Why does snooker thrive and pool die?

skogstokig

AzB Silver Member
Silver Member
Please read the entire post and not only the topic question

I am an avid american pool fan, it's a big part of my heart and life. The best game in the world. It's with great sadness i see pool halls closing and world elite pool getting almost no media attention. But why is this?

I'd like to make a comparison. In Europa and in Asia the game of snooker is very popular. It's one of the fastest growing sports in the arab world and in eastern asia. Even people who doesn't play or even feel remotely interested in snooker know who Ronnie O'Sullivan is, just like average joe knows who Shaq O'neil is in the USA, no matter whether they have an interest in basketball or not. I myself like to watch snooker even though i don't play it and there are lots of broadcasts here in europe to see it, most people have eurosport, SKY or BBC in their TV:s, even in poor countries like Romania.

I have been thinking a lot about this, in order to try to identify the differences. In my eyes pool can be just as entertaining as snooker. Why then does snooker have money and media attention and pool does not? These are a few differences between the games, i will list a few and hope some join in and add to the list:

1. Availability and media attention. Snooker is not a PPV sport. PPV doesn't even exist in many countries in Europe and Asia. Instead, snooker is broadcasted widely on big TV channels mentioned above, and even public service TV in China, reaching millions and millions of viewers. This creates interest, money and new aspiring players.

2. Advertising and sponsorship. Pool tourneys tend to have cue tip or cue manufacturers as sponsors. Snooker have betting companies, poker sites, beer, i.e. BIG MONEY. These businesses - as opposed to for example kamui tips - attract viewers widely. They watch snooker and then go to unibet, bettson, etc and SPEND money. This leads to 3 and 4.

3. Prize money is big. Winners of a snooker tournament can win £625,000. Thats a million dollars in prize fund. And that's UK champs, not even the biggest tournament - the world championship has DOUBLE that in prize fund. And it doesn't end there, if any player makes a perfect rack (147) they can win £60,000, thats almost a 100 000$. In ten minutes flat. Aside from this the players make great money in company gigs, advertising and sponsorship. Some players have earned more than world elite golfers, tennis players, etc. And big money is not only good for the sport, it also leads to admiration and to people wanting to start playing snooker.

4. Betting on the games is big and is growing, and it's not something that happens in obscure places/internet forums. Go to one of the betting sites mentioned above, or any other, pick a winner and you can win loads of money. I won some 1000$ last year, and as a said i'm not even primarily a snooker fan.

5. Rules of the game are stable and not changing much. That means, once the people have learned the game they can follow it on the TV and get the hang of it. Also, there is only one governing body world wide and it has great authority.

There are probably more differences and discussion points, please fill in.

I don't have a simple solution or answer but i think that looking at the snooker scene and the snooker business - because it is a business - can help pool a lot. The first thing i would go for is advertising. Kamui tips are great, i'm not dissing them - i use it myself, but advertising needs to attract the wide audience. Where are the big gambling sites in pool sponsorship? Is it not legal to have that kind of ads? As i have tried to show it's an upward spiral: big attention -> big money -> financially successful players -> admiration -> new players
 

SplicedPoints

AzB Silver Member
Silver Member
No answers here.
But you're looking at Snooker 'now'.
I think it might be useful to look at how snooker got here. It didn't get to be popular without someone doing something about it.
Maybe someone who knows the history of snooker development can chime in.
 

Maniac

2manyQ's
Silver Member
The people in the countries where snooker is popular don't have the quality of professional sports like we have here in America. It's damn hard to get media attention/coverage when you have sports such as NFL football, NBA basketball, MLB baseball, NHL hockey, PGA golf, MMA & UFC fighting, NCAA football, NCAA basketball, and NASCAR filling up most time slots on television and the sports sections of daily newspapers. And I probably didn't even list them all. America has spoken (via ratings) as to what we choose to watch on television, and pool is not even a blip on the radar anymore.

You think Asians or Arabs are going to be as big on football or NASCAR (just two examples) as they would naturally be with snooker, a game that is more suited to their culture/physical traits???

IMO, I can't see pool ever getting to be mainstream enough in America again to garner any serious TV time. I hope I'm wrong.

Maniac
 

Paul Schofield

AzB Silver Member
Silver Member
Mike Shamos wrote a piece within the last year for the Billiards Digest on exactly this topic. It was fascinating and insightful. As a matter of fact, I read it a number of times. His analysis differs significantly from the OP. When I get to work I will look it up and post what issue it was in.

I want to add something here. For every person who's interest in this game is outside of "playing good pool", Mike Shamos is required reading.
 
Last edited:

Slh

AzB Silver Member
Silver Member
The people in the countries where snooker is popular don't have the quality of professional sports like we have here in America. It's damn hard to get media attention/coverage when you have sports such as NFL football, NBA basketball, MLB baseball, NHL hockey, PGA golf, MMA & UFC fighting, NCAA football, NCAA basketball, and NASCAR filling up most time slots on television and the sports sections of daily newspapers. And I probably didn't even list them all. America has spoken (via ratings) as to what we choose to watch on television, and pool is not even a blip on the radar anymore.

You think Asians or Arabs are going to be as big on football or NASCAR (just two examples) as they would naturally be with snooker, a game that is more suited to their culture/physical traits???

IMO, I can't see pool ever getting to be mainstream enough in America again to garner any serious TV time. I hope I'm wrong.

Maniac
that's not the reason. In Europe we have football ( or soccer) which is the most followed sport in the world. We have F1 and basketball.
Other sports like baseball, hockey, nascar are generally considered "rubbish" sports in Europe. Golf has a good fanbase who plays it but I don't know a single person who actually follows it in TV.
 

JAM

AzB Silver Member
Silver Member
Snooker currently successful?
Two Words - BARRY HEARN

And the only thing the pros look forward to in American professional pool, accumulating those precious so-called "ranking points," is what Barry Hearn offers: Mosconi Cup.

I did not know he suffered a heart attack in 2002.
 

Attachments

  • _59975981_hearnpoints.jpg
    _59975981_hearnpoints.jpg
    29.3 KB · Views: 858

TheThaiger

Banned
The people in the countries where snooker is popular don't have the quality of professional sports like we have here in America. It's damn hard to get media attention/coverage when you have sports such as NFL football, NBA basketball, MLB baseball, NHL hockey, PGA golf, MMA & UFC fighting, NCAA football, NCAA basketball, and NASCAR filling up most time slots on television and the sports sections of daily newspapers. And I probably didn't even list them all. America has spoken (via ratings) as to what we choose to watch on television, and pool is not even a blip on the radar anymore.

You think Asians or Arabs are going to be as big on football or NASCAR (just two examples) as they would naturally be with snooker, a game that is more suited to their culture/physical traits???

IMO, I can't see pool ever getting to be mainstream enough in America again to garner any serious TV time. I hope I'm wrong.

Maniac

Newsflash buddy: nobody in the rest of the world cares about american sports. We have plenty of our own to be getting on with. Football and cricket are head and shoulders above every other sport in terms of popularity, yet we still manage to find the time to watch a little snooker.

Quite what cultural and physical traits have to do with the popularity of pool is anyone's guess...
 

bender_lu

AzB Silver Member
Silver Member
No answers here.
But you're looking at Snooker 'now'.
I think it might be useful to look at how snooker got here. It didn't get to be popular without someone doing something about it.
Maybe someone who knows the history of snooker development can chime in.

when color TVs first came out, one of the larger channels (was it BBC back then? dont know) needed a program where different colors would be a fundamental aspect.
snooker was perfect for this and thats how it got first on TV.

im quite happy that kazoom now offers a nice PPV for eurotour and EPC, think its about 100 euros for the entire year.
 

Worminator

AzB Gold Member
Gold Member
Silver Member
I have but one question on this subject... if Snooker is so popular and has all this sponsorship money, why aren't the best cueists in the world switching from pool to snooker?

Guys like Alex, SVB, Fransisco, etc. could all make the transition to snooker and be top level players.
 

TimKrazyMon

Kid Delicious' Evil Twin
Silver Member
Please read the entire post and not only the topic question

I am an avid american pool fan, it's a big part of my heart and life. The best game in the world. It's with great sadness i see pool halls closing and world elite pool getting almost no media attention. But why is this?

I'd like to make a comparison. In Europa and in Asia the game of snooker is very popular. It's one of the fastest growing sports in the arab world and in eastern asia. Even people who doesn't play or even feel remotely interested in snooker know who Ronnie O'Sullivan is, just like average joe knows who Shaq O'neil is in the USA, no matter whether they have an interest in basketball or not. I myself like to watch snooker even though i don't play it and there are lots of broadcasts here in europe to see it, most people have eurosport, SKY or BBC in their TV:s, even in poor countries like Romania.

I have been thinking a lot about this, in order to try to identify the differences. In my eyes pool can be just as entertaining as snooker. Why then does snooker have money and media attention and pool does not? These are a few differences between the games, i will list a few and hope some join in and add to the list:

1. Availability and media attention. Snooker is not a PPV sport. PPV doesn't even exist in many countries in Europe and Asia. Instead, snooker is broadcasted widely on big TV channels mentioned above, and even public service TV in China, reaching millions and millions of viewers. This creates interest, money and new aspiring players.

2. Advertising and sponsorship. Pool tourneys tend to have cue tip or cue manufacturers as sponsors. Snooker have betting companies, poker sites, beer, i.e. BIG MONEY. These businesses - as opposed to for example kamui tips - attract viewers widely. They watch snooker and then go to unibet, bettson, etc and SPEND money. This leads to 3 and 4.

3. Prize money is big. Winners of a snooker tournament can win £625,000. Thats a million dollars in prize fund. And that's UK champs, not even the biggest tournament - the world championship has DOUBLE that in prize fund. And it doesn't end there, if any player makes a perfect rack (147) they can win £60,000, thats almost a 100 000$. In ten minutes flat. Aside from this the players make great money in company gigs, advertising and sponsorship. Some players have earned more than world elite golfers, tennis players, etc. And big money is not only good for the sport, it also leads to admiration and to people wanting to start playing snooker.

4. Betting on the games is big and is growing, and it's not something that happens in obscure places/internet forums. Go to one of the betting sites mentioned above, or any other, pick a winner and you can win loads of money. I won some 1000$ last year, and as a said i'm not even primarily a snooker fan.

5. Rules of the game are stable and not changing much. That means, once the people have learned the game they can follow it on the TV and get the hang of it. Also, there is only one governing body world wide and it has great authority.

There are probably more differences and discussion points, please fill in.

I don't have a simple solution or answer but i think that looking at the snooker scene and the snooker business - because it is a business - can help pool a lot. The first thing i would go for is advertising. Kamui tips are great, i'm not dissing them - i use it myself, but advertising needs to attract the wide audience. Where are the big gambling sites in pool sponsorship? Is it not legal to have that kind of ads? As i have tried to show it's an upward spiral: big attention -> big money -> financially successful players -> admiration -> new players

To answer your points:

1. Pool on TV in America has never come close to the ratings achieved by snooker. EVER. Which leads to.....

2. Who's going to put up sponsorship $$ if nobody is watching, so..

3. Not a whole lot of big $$ in pool.

4. Ahhh, the betting. Pool, unfortunately, can't even be bet on in Vegas due to players demonstrating they will take a dive. Yes, it's happened.

5. Most of the different pool games have had stable rules for a very long time. The only one that has changed much is 9ball, and that was just the rules on the break.
 

TheThaiger

Banned
Please read the entire post and not only the topic question

I am an avid american pool fan, it's a big part of my heart and life. The best game in the world. It's with great sadness i see pool halls closing and world elite pool getting almost no media attention. But why is this?

I'd like to make a comparison. In Europa and in Asia the game of snooker is very popular. It's one of the fastest growing sports in the arab world and in eastern asia. Even people who doesn't play or even feel remotely interested in snooker know who Ronnie O'Sullivan is, just like average joe knows who Shaq O'neil is in the USA, no matter whether they have an interest in basketball or not. I myself like to watch snooker even though i don't play it and there are lots of broadcasts here in europe to see it, most people have eurosport, SKY or BBC in their TV:s, even in poor countries like Romania.

I have been thinking a lot about this, in order to try to identify the differences. In my eyes pool can be just as entertaining as snooker. Why then does snooker have money and media attention and pool does not? These are a few differences between the games, i will list a few and hope some join in and add to the list:

1. Availability and media attention. Snooker is not a PPV sport. PPV doesn't even exist in many countries in Europe and Asia. Instead, snooker is broadcasted widely on big TV channels mentioned above, and even public service TV in China, reaching millions and millions of viewers. This creates interest, money and new aspiring players.

2. Advertising and sponsorship. Pool tourneys tend to have cue tip or cue manufacturers as sponsors. Snooker have betting companies, poker sites, beer, i.e. BIG MONEY. These businesses - as opposed to for example kamui tips - attract viewers widely. They watch snooker and then go to unibet, bettson, etc and SPEND money. This leads to 3 and 4.

3. Prize money is big. Winners of a snooker tournament can win £625,000. Thats a million dollars in prize fund. And that's UK champs, not even the biggest tournament - the world championship has DOUBLE that in prize fund. And it doesn't end there, if any player makes a perfect rack (147) they can win £60,000, thats almost a 100 000$. In ten minutes flat. Aside from this the players make great money in company gigs, advertising and sponsorship. Some players have earned more than world elite golfers, tennis players, etc. And big money is not only good for the sport, it also leads to admiration and to people wanting to start playing snooker.

4. Betting on the games is big and is growing, and it's not something that happens in obscure places/internet forums. Go to one of the betting sites mentioned above, or any other, pick a winner and you can win loads of money. I won some 1000$ last year, and as a said i'm not even primarily a snooker fan.

5. Rules of the game are stable and not changing much. That means, once the people have learned the game they can follow it on the TV and get the hang of it. Also, there is only one governing body world wide and it has great authority.

There are probably more differences and discussion points, please fill in.

I don't have a simple solution or answer but i think that looking at the snooker scene and the snooker business - because it is a business - can help pool a lot. The first thing i would go for is advertising. Kamui tips are great, i'm not dissing them - i use it myself, but advertising needs to attract the wide audience. Where are the big gambling sites in pool sponsorship? Is it not legal to have that kind of ads? As i have tried to show it's an upward spiral: big attention -> big money -> financially successful players -> admiration -> new players

I think the strength of snooker is overplayed a little. It's popularity in the UK is declining, with very little interest shown in the game by younger generations. Football and Xbox are kings now. It is still a fringe game throughout Europe, although it will probably continue to build on recent growth, especially in eastern Europe. China is the real hope - if interests dies-off there, the game will be in trouble again.

I'd need to check, which I can't be bothered to do, but I think your prize money's a little out there. I think winners of the big tournaments get significantly less than you've listed - about £250k for the World Champs, I think. Anyway, there's not THAT much money in snooker. It certainly isn't mega money for anyone.

As to why snooker is more popular than pool, you make some good points: standardised rules are key, as is standardised equipment and one governing body. I would also say standardised TECHNIQUE is important here, too - I don't want to reopen old wounds, but how pool technique is taught, and the plethora of inelegant styles (and poor players) this has created, is also a barrier for pool.

In short, snooker is pure. Pool is mongrel.
 

TheThaiger

Banned
I have but one question on this subject... if Snooker is so popular and has all this sponsorship money, why aren't the best cueists in the world switching from pool to snooker?

Guys like Alex, SVB, Fransisco, etc. could all make the transition to snooker and be top level players.

:grin:

Astonishing. The best cueists in the world ARE playing snooker!!
 

Pre-Flag Master

Cue Ball Man
Silver Member
I have but one question on this subject... if Snooker is so popular and has all this sponsorship money, why aren't the best cueists in the world switching from pool to snooker?

Guys like Alex, SVB, Fransisco, etc. could all make the transition to snooker and be top level players.

Don't get me wrong, I love Busty, but with that wavy stroke, I bet he would stink up the place playing snooker.

Fatz
 

labatt ice rod

AzB Silver Member
Silver Member
I have but one question on this subject... if Snooker is so popular and has all this sponsorship money, why aren't the best cueists in the world switching from pool to snooker?

Guys like Alex, SVB, Fransisco, etc. could all make the transition to snooker and be top level players.

Alex will be playing Snooker soon. He just won back to back Canadian Snooker Championships. (look on my youtube page Rod Babin Channel for videos) He was to be on tour but gave his spot to Floyd Ziegler as i think its a 2 year commitment
 

Slh

AzB Silver Member
Silver Member
Alex will be playing Snooker soon. He just won back to back Canadian Snooker Championships. (look on my youtube page Rod Babin Channel for videos) He was to be on tour but gave his spot to Floyd Ziegler as i think its a 2 year commitment
Hi
do you know why Alex decided to gave his spot away?

I watched the canadian snooker championship and even though Alex didn't play as well as the last year, he still won the tournament. He also had the high run of the tournament, 134, if I remember correctly. The tables in the canadian championship play a little looser than the usual tables in the pro tour, but they also play a lot slower. He also had a 147 in pratice.
Here his 134 break:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Oekjq8nbSgQ
 

swisslife77

....let me play....
Silver Member
Well, how to disagree?
Snooker "look" more succesful, specially thanks to the fact that there is only one game (so one set of rules) and one governing body!
And also few producers of goods to "feed".

But we can't compare! The games are too different!

Pool stays to snooker liker beer to wine!
At least that's how it's perceived by the average man!
 

BasementDweller

AzB Silver Member
Silver Member
I'm a sucker for this subject. Every time I see a thread on it I'm forced to read it.

I really think the major difference has been in how the two games have been packaged to the audience. Snooker is a great drama. They develop their characters and story lines and allow the game to be played out slowly on the table - drawing the fans in. Often times the suspense builds and builds and then once in a blue moon you get to see something as magnificent as a 147. This keeps people coming back.

Pool on the other hand, is packaged (for the most part) as an action sport. Wham, Bam, thank you maam. Nine-ball is especially like this. They smash the rack open and run out; the racks are over with quickly, as are the matches. There is no development of the characters involved in the action. All the players involved are pretty much interchangeable from the audience's perspective. This makes it really difficult to get the audience to come back for more. I don't think pool as an action sport works on TV. It has to be different.

Pool has to be drama + action, and I think that's what the Mosconi Cup sort of does. It has to be something more than 2 random guys (or gals) playing a meaningless race to 7.

Call me crazy, but I actually think a game like 1 pocket could be developed as a good drama. You would never run this live or unedited. But you could set up the match with some background information on the players and explain the rules and what they are trying to accomplish. Even mixing in a rack of 1 pocket, inside a 2 hour broadcast of some other discipline could be interesting. An epic battle between a young gun and old master, showing only the final rack could be interesting.

I don't know....I have so many thoughts on this subject. But I honestly have zero real knowledge of how this stuff really works like some on AZ. So they are just my random musings.
 
Last edited:

Scaramouche

AzB Silver Member
Silver Member
:grin:

Astonishing. The best cueists in the world ARE playing snooker!!

Tell the truth, they have played pool :grin:

Steve Davis vs Steve Mizerak
Straight Pool
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PilVaTOyDII
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eQpsVnhASo8


A frame of snooker can be perfect and take 5 minutes 20 seconds, or tun into a defensive battle that will last more than an hour.

Pool on TV has no suspense.
Everything is fast - 9-ball, speed pool.
I was watched the Challenge of Champions trick shot competition, most notable for the fact that the players couldn't execute their own tricks. :eek:

Pool has no organization. As has been pointed out, the only ranking is for the Mosconi Cup, run by a snooker promoter.

Used to be that the public knew Minnesota Fats and Willy Mosconi. Pool players, with the odd exception like Jeanette Lee, don't promote themselves. Without a compelling personality - Arnie Palmer, Jimmy Connors, Joe Namath - a sport won't penetrate the collective awareness

Snooker Events during the 2012/13 season:

Asian PTC1: Stuart Bingham
Wuxi Classic: Ricky Walden
6 Red World Championship: Mark Davis
Australian Goldfields Open: Barry Hawkins
UK PTC1: Stephen Maguire
UK PTC2: Martin Gould
European Tour 1 (Paul Hunter Classic): Mark Selby
UK PTC3: Rod Lawler
Shanghai Masters: John Higgins
Asian PTC2
European Tour 2
European Tour 3
Seniors World Championship
International Championship
Asian PTC3
UK PTC4
European Tour 4
Premier League Final
UK Championship
European Tour 5
European Tour 6
The Masters
Snooker Shoot-Out
German Masters
Welsh Open
Haikou World Open
PTC Grand Finals
Championship League
China Open
World Championship

One thing to note, Ron Lawler was a winner, as an amateur. He had been dropped from the list of ranked players and had to come back though Q school.

If you had looked at a schedule a few years ago, many of these opportunities were not there. Now, if players are willing to travel, they can play regularly.

Snooker is declining, in the UK and Canada, but growing elsewhere.
Lose of booze an tobacco sponsorship severely reduced UK tournaments and prize money. Recovery has only been in the past two years. Lots of money up for grabs in China.
 

sfleinen

14.1 & One Pocket Addict
Gold Member
Silver Member
[...]
As to why snooker is more popular than pool, you make some good points: standardised rules are key, as is standardised equipment and one governing body. I would also say standardised TECHNIQUE is important here, too - I don't want to reopen old wounds, but how pool technique is taught, and the plethora of inelegant styles (and poor players) this has created, is also a barrier for pool.

In short, snooker is pure. Pool is mongrel.

With this, I have to agree -- especially that last part. If the average Joe/Jane Doe tunes to a snooker match on TV, within a short while, they can observe the rules. Because of standardization, snooker's rules are actually easy in comparison to what one would find in pool on TV.

Pool on TV is a gamble on what you're going to see, rules-wise. Talking about short-rack rotation pool alone -- nevermind the fact that chasing the lowest-numbered ball on the table isn't intuitive to the average Joe/Jane Doe who are use to "pattern pool" (i.e. 8-ball) -- the rules of the 9-ball break vary from tournament to tournament. I've watched the reactions of family members who don't play pool, but took an interest at that moment during, say, the Mosconi Cup, shake their heads and go "huh?!?" when the referee called an "Illegal break" on a player that breaks the rack pretty hard (but you folks know that 3 or more balls didn't cross the headstring).

When the IPT was going on, that was when I saw the average Joe/Jane Doe really show an interest in pool, because:
1. The rules were standardized (they were even announced before every match via Michael Buffer's cheesy "Let's get ready to rack 'emmmmmmmmmmm" battle cry).
2. This was a game that is not only simple to follow, but is a game that EVERYONE is familiar with -- 8-ball.
3. The production quality was EXCELLENT -- if there's one thing KT did, he hired the best production teams available.
4. There was just an "air" of excitement to the whole event; the build-up and the conclusion made for an enjoyable view, whether you were a pool nut like we were or just your average Joe/Jane Q. Public.

I'm not too sure that "technique" has anything to do with popularity on TV, because if there's one thing pool does offer in this respect, is variety. But I agree with Tim in that technique *does* have an effect with the average person's ability to be taught technique in a standardized way. Pool is all over the map in this regard; no rhyme or reason or standardized syllabus compared to snooker.

Good thread,
-Sean
 
Top