International 9-Ball Open changes. WHY?

iusedtoberich

AzB Silver Member
Silver Member
The video is private and so not viewable

They took it down:( This video was great because it was a side view of the table, and you could see the racking process perfectly. All the other videos (that are still up incidentally), are from the end view of the table, and the player's body blocks the racking process. I edited my post above to describe in text the racking process.
 

Bob Jewett

AZB Osmium Member
Staff member
Gold Member
Silver Member
What is the value of spectators VS the value of players?
That depends on the nature of the tournament. If the promoter is trying to make money, the players are a burden except for the ones who are watchable and draw paying spectators and sponsors. I suppose some of the lower-level players do bring paying friends and family to watch sometimes.

An example of this is the last US Open where 240 players were more or less irrelevant to the financial success of the event and most of the income was from the 15 televised matches in the last three days. They only needed 16 players for those matches. The prelims did set the stage and did pump up the prize fund, but the vast majority of event income was from broadcast rights for the final 16 and the associated sponsorships.

If the tournament is a national/world championship, the whole point is to have the players there to decide who is best and to improve everyone's play through competition. Often all but the top few are a burden in that situation since the "barely rans" sop up resources and have no chance to win. The main reason to have them there is to ensure future generations of competitors.
 

realkingcobra

Well-known member
Silver Member
They only needed 16 players for those matches. The prelims did set the stage and did pump up the prize fund, but the vast majority of event income was from broadcast rights for the final 16 and the associated sponsorships.

Now comes my complaint, there's no DOUBT Match Room made bank selling the stream to about 80 different countries....but the million dollar question is, how much of that revenue made it's way into the players fund????
 

realkingcobra

Well-known member
Silver Member
That depends on the nature of the tournament. If the promoter is trying to make money, the players are a burden except for the ones who are watchable and draw paying spectators and sponsors. I suppose some of the lower-level players do bring paying friends and family to watch sometimes.

An example of this is the last US Open where 240 players were more or less irrelevant to the financial success of the event and most of the income was from the 15 televised matches in the last three days. They only needed 16 players for those matches. The prelims did set the stage and did pump up the prize fund, but the vast majority of event income was from broadcast rights for the final 16 and the associated sponsorships.

If the tournament is a national/world championship, the whole point is to have the players there to decide who is best and to improve everyone's play through competition. Often all but the top few are a burden in that situation since the "barely rans" sop up resources and have no chance to win. The main reason to have them there is to ensure future generations of competitors.

Last years US Open collected $256,000 in entry fees, + $50,000 added, total $306,000 winner got paid $50,000

US Open before that, the US Open collected $128,00 in entry fees, + $50,000 added, total $178,000 winner got paid $50,000.....if there was an extra $128,000 in players fees collected, where did it go, because the winner was paid the same. Did Match Room Sports kick in any prize money from SELLING the streaming rights, or just bank the millions it made???
 

sjm

Older and Wiser
Silver Member
If there were 96 good players at the tournament, I don't see how 32 more will add a significant amount of spectators. There are only a handful (or two) of players that people come to see anyway. The rest are just there so the players they come to watch will have an opponent to play.
Maniac

You are absolutely right here, Maniac.

I don't think filling the field would have any effect on spectator turnout. Most of the truly elite players in the world participated this year. Of the WPA top 9 ranked players, only Carlo Biado was absent. The stars of the game were there, and I doubt even a single fan opted not to attend because the field wasn't stronger.

We've read about many changes that Pat has planned to further cater to the needs of the players to induce greater participation, and I commend Pat for that, but if Pat's plan for increasing spectator turnout is simply to increase player participation, he's beating a path to another poor spectator turnout in 2020.

As I noted at length and in great detail in Post #13 of this thread, what the fans want are well designed stands, access to the best seats, good refreshments and food within the venue, and matches that stay on schedule. The 2019 International fell short in all of these respects, especially relative to some of the other premier American-based pro pool events.
 

realkingcobra

Well-known member
Silver Member
Last years US Open collected $256,000 in entry fees, + $50,000 added, total $306,000 winner got paid $50,000

US Open before that, the US Open collected $128,00 in entry fees, + $50,000 added, total $178,000 winner got paid $50,000.....if there was an extra $128,000 in players fees collected, where did it go, because the winner was paid the same. Did Match Room Sports kick in any prize money from SELLING the streaming rights, or just bank the millions it made???

What, now no one has anything to say???
 

iusedtoberich

AzB Silver Member
Silver Member
What, now no one has anything to say???

First of all, unless you added up ALL the payouts, looking only at first place means zero.

Second, I guarantee you if they kept the prize money the same for the next 20 years, they would fill every year. Why, because its matchroom, and they do everything first class. For both the players and the fans. That is what a top reputation gets you. Its more about the total experience, even from the player's viewpoint, then the paycheck.

Respectfully.
 

realkingcobra

Well-known member
Silver Member
Prize fund was increased to $375,000 this year. which will likely give it the highest added money of any event in 2020 in the world.

Big deal, $256,000 is still being added by the players, and millions are being made selling the streaming rights! There should be a few million added, not a $119,000.
 

realkingcobra

Well-known member
Silver Member
First of all, unless you added up ALL the payouts, looking only at first place means zero.

Second, I guarantee you if they kept the prize money the same for the next 20 years, they would fill every year. Why, because its matchroom, and they do everything first class. For both the players and the fans. That is what a top reputation gets you. Its more about the total experience, even from the player's viewpoint, then the paycheck.

Respectfully.
Bullshit, its nothing more than pimping the players for a bigger bank account as a promoter!!!
 

sjm

Older and Wiser
Silver Member
Big deal, $256,000 is still being added by the players, and millions are being made selling the streaming rights! There should be a few million added, not a $119,000.

Apparently, the players disagree. They signed up and filled up the 2020 US Open field six months in advance. I don't see the event lasting very long if the players become as defiant as you are about the added money. Matchroom would just walk away and focus on their other events.

Regardless, this topic has nothing to do with this thread.
 

dnschmidt

AzB Silver Member
Silver Member
Winner break is fine in 10-ball. Not so good in 9-ball

My $0.02 on winner vs alternate break. 10-ball, since it's harder to make a ball, is fine with winner breaks. 9-ball, with the balls being wired, is more suited for alternate breaks.

With respect to spectators. SJM is dead right but I don't think anything Pat does would make much of a difference. Personally, I didn't like the Sheraton the one time I attended the U. S. Open there. The food was crazy expensive and not readily available. The Holiday Inn the previous year was better in that regard as there was many restaurants nearby within easy driving distance and had easy parking. Repeating myself, I don't like the Sheraton Norfolk.

Why does this tournament have to be held in Norfolk? Now that Barry's dead who cares where it's held? What's unique about Norfolk? Is there nowhere else that would be more suitable for this tournament. Just asking.
 

Poolplaya9

Tellin' it like it is...
Silver Member
Big deal, $256,000 is still being added by the players, and millions are being made selling the streaming rights! There should be a few million added, not a $119,000.

Bullshit, its nothing more than pimping the players for a bigger bank account as a promoter!!!

Why do you believe that how somebody else spends their money is any of your business? What makes you think that you somehow have the right to have some say so in how others spend the money that they have earned? That concept just doesn't compute to me, nor should it IMO.

I don't feel like I should get to have any say in how you spend the money that you earned in your business of fixing tables or selling glue. It's your money to do with as you please. Just wondering why you feel you should get some say so in how others spend their money? This isn't directed only to you, but to anybody that expresses the same mentality that they should get some say in how other people spend their money.

To help out with where I think people are going wrong, let me explain a couple of concepts:

A business: A business is essentially just a job that you have created for yourself. As with a job, a business is intended to be for the primary (and most often sole) benefit of the business owner/s, to make them as much money as possible. It's no different than any other job really. It's what you do for you.

A charity: This is intended to be for the primary (and most often sole) benefit of others.

If you want to help pool or whoever else, set up a charity for that purpose. But don't expect that you should get to have some say so in how other people spend the money that they earned at their job or their business any more than they should have the right to tell you how you should have to spend the money you made at your job or business.

And on a somewhat unrelated note, even if you did have the right to have some say in how other people should have to spend their money, which of course you don't, then you should be telling them to give it to an organization trying to cure cancer or something else that is likewise actually significant and important and worthwhile in the scheme of things, and not something as insignificant and unimportant as professional pool in comparison.
 
  • Like
Reactions: sjm

realkingcobra

Well-known member
Silver Member
Why do you believe that how somebody else spends their money is any of your business? What makes you think that you somehow have the right to have some say so in how others spend the money that they have earned? That concept just doesn't compute to me, nor should it IMO.

I don't feel like I should get to have any say in how you spend the money that you earned in your business of fixing tables or selling glue. It's your money to do with as you please. Just wondering why you feel you should get some say so in how others spend their money? This isn't directed only to you, but to anybody that expresses the same mentality that they should get some say in how other people spend their money.

To help out with where I think people are going wrong, let me explain a couple of concepts:

A business: A business is essentially just a job that you have created for yourself. As with a job, a business is intended to be for the primary (and most often sole) benefit of the business owner/s, to make them as much money as possible. It's no different than any other job really. It's what you do for you.

A charity: This is intended to be for the primary (and most often sole) benefit of others.

If you want to help pool or whoever else, set up a charity for that purpose. But don't expect that you should get to have some say so in how other people spend the money that they earned at their job or their business any more than they should have the right to tell you how you should have to spend the money you made at your job or business.

And on a somewhat unrelated note, even if you did have the right to have some say in how other people should have to spend their money, which of course you don't, then you should be telling them to give it to an organization trying to cure cancer or something else that is likewise actually significant and important and worthwhile in the scheme of things, and not something as insignificant and unimportant as professional pool in comparison.

That's ok, people can spend their money anyway they want, but to imply they're helping out the sport of pool is nothing more than a sales pitch. But even that's ok, has no effect on my plans whatsoever, but my plans may just have a huge effect on theirs, time will tell.
 

noMoreSchon

AzB Silver Member
Silver Member
Bullshit, its nothing more than pimping the players for a bigger bank account as a promoter!!!


Still waiting for your glue to change the pool world. Then all these starving players will

finally have something to eat. You are allowed to make money. Tell me one organization

that doesn't make money for the promoter? You know frisbee golf, cornhole, and all those

other stupid things, that are sponsored make the promoter? Money, why people think it

should be different in the billiard world.
 

realkingcobra

Well-known member
Silver Member
Still waiting for your glue to change the pool world. Then all these starving players will

finally have something to eat. You are allowed to make money. Tell me one organization

that doesn't make money for the promoter? You know frisbee golf, cornhole, and all those

other stupid things, that are sponsored make the promoter? Money, why people think it

should be different in the billiard world.

While you're looking for my glue, you'll miss what I'm really after😎
 

Poolplaya9

Tellin' it like it is...
Silver Member
That's ok, people can spend their money anyway they want, but to imply they're helping out the sport of pool is nothing more than a sales pitch.
While that can sometimes be true that claims of pool related business helping the sport are sales pitch and not reality, it certainly doesn't have to be true (as you seem to be trying to imply) and indeed probably isn't even usually true. Even in cases where a pool related business is thinking solely of themselves and not trying to be charitable in the least, they can still be and often are a benefit to the pool community. Any pool tournament that honors their promises would be such an example that is a benefit to pool. That is simply indisputable IMO. Pool is better off with them than without them.

Then you also have those cases where a business has some charitable component to it as as well (that charitable component could be anywhere from very tiny, or it might be as important a component to the owner as their own self interests). From most appearances it looks like Pat's International 9 ball Open falls in this category. There are some decent indications that he is doing it as much as a labor of love and desire to contribute to the sport as for his own personal profit. He does more than he needs to, and almost certainly does things that are good for the sport or the players but that eat into his potential profit margin. Even Matchroom gives up some of their profit margin doing things that they don't need to do and that they won't see a return in investment on. But even if Pat and Matchroom didn't do these extras that eat some of their profit margins, by just simply having tournaments that honor their promises they are still without question a benefit to the sport.

But even that's ok, has no effect on my plans whatsoever, but my plans may just have a huge effect on theirs, time will tell.
Your plans, if I remember the details of them correctly (including that you are not intending or expecting to make a profit from them), are largely or even primarily charitable in nature with the intended beneficiaries being professional pool players. More power to you for spending your own money in the way that you desire if that is indeed what you end up doing, but don't begrudge somebody else for how they want to spend theirs, or for wanting to have a business rather than a charity.
 

realkingcobra

Well-known member
Silver Member
While that can sometimes be true that claims of pool related business helping the sport are sales pitch and not reality, it certainly doesn't have to be true (as you seem to be trying to imply) and indeed probably isn't even usually true. Even in cases where a pool related business is thinking solely of themselves and not trying to be charitable in the least, they can still be and often are a benefit to the pool community. Any pool tournament that honors their promises would be such an example that is a benefit to pool. That is simply indisputable IMO. Pool is better off with them than without them.

Then you also have those cases where a business has some charitable component to it as as well (that charitable component could be anywhere from very tiny, or it might be as important a component to the owner as their own self interests). From most appearances it looks like Pat's International 9 ball Open falls in this category. There are some decent indications that he is doing it as much as a labor of love and desire to contribute to the sport as for his own personal profit. He does more than he needs to, and almost certainly does things that are good for the sport or the players but that eat into his potential profit margin. Even Matchroom gives up some of their profit margin doing things that they don't need to do and that they won't see a return in investment on. But even if Pat and Matchroom didn't do these extras that eat some of their profit margins, by just simply having tournaments that honor their promises they are still without question a benefit to the sport.


Your plans, if I remember the details of them correctly (including that you are not intending or expecting to make a profit from them), are largely or even primarily charitable in nature with the intended beneficiaries being professional pool players. More power to you for spending your own money in the way that you desire if that is indeed what you end up doing, but don't begrudge somebody else for how they want to spend theirs, or for wanting to have a business rather than a charity.

You know, I wish I could lay out all the details to what I'm working on, and who I'm attempting to work with, but I just can't at this time.

But I will say this, if I succeed in my plan, pool and many, many other sports we forever be changed for the good of the participants and all those associated with each one of them.

But to be clear, pool players need to belong to a pool players Association, with a male and female President of each. The 7 sanctioning bodies that govern pool world wide need to submit one me.ber from each organization to form the world sanctioning body of this sport, to oversee the organization and continued growth at all levels.

This sport needs to stop being treated like it's an American game, played by American players only....and realize and accept the fact that this is an international sport, played in every country on the planet, and be treated as such.

World champions need to be able to defend their titles in match play, and stop having them put up for grabs in a tournament with anyone being the winner. Tournaments need to be used to produce number 1 contenders to challenge the world champions in match play.

Major sponsors who advertise need to have that money, 100% of it passed on down the line through the 7 sanctioning bodies to support the interest and continued growth of pool in their respective regions, but only letting the pool players who are members of the world Professional pool players Association compete for it as ADDED money to local tournaments. That means if you can't join as a member, you're not paying an entry fee just to try and win the added money to the events.

The top 64 Pro players need to be signed to a 2 year contract, with a salary, plus tournament winnings, and after each monthly tournament, they get broken up into 8 groups of 8 players each, then sent out to take on the top 24 players in each region as a pro tour stop monthly, and compete without any handicap and under Professional rules of play, with 50% of the field always being paid.

We'll see if my plan pays off shortly.

Ps, this has nothing to do with my glue sales as there's no way I could support over $10,000,000 a month in prize money and saleries.
 
Last edited:

Swighey

AzB Silver Member
Silver Member
World champions need to be able to defend their titles in match play, and stop having them put up for grabs in a tournament with anyone being the winner. Tournaments need to be used to produce number 1 contenders to challenge the world champions in match play

First off, I’m on the same page as you on pretty much everything else in your post (the stuff I haven’t quoted) regarding the development of the sport.

The number 1 contender idea is interesting. The world chess champion used to be decided that way - but even that moved with the times and went to a tournament model that is more viable economically. Boxing still retains the champion and the contender concept partly because it’s impractical on safety grounds to have people beating each other up every few days - but even boxing now has non world title series’ where a group of fighters enter a knockout competition over time for prize money.

I think the tournament as a decisive way to select a champion will always win in this regard. Don’t get me wrong though, I absolutely love your idea of a number 1 contender being selected to play a champion in a very long race of 9 Ball over a couple of days and 4-6 sessions like a world snooker semi or final (and here winner breaks is wholly appropriate with the champion having first break to defend his, or her, title). Find a way to promote it as “the real world champion” or some other appropriate namelike thingy - but there is still and always will be a place for a World Championship that is a tournament where players have to come out cold in shorter races and play under tournament pressure (the pressure that tests elite pro players and takes them out of their comfort zone - the pressure that determines that one of the best always wins but it isn’t always the same one of the best - it’s the one who makes the least mistakes and rides the pressure the best in the moment).

Certainly room for both.
 

realkingcobra

Well-known member
Silver Member
First off, I’m on the same page as you on pretty much everything else in your post (the stuff I haven’t quoted) regarding the development of the sport.

The number 1 contender idea is interesting. The world chess champion used to be decided that way - but even that moved with the times and went to a tournament model that is more viable economically. Boxing still retains the champion and the contender concept partly because it’s impractical on safety grounds to have people beating each other up every few days - but even boxing now has non world title series’ where a group of fighters enter a knockout competition over time for prize money.

I think the tournament as a decisive way to select a champion will always win in this regard. Don’t get me wrong though, I absolutely love your idea of a number 1 contender being selected to play a champion in a very long race of 9 Ball over a couple of days and 4-6 sessions like a world snooker semi or final (and here winner breaks is wholly appropriate with the champion having first break to defend his, or her, title). Find a way to promote it as “the real world champion” or some other appropriate namelike thingy - but there is still and always will be a place for a World Championship that is a tournament where players have to come out cold in shorter races and play under tournament pressure (the pressure that tests elite pro players and takes them out of their comfort zone - the pressure that determines that one of the best always wins but it isn’t always the same one of the best - it’s the one who makes the least mistakes and rides the pressure the best in the moment).

Certainly room for both.

You'll appreciate how the number 1 contender gets decided. By buying the Clarion Hotel in Louisville, KY and turning the convention center into a live production stage, with 80 Diamond 9fts, there's the playoffs location. Then the world gets to submit their skill level test for 8b, 9b, and 10b. Each month the top 1,024 players in the world play a race to 21, 3 hours time limit, single elimination tournament. No entry fees. First round loss plays $250, or in other words, each round of play pays $128,000 a round, so the prize money to the players doubles every round. Second pays $128,000 and 1st pays $256,000 and a shot at the title at the end of each quarter, for $500,000 to lose, and $1,000,000 to win. After the monthly, the top 64 players break off into 8 pro tour groups, and are sent around the world to play the top 24 players in each region they're sent to, same rules as the quarter's. First round loss pays nothing, then the next round pays $1,000, then $2,000, $4,000, $8,000, winner earns $16,000. The Pros are seeded, so after the first round, there's 16 players remaining, which should be 8 locals and 8 Pros. At this point, the locals at a minimum are guaranteed a $1,000 each if they lose to the Pros, but if they beat a Pro, they continue on playing for that Pros payday.
 
Top