2011 APA National Masters in Vegas

[JMuck]

The APA is managing a HUGE number of participants for their leagues, and their national tournaments. Thus they have to make decisions based on that scope.

It's quite funny to see so many people who hate the APA so much, yet they bring SO MANY people into our sport. It is such a contradiction. It borders on hypocrisy. It's fine if you don't like their style of play or their rules, or whatever. But to spew such venom and hatred towards them so continuously is hard to understand. Again, they bring HUGE numbers of people to this game of ours, people who would never have played it regularly otherwise. What is wrong with that?

Oh, you'd rather have the rooms empty.... until they close for good. Is that it?

sheesh

This is my first vent concerning this issue.

I understand scope,logistics and portions of the business model.I like that so many people are playing.What I don't like is the sacrifice of conditions in order to maximize profit.

Promise them a Cadillac and give 'em a Vega.

 

[JAM]

...Promise them a Cadillac and give 'em a vega.

Oh, man, I had two Vegas in my younger life, a lime-green one and a silver one. They both burned a quart of oil with each tank of gas. It was unreal. What a joke that Vega was. :angry:

It sure is ironic that the plural of Vega is "Vegas." Both of them are money-burners. :grin:

 

[SpankyNC]

Anyone thinking $30 million is not a realistic income for the APA....think again!

All figures thrown out here so far have been based solely on individuals, playing league one night per week, in one event. Consider how many members play 2, 3, and 4 nights per week including 8 ball, 9 ball, Masters, ladies divisions, double jeopardy divisions.

I think $30 Million is a far cry from the APA's real gross income.

An APA member.....only because there is no other choice in my area!

 

[no regrets]

Apa bashing

I too was in Vegas for the Nationals and yes the tables did suck along with the seating and spectating it has always made me wonder why the "The largest pool league in the world" would use anything other than diamond tables!! oh yea because that would take more money out of their pockets also the 2s,3s,and 4 skill levels don"t care about the equipment, after all that's what APA caters to! not the players that have put in the time and paid their dues to become pool players! BCA is sounding more and more like the better choice

 

[no regrets]

You realy think the APA takes in $30,000,000 a year. Can you show the math as to where you think this money comes from.

You have a legitimate complaint about tables (I was there and played in the mini room so yes I agree that the tables were not great) but don't cloud the issue with misinformation. I agree with you the APA should address this issue, but it has nothing to do with how much money they bring in, it has more to do with who the table supplier is.


Leagueguy

yep you get what you pay for !!!!!!!!!!!

 

[OneIron]

yep you get what you pay for !!!!!!!!!!!

In spite of anything APA Management says about treating all ranks of players equally, I have not found this to be the case. I've personally heard LO's say that the APA is not for higher ranked players. And I think this was evident in the treatment of the Masters Division at the Nationals.

And the excuse for poor equipment rings hollow to me. The APA should absolutely guarantee top line equipment and proper setup at the national events. It's a slap in the face to the APA members whose dream it is to make it to the Nationals.
:frown::frown::frown:

 

[Ctwitty]

playing in another league

30 players and a $200 fee and you can start a BCA league. That's what I'm working towards here. Still go to Vegas, but compete where winning means something. Not the Any Pocket A$$ pool.

I am sure your area is just waiting for you to get something started so that then they won't have to listen to your whining and crying all the time. good luck to you. LOL

 

[stumpie71]

Anyone thinking $30 million is not a realistic income for the APA....think again!

All figures thrown out here so far have been based solely on individuals, playing league one night per week, in one event. Consider how many members play 2, 3, and 4 nights per week including 8 ball, 9 ball, Masters, ladies divisions, double jeopardy divisions.

I think $30 Million is a far cry from the APA's real gross income.

An APA member.....only because there is no other choice in my area!

If you read Scott Lee's post he based his numbers on teams not players. The only way to deduce the gross income not including the membership dues.

 

[stumpie71]

I too was in Vegas for the Nationals and yes the tables did suck along with the seating and spectating it has always made me wonder why the "The largest pool league in the world" would use anything other than diamond tables!! oh yea because that would take more money out of their pockets also the 2s,3s,and 4 skill levels don"t care about the equipment, after all that's what APA caters to! not the players that have put in the time and paid their dues to become pool players! BCA is sounding more and more like the better choice

The cost difference between diamonds and valleys are negligible. And you're right the APA doesn't cater to the higher skill levels. The 8 ball open had roughly 800 teams and 8000 players. The masters had 256 teams and roughly 750 players.

Whats your solution? Everyone complains but no one comes up with a viable solution for the tournament as a whole. Organize an event with thousands of people in a limited space and limited time frame. And have no one complain.

The better players seem to have a hard accepting that they aren't the focal point of this event. Most of the people that go don't go for the Masters. They are there for the team tournament and the Mini's.

 

[cardiac kid]

Folks,

Thought it was interesting none of you commented on the "there are people who would complain about the Diamonds". If my memory is correct, one of the reasons the "league" version of the small Diamond table was built along side the Pro / Am is the APA and some APA players compained about the "too tight" pockets. Maybe Paul Smith, Greg Sullivan or Mark Griffin will comment on this. The guy from APA is correct.

As far as "most players play each week on Valleys" is also true. Trying to justify the use of sub-standard equipment just because most players play on that brand is a joke! Get High Plains Productions to update their equipment or change vendors are simpler solutions. The simplist would be to just use Diamonds. Bad Boys and CSI have enough tables available to supply the needs of any future tournament in Vegas. Again if my memory serves me, BCAPL had 260 plus tables at The Riv this past May.

Lyn

 

[AcuraHeel]

Scott Lee

Get over yourself!!!! Why do you make this a personal issue? We all have an opinion and I'm sorry if you don't agree. I could care less what APA takes in.I don't get a frigging penny of it.I have an OPINION of what I feel they take in and I'm wrong?? You are doing the same thing the rest of us are,which is ASSUMING. What makes you right? You have access to the books at APA or something? I would LOVE to make a bet that APA as a company takes in more than $30,000,00 in revenue. We're going to look at the total package of what they take in as a company.

You want to make a bet and have no way for either side to win...Genius!!!!



This has gotten of topic... The point is.... With the kind of money that they take in and we pay as a customer, we could have had better playing conditions in Vegas!!

 

[justadub]

I am sure your area is just waiting for you to get something started so that then they won't have to listen to your whining and crying all the time. good luck to you. LOL

Bravo! :thumbup:

 

[AcuraHeel]

Cardiac Kid

I agree with your post. I play on some well kept 9' tables each week. It was just a disappointment playing on those tables that didn't roll straight,etc. It comes down to one thing. It was fair for one as it was the other...:smile: We all got the same bad rolls...

 

[DogsPlayingPool]

The cost difference between diamonds and valleys are negligible. And you're right the APA doesn't cater to the higher skill levels. The 8 ball open had roughly 800 teams and 8000 players. The masters had 256 teams and roughly 750 players.
.

Any cost difference likely has little to do with why the APA doesn't use Diamonds. In spite of what the APA management says, many think this is at least partly a strategic decision.

 

[Scott Lee]

AcuraHeel...Then MAKE A BET. I only included you in my post to play4$, because you said you wanted to bet. It is a bet whose winning side can be deduced from numbers of active teams (which includes members playing on multiple teams), as I stated...which is available from the APA.

On topic in this thread...I never stated that I didn't believe that the APA could/should provide better tables. On the contrary, I stated that several times, in this and other APA threads. I also stated that, imo, APA Corporate should add more money to their national events.

It isn't personal at all. I just love the folks like yourself who spout numbers off the top of their heads, without any relative facts (you know, those pesky things that get in the way of someone "being right"?) to back you up...whereas I provided those facts, which are not speculation. Whether you believe them or not is irrelevant. Put up or shut up!

Play4$...you didn't respond as to whether you still wish to make a bet?

Scott Lee
www.poolknowledge.com

Scott Lee

I would LOVE to make a bet that APA as a company takes in more than $30,000,00 in revenue. You want to make a bet and have no way for either side to win...Genius!!!!

This has gotten of topic... The point is.... With the kind of money that they take in and we pay as a customer, we could have had better playing conditions in Vegas!!

 

[KMRUNOUT]

So APA just lets some vendor come in a make $1 a game without a cut...Oh really, now who sounds dumb!

So do you think the vending company or whoever supplies the tables rents them to the APA, comes in and sets them up for free? The $1 per game *helps* to offset the cost the APA pays for renting over 200 tables. It isn't cheap. I strongly doubt The APA comes out ahead on that particular facet of their project. I still think the $1 per game method is foolish...a $20 a day wrist band or something would be much better...but that is a different topic.

KMRUNOUT

 

[KMRUNOUT]

In spite of anything APA Management says about treating all ranks of players equally, I have not found this to be the case. I've personally heard LO's say that the APA is not for higher ranked players. And I think this was evident in the treatment of the Masters Division at the Nationals.

And the excuse for poor equipment rings hollow to me. The APA should absolutely guarantee top line equipment and proper setup at the national events. It's a slap in the face to the APA members whose dream it is to make it to the Nationals.
:frown::frown::frown:

Clearly the APA is targeted at amateur tavern players. Often my league office sends out the numbers of players in the area. I'm a 7 and 9, which means I fall into the top like 5% of 8 ball players (maybe less), and the top 0.5% of 9 ball players. If you were running a business, wouldn't you be way more concerned about the giant 3-5 range or your clientele, who comprise like 80% of your business? I know I would. While it is true that the higher skilled players that are kind and have a helpful attitude can help bring more people into the game, organize teams, improve the lesser players to the point where they maybe start teams of their own, there is just no overlooking the percentages.

I must say I was very impressed with the APA rep's response in this thread!

KMRUNOUT

 

[stumpie71]

Any cost difference likely has little to do with why the APA doesn't use Diamonds. In spite of what the APA management says, many think this is at least partly a strategic decision.

I agree that I think there are other reasons why they don't use Diamonds. Diamonds are a better table hands down, but to refer to the Valley's as substandard isn't factual. The problem seems to be if it isn't a Diamond then it's a POS.

At the very least the APA should require the vendor to use Aramiths premium balls and a better more solid rack. The tables were average that's all. After ten days people need to be realistic in how a table will play.The tables will change and will need to be adjusted. Hell OB Cue's Diamond had a roll to it by the end of the tourny. My bad roll came while trying to thin a ball softly from 4' away. The cb rolled off and I missed the OB entirely. From 4' though means the cb rolled off 1/16th of an inch per foot. That's not horrendous just unfortunate.

While IMO better equipment would set this tournament apart from the APA's competitors. I don't see it happening but overall I have zero complaints.

 

[KMRUNOUT]

30 players and a $200 fee and you can start a BCA league. That's what I'm working towards here. Still go to Vegas, but compete where winning means something. Not the Any Pocket A$$ pool.

Yeha, or that hack Texas Express 9 ball those pros have been playing all these years...Earl should have just played APA...

KMRUNOUT

 

[KMRUNOUT]

I will say one thing...someone mentioned the rack. I actually spent nearly 10 minutes racking one game in the masters...that is just totally ridiculous. I'm actually very good at racking too (must be all the practice lol!)

If the APA was seriously concerned with the time issue, which they obviously were based on the sudden death rule that affected many matches, they should use the Magic Rack. Of course there would be lots of break and runs...but seriously, its a bar table with buckets...there are *supposed* to be a lot of break and runs. In 8 ball it wasn't really an issue, but in 9 ball it was a real nightmare. Without exception, every single person I played mentioned that it was difficult to get a good rack. It is possible that a rigid wooden rack would help. However, the low quality of the balls combined with the crappy racks resulted in a situation where the balls frequently couldn't even freeze together in the rack, never mind when you take it away.

Perhaps the most foolish piece of APA logic I have ever encountered is that they believe the Magic Rack is not approved for play because "in certain situations it could influence the roll of the balls". Read that sentence again, and try note to burst out laughing. I sure can't do it. The TERRIBLE racking conditions create *vastly* more erroneous movement of the balls, as do the improperly leveled tables, the incorrectly installed rails, the bunched up cloth, etc., etc. The ultimate expression of foolishness is looking at a certain solution to a problem and deciding against it. I have yet to find a table in any condition that prevents me from offering an excellent rack with the magic rack in under 15 seconds. Think of the time wasted just racking the balls. And yet they have the nerve to impose a time limit, while handicapping us against a reasonable pace of play.

Something to consider Mr. APA.

KMRUNOUT