What does Poker have that Pool doesn't?

Its Easy/Anyone can win/NOT

Payouts are large, they sell it like "anyone" can win, and with the hole card camera everyone "knows" what they would do. I find it fun to watch but the more I have watched the less I stay with it. It doesn't have enough "game" to keep me interested. I like watching Roddick, the Wms sisters get beat, people "peaking" at a certain point in their career, I like it when its hill/hill with Reyes and Archer, or Earl hitting the 10th in a row for a Mill. The casinos are just selling to get more suckers in and have found a way, more power to em. Well, gotta go, looking forward to the final four, I hope poker isn't on because I know they would get poor ratings and wouldn't want that when there pitchin' it to sell air time. Go OKlahoma!!!!!!!!!!! to all the employees at Magoos in Tulsa. BF

What Does Poker Have That Pool Doesn't?

dreco said:

I enjoy watching and playing both pool and poker, although, if they were women I would marry pool before I would marry poker (I think pool is prettier and has a better personality LOL). Looking at the way poker has been growing on cable TV the last couple of years its probably going to be on network TV in the near future and pool can barely get airtime on ESPN while there are weekly poker shows on the travel channel. Beyond the recent tv coverage poker has had million dollar tournaments for decades, maybe we need to get pool tables on casino floors in Las Vegas to help pool grow. But getting to the point, what I wanted to discuss was the similarities and differences between poker and pool and why poker is "catching on" the way it is versus pool. Personally I don't even think poker is a sport, its a game like chess where no physical skill is needed just mental ability and the right strategies pool at least requires hand eye coordination to play. I've heard that pool just has a negative image, smoky and dark pool halls with "hustlers", but there are similar images you can draw up with poker, dark backrooms with guys gambling away paychecks and life savings. I think part of the reason is that TV poker is presented better, the different camera angles, the winning percentages and the commentators do a great job of making the game more watchable and exciting and the personalities of the poker players come through on TV so there are "bad" guys and "good" guys. Maybe if their were a way to give TV pool more "personality" without turning it into just a show. Or maybe its because its easier to become a "good" poker player than a "good" pool player. I don't know.

Let me know what you guys think.

Click to expand...

Answer: 6 players at the final table. I know, you can't have 6 players at the final table in pool. WRONG!!!!!!!! RING GAMES,,,,,,are what is needed to save and promote pool. GAMBLING,,,,,,is what makes poker so interesting. In a pool tournament, the best player usually wins. Ala, Womens pool tournaments. BORING!!!!!!! Now, womens Ring Games? Very interesting idea. Especially to the TV viewing public. In a womens Ring Game you might not see the Usual Suspects, A-K-J as one of the final two. I believe our own Sarah has as much chance in a Ring Game as A-K-J. She surely has as much, if not more, heart as any of them.

Is it that the two, "Professors" know something that the rest of us don't? YES!!!!! Dreco makes a very good point when he says, I've heard that pool just has a negative image, smoky and dark pool halls with "hustlers", but there are similar images you can draw up with poker, dark backrooms with guys gambling away paychecks and life savings.

30 years ago the morals of this country would not allow such a negative event to be shown on TV. Today, the gambling aspect is what sells poker on TV. It is very EXCITING.....

To successfully promote pool Ring Games, it has to be emphasized that the worst player in the game has virtually the same chance to win as the best player. This way, a viewer can pick his/her favorite player, root for that player, knowing that they are not going to automatically see A-K-J in the final two.

Look at "Professor" R.H. Gilmer's first Ring Game. Danny Basavich was by far the favorite to win it all. Danny was the FIRST player put out.

GAMBLING,,,is GOOD people. It sells. The way pool tournaments are run now, there is no gambling, which makes it BORING for all, save the hard core pool purist.

Pool on TV has too much "dead time". The player is walking around thinking and then takes a shot that is totally predictable. The ball goes in the pocket that it was intended to go into over and over and over. There is virtually no surprise except after the break. This is expecially the case for a viewer who doesn't have the knowlege and experience to appreciate the better shots.

In poker there is some time taken in thinking about a bet but that only suggests that the bet is not highly predictable and might be somewhat surprising and worth waiting to see. The cards appear and they are not at all predictable. This gives the viewer a chance to speculate about what might happen next.

To the average viewer pool is boring, poker is not.
Ken

dreco

I think the problem with TV covereage of pool is ESPN. They have a sports-minded approach that does not work for Pool. Actually, I don't think their approach works for anything. The only time I watch ESPN is for Pool, Boxing (they do a pretty good job with boxing by having Max Kellerman), and the NFL game on Sunday evenings.

ESPN didn't make Poker interesting, the Travel Channel did. Look at that show, "Queer Eye for the Straight Guy", now who would have ever thought something like that would take off? That has been shown on NBC now. "Trading Spaces" is another show that is doing fantastic on the DSC channel. If ESPN would take off their strangle hold from Pool maybe one of these other channels could figure out how to do a better job of packaging it.

Hemi has the right idea too about the Ring Game format. If the Travel Channel or the Discovery Channel could take that concept and work with it, I think Pool could become a much more viewable show. I loved the Ring Game at the DCC tournament but I would advocate tweaking it a little. For example, I would encourage more interaction between the players. I think that's what makes Poker so entertaining; you get to see the players' emotions and personalities and that's what people like to watch.

Sorry for writing a book but this subject is near and dear to me.

dreco said:

I enjoy watching and playing both pool and poker, although, if they were women I would marry pool before I would marry poker (I think pool is prettier and has a better personality LOL). Looking at the way poker has been growing on cable TV the last couple of years its probably going to be on network TV in the near future and pool can barely get airtime on ESPN while there are weekly poker shows on the travel channel. Beyond the recent tv coverage poker has had million dollar tournaments for decades, maybe we need to get pool tables on casino floors in Las Vegas to help pool grow. But getting to the point, what I wanted to discuss was the similarities and differences between poker and pool and why poker is "catching on" the way it is versus pool. Personally I don't even think poker is a sport, its a game like chess where no physical skill is needed just mental ability and the right strategies pool at least requires hand eye coordination to play. I've heard that pool just has a negative image, smoky and dark pool halls with "hustlers", but there are similar images you can draw up with poker, dark backrooms with guys gambling away paychecks and life savings. I think part of the reason is that TV poker is presented better, the different camera angles, the winning percentages and the commentators do a great job of making the game more watchable and exciting and the personalities of the poker players come through on TV so there are "bad" guys and "good" guys. Maybe if their were a way to give TV pool more "personality" without turning it into just a show. Or maybe its because its easier to become a "good" poker player than a "good" pool player. I don't know.

Let me know what you guys think.

Click to expand...

MONEY!!! and loads OF it.

dreco said:

I enjoy watching and playing both pool and poker, although, if they were women I would marry pool before I would marry poker (I think pool is prettier and has a better personality LOL). Looking at the way poker has been growing on cable TV the last couple of years its probably going to be on network TV in the near future and pool can barely get airtime on ESPN while there are weekly poker shows on the travel channel. Beyond the recent tv coverage poker has had million dollar tournaments for decades, maybe we need to get pool tables on casino floors in Las Vegas to help pool grow. But getting to the point, what I wanted to discuss was the similarities and differences between poker and pool and why poker is "catching on" the way it is versus pool. Personally I don't even think poker is a sport, its a game like chess where no physical skill is needed just mental ability and the right strategies pool at least requires hand eye coordination to play. I've heard that pool just has a negative image, smoky and dark pool halls with "hustlers", but there are similar images you can draw up with poker, dark backrooms with guys gambling away paychecks and life savings. I think part of the reason is that TV poker is presented better, the different camera angles, the winning percentages and the commentators do a great job of making the game more watchable and exciting and the personalities of the poker players come through on TV so there are "bad" guys and "good" guys. Maybe if their were a way to give TV pool more "personality" without turning it into just a show. Or maybe its because its easier to become a "good" poker player than a "good" pool player. I don't know.

Let me know what you guys think.

Click to expand...

I think that poker has done a lot better job of stayin true to itself than pool. I think poker is a perfect example of how popular pool can become, but instead of celebrating how unique a the game is they try to change it for TV. It does not work, and I don't know when they will figure this out.
I have said this in past threads but I truely believe that if someone was to make a documentary style program about pool, explain the lifestyle and show the differences between some of the gamblers and tournament players.

Back in the 1970's when Wide World of Sports would cover the Mosconi vs. Minnesota Fats exhibition matches, those matches had some of the highest ratings of any sports programming events. But the players with personality are never on TV, with the exception of Earl who is a perfect "bad guy". Even when pool was being televisied a little in the 80's I only saw Keith Mc Cready on TV one time, I never saw Ronnie Allen, or Grady Matthews these are the types of personalities that people will remember and even if they do not no much about the game they will tend to watch these guys play, thats how you bring new viewers in and I don't think ESPN will ever get that or this game.

Lets face it this game is a lot more poker than it is golf, so lets stop trying to make it golf, and lets celebrate what it is and let the whole world enjoy it.

I think one of the big things that noone has really hit on is the "Average Joe". The "Average Joe" flies to Vegas or Atlantic City with his paycheck or life savings in tow and can sit down and still have a chance at the averages to hit it big, or atleast clear enough for the all you can eat buffet. Most of the time, Im not saying always, you are just working against the law of averages. You go to the big casino's or even your neighborhood riverboat casino or indian reservation and you see everyone from pimple faced 18 year olds to 90 year old grandma's who all have the same basic chance to have fun and possibley make some money. It's more of a "public" forum.
Now pool on the other hand pool is an aquired taste. Sure you still ave a lot of people who go and play just for fun and take 2 hours to play one game, but that isnt how the majority of the public see the game. They see a game of skill, and if they dont have the skill they arent interested. A majority of people don't want to go shoot pool against someone and have thier butt kicked every game after game. People like to win, even if it is at something they arent any good at. Not everyone has the patience and determination to sit through the butt kickings and learn from what they see, they want the easy win type of fun, like poker.
Anyway, thats just my opinon. Another reason why poker might get more and more public coverage on TV is the sponsorship of these matches. Most of the matches are sponsored by the major casinos, and to them a million dollar payout is like a drop in the bucket, they make that back in an hour on the floors of the casinos. I dont think that thier are any current pool sponsers that could drop that kind of money and not blink.

J J

What makes wheel of Fortune so popular? It just takes some modicum of skill and anybody can learn to play. In Poker it always is the luck of the draw. You have to have the cards. A GAME where a little luck can make a part time amateur player beat the champions. Thats why guys like Chris Moneymaker or the guy who won the Worlds Poker the year before Robert M. can beat a Johnny Chan or Phil Helmuth. In pool a Sport of skills the amateur part time player has no chance whatsoever against a Champion. No amateur is gonna beat an Archer, Reyes, Strickland, Fisher, etc.

Of course poker is a skill too and the cream will always rise to the top but there dreams of the unskilled could come true. Not in pool. You got to have all the skills to win.

hemicudas said:

GAMBLING,,,is GOOD people. It sells. The way pool tournaments are run now, there is no gambling, which makes it BORING for all, save the hard core pool purist.

Click to expand...

Well said, hemi

"Anyway, thats just my opinon. Another reason why poker might get more and more public coverage on TV is the sponsorship of these matches. Most of the matches are sponsored by the major casinos, and to them a million dollar payout is like a drop in the bucket, they make that back in an hour on the floors of the casinos. I dont think that thier are any current pool sponsers that could drop that kind of money and not blink."


No, right now in poker 100% of the prize fund comes from players. The house TAKES a cut, doesn't add anything. At least in the big tournaments. Poker players want to figure out how to get added money. And that folks tells you why pool has a problem Poker tournaments can have millions in the prize fund all put up by players, while pool tournaments have dinky prizes. The reason is that anybody can win on a given day. You can put up the money or win a satellite and get to play with some good players. Maybe beat one. Chris Moneymaker is a great example. He is a decent poker player. He is not great. He won the biggest tournament and took home a couple million. Which game you wanna play? Pool has a real problem. If you like to gamble, play poker. If you want to play pool, play. But don't expect it to be a popular sport or gambling event. It will probably remain a fringe sport. I hope it grows, but it probably won't

Look, I love pool as much as any of you. What is the big deal about it getting so much airtime? Why does it really matter? TV sucks anyhow! The only great thing I can see coming from it is bigger purses for tournaments. I guess I'll just stick to being a degenerate gambler myself.

I see the future of pool is on T.V. it will bring the talent level up when the Big Money gets worked into the mix. The sport will evolve by more people becoming hardcore champions when the purse is say a million dollars. I think you would see a surge in the ratings and skill level will go up in all areas because new people will want their chance at the money. Really how good can the players possibly get? Can the skill level still rise? Where is the peak? I mean these guys do not miss anything, and if they do miss look out cuz you are super hooked. How can you even begin to climb to the skill level of Bustamante, or Strickland why even try? Soon matches will be decided by the lag. I can See Mika eventually running 15 and out! I saw him run 7 in a row on CWilliams then miss 1 shot hooked CW CW missed, and Mika run the set out 13 to 2 ovet the net. Flawless play Some of the shots rolled in with Mikas Mind Power. Totally awesome how these Pro's just keep geting better.

Tv?

Pool has been on TV for a while and it hasn't caught on yet. It's still used as a time filler. Something has to change if it is ever to become a real ratings-earner. Hemi has been touting the ring game for a long time now. After I saw it on the DCC tournament, I chimed in with enthusiasm. The current format, 9 ball, race to 7, is not going to get it, imho.

bethesilentone said:

I see the future of pool is on T.V. it will bring the talent level up when the Big Money gets worked into the mix. The sport will evolve by more people becoming hardcore champions when the purse is say a million dollars. I think you would see a surge in the ratings and skill level will go up in all areas because new people will want their chance at the money. Really how good can the players possibly get? Can the skill level still rise? Where is the peak? I mean these guys do not miss anything, and if they do miss look out cuz you are super hooked. How can you even begin to climb to the skill level of Bustamante, or Strickland why even try? Soon matches will be decided by the lag. I can See Mika eventually running 15 and out! I saw him run 7 in a row on CWilliams then miss 1 shot hooked CW CW missed, and Mika run the set out 13 to 2 ovet the net. Flawless play Some of the shots rolled in with Mikas Mind Power. Totally awesome how these Pro's just keep geting better.

Click to expand...

my thoughts

I think the major cause of pool being a dud on TV is the money. People who tune into a sport on TV want to see something bigger then themselves, they want to see stars that are loaded with talent and money and are playing for huge stakes. They want these people to be famous and have that star quality that makes people tune into the Oscars just to watch people walk down the red carpet. This is not going to happen when you have the finals of a 160 player tournament going and you have 2 people playing who are lucky to make 100K a year playing for about a 15k difference of $30,000 to the winner or $15,000 to the loser. A viewer sees that and thinks "wow, I could not even buy that car I want if I won that tournament, what is the point?"

On the other hand look at golf. You have a sport where a bunch of multi millionaires are all out there hitting balls around a course (as predictable and slow as pool ever was) and they are playing for a payday of over $1,000,000 for first place. The viewer instead sees this and says "Wow, not only could I buy that car I want, I could buy a house as well, my life would be set! What a dream it would be to be able to do that and play pro golf"

It takes money to make money is a popular slogan, it has merit here though. In order for pool to advance it is going to need to impress the audiance with loads of cash and the pressence of stars. It is going to need the sport to look bigger then the lives of the people who tune in to watch it. That is the draw poker has. Joe who works a 9-5 job for 40k a year gets home and he flicks on the TV and he sees the World Series of Poker. He watches a bunch of people sitting at a table betting sums of money that make his yearly wage look like chump change and some guy winning millions of dollars, and for what, playing poker? This is a dream to Joe, he wishes his life could be so exciting and watching poker on TV is an escape for him where he can dream. When he watches pool on the other hand he sees some guy working his nuts off beating 159 other players in a tournament in order to make $30,000 in the biggest tournament in the USA, it looks alot like work to Joe.

Take a pool tournament and put it on TV, have a larger then life setting (a casino floor, or a stadium like the Worlds has, but put it in Vegas cause Vegas sells. When you are opening the show pan down the strip showing the scene in Vegas, the lights, the people milling around, ect... Then show the larger then life casino of the tournament, lets say the Luxor, a shot of the huge pyramid, the large light shooting out the top, the huge sphinx. Now inside the casino we go, briefly seeing the floor and such and then a shot of 2 hot tall show girls at a door who each open one door with big smiles and little clothes, and inside the doors we see the tables. Have show girls sitting near the players who do nothing more then pour the water for the players and such, making the players look important. In no way should the players rack their own balls or their opponent, this can be done by a ref dressed in some fancy tux type thing or if you get Michaella Tab maybe we could squeeze her into one of those show girl outfits? =). The key is to make the players look larger then life, they should be shown as kings and this is their castle. Have the winner winning a million dollars and then after a elaborate scene of getting the cash (not a check, I mean huge wads of hundred dollar bills in a suitcase all stacked up, the viewer will orgasm at the thought and sight of it) and then the winner closes up the suitcase and with 2 show girls, one on each arm walks casually with his head held high into the casino, as the king of his domain. Show over, end credits, leave the viewer wishing he was so lucky as to be a pro pool player. Screw poker.