending 100-99, the better player can still end up losing.

The only thing we can conclude is the winner was the better player those two days.

That's all we can ever conclude from any race no matter how long it is the sample size is still to small ,, we Earl beat Shane like a red headed step child I think the vast majority still thought Shane was the best player just not that race ,,


1
 

BRussell

AzB Silver Member
Silver Member
Your last line
What player or backer would bet money off that?
If there wasn't a player or backer to bet we wouldn't have any matches .

I was being a little facetious with that comment. But I have to ask: Race to 15, no one is going to bet on that? Best of 5 sets, each set a race to 5, no money on that? And, without backers or betting players, no matches, at all? Really? I don't think pool would cease to exist without that. In Europe and Asia they've got serious clubs and youth programs and a pro tour. We could if we had the will.
 

real bartram

Real Cold Steel
Silver Member
I was being a little facetious with that comment. But I have to ask: Race to 15, no one is going to bet on that? Best of 5 sets, each set a race to 5, no money on that? And, without backers or betting players, no matches, at all? Really? I don't think pool would cease to exist without that. In Europe and Asia they've got serious clubs and youth programs and a pro tour. We could if we had the will.

Yes without backers or players betting you would not have any of these matches .
These are matches people seem to want to watch .
Sure you can go watch the tourning stone this week .
But how often is there a pro tourney in the USA ?
 

1 Lone Wolf

AzB Silver Member
Silver Member
Old School

I believe ahead sets are the best way to play for big $$$$, 15 ahead over 2 days. Start 7pm, play till 3am. This truly shows the fight in the player.
 

Poolplaya9

Tellin' it like it is...
Silver Member
I believe ahead sets are the best way to play for big $$$$, 15 ahead over 2 days. Start 7pm, play till 3am. This truly shows the fight in the player.

How can you schedule 15 ahead sets for two days? They take however long they take. Could be done first day, might take a week. If you mean just stop at the end of two days and prorate, well then that kind of defeats the purpose of an ahead set as far as definitively settling anything.

That said, while I agree that an ahead set of that amount (15 ahead) is good, they aren't infallible like people make them out to be. People act like that it always 100% proves who is better and it doesn't always. It may prove who was better on those days, but it is possible in some cases for it not to even do that.

A few examples of that are if the rolls go one way for a little bit it is possible for the guy who wasn't supposed to win to win. Or the guy who is supposed to win can get the runs that day for some reason affecting his concentration and his play enough to cause him to lose. And if the match goes long enough, 15 ahead isn't all that much difference between players. For example if a total of 1001 games had been played by the time the winner got 15 ahead, the winner will have only won about 3% more games than the loser. Hardly earth shattering conclusive. That is about equivalent to winning 100 to 97 in a race to 100.

While very good, a long ahead set certainly isn't infallible like people paint it out to be, but more importantly the format isn't really suited for PPV unfortunately due to the unknown length of time and they don't tend to be the most exciting format either.
 

BeiberLvr

AzB Silver Member
Silver Member
When did gambling become about entertainment?

The length of the match should be determined by the players and the backers, and the "entertainment value" should play no part in the decision.
 

BeiberLvr

AzB Silver Member
Silver Member
When did gambling become about entertainment?

The length of the match should be determined by the players and the backers, and the "entertainment value" should play no part in the decision.
 

(((Satori)))

AzB Silver Member
Silver Member
When did gambling become about entertainment?

The length of the match should be determined by the players and the backers, and the "entertainment value" should play no part in the decision.

When it added in the element of putting on a show for people to pay to see.


It's only smart business to consider what would draw in the most paid viewers and sponsors to bring in the outside money
 

Poolplaya9

Tellin' it like it is...
Silver Member
When did gambling become about entertainment?

The length of the match should be determined by the players and the backers, and the "entertainment value" should play no part in the decision.

Well from the very first post this thread as been about the public's desires for things in matches they will presumably be able to watch through some medium such as a PPV stream. Of course entertainment is an important factor, as is having a format which does a reasonable job giving the public a reasonably definitive answer as the who the better player was those days (because those are the things the public wants) but without losing any viewing excitement (because that is what the public wants). This whole conversation has been about what the public wants so by definition entertainment value is going to be one of the primary factors.

Now what the players want to do in a vacuum that has nothing to do with the public is an entirely different thread and discussion than this one. Unless we are one of the backers or one of the two players involved I don't think anyone really cares how two people match up if it is a private match up not specifically being aired for public entertainment. They can play races to one or to one million for all anybody cares. But if the match is to be put out there for public consumption, and even more so if they are having to pay for it, then the public is rightfully going to want a match format that is likely to provide viewing excitement and that also does a reasonable job of answering who the better player is for those days--the two main things that are important to them.
 
Top