$300,000 per rack

Bob Jewett

Bob Jewett

AZB Osmium Member
Staff member
Gold Member
Silver Member
The World Snooker Championships are going on right now. (For video links, see the snooker forum here.) Ronnie O'Sullivan just had a perfect game -- 147 with all blacks -- for which he gets 147,000 pounds, which is $300,000 more or less. This is the third 147 that he has had over the years in that tournament, so he has gotten almost a million dollars for running three racks. Snooker has lost its major sponsor (tobacco), but seems to be doing OK none the less.

O'Sullivan also had a 100, 102 and 140 in that match, which was a race to 13. He is one of eight players remaining.
 
Bob Jewett said:
The World Snooker Championships are going on right now. (For video links, see the snooker forum here.) Ronnie O'Sullivan just had a perfect game -- 147 with all blacks -- for which he gets 147,000 pounds, which is $300,000 more or less. This is the third 147 that he has had over the years in that tournament, so he has gotten almost a million dollars for running three racks. Snooker has lost its major sponsor (tobacco), but seems to be doing OK none the less.

O'Sullivan also had a 100, 102 and 140 in that match, which was a race to 13. He is one of eight players remaining.
Click to expand...
I need the link again, PLEASE. I have been so caught up in the tourney here in town that I have not been watching. I wondr if I am going to win:)
 
Wow, those breaks are fantastic. When Ronnie's in stroke, he's the most dangerous person with a snooker cue. He just makes it look so easy. I think his pace is a lot like Strickland in dead stroke. Very fast, to the point that the ref has to keep moving to put up the colors when they're potted. Great to watch.


Bob Jewett said:
The World Snooker Championships are going on right now. (For video links, see the snooker forum here.) Ronnie O'Sullivan just had a perfect game -- 147 with all blacks -- for which he gets 147,000 pounds, which is $300,000 more or less. This is the third 147 that he has had over the years in that tournament, so he has gotten almost a million dollars for running three racks. Snooker has lost its major sponsor (tobacco), but seems to be doing OK none the less.

O'Sullivan also had a 100, 102 and 140 in that match, which was a race to 13. He is one of eight players remaining.
Click to expand...
 
Bob Jewett said:
The World Snooker Championships are going on right now. (For video links, see the snooker forum here.) Ronnie O'Sullivan just had a perfect game -- 147 with all blacks -- for which he gets 147,000 pounds, which is $300,000 more or less. This is the third 147 that he has had over the years in that tournament, so he has gotten almost a million dollars for running three racks. Snooker has lost its major sponsor (tobacco), but seems to be doing OK none the less.

O'Sullivan also had a 100, 102 and 140 in that match, which was a race to 13. He is one of eight players remaining.
Click to expand...
Bob, 've had chance to see him play via youtube and he is sensational but I also saw one tourney where he missed a shot and conceded the match so I'm not sure if he is all there if you know what I mean. Anyone who hasn't seen him play go to youtube and search for Ronnie O Sullivan you're in for a treat. Philw
 
Bob Jewett said:
The World Snooker Championships are going on right now. (For video links, see the snooker forum here.) Ronnie O'Sullivan just had a perfect game -- 147 with all blacks -- for which he gets 147,000 pounds, which is $300,000 more or less. This is the third 147 that he has had over the years in that tournament, so he has gotten almost a million dollars for running three racks. Snooker has lost its major sponsor (tobacco), but seems to be doing OK none the less.

O'Sullivan also had a 100, 102 and 140 in that match, which was a race to 13. He is one of eight players remaining.
Click to expand...

actually snooker is not doing well at all

ronnie is a legend and he will always clean up at snooker but it is not doing good financially, the world title is the only tournament with the same money as before all the other competitions are down 50%. its like comparing it to 9 ball world title which is 100,000us to winner which is good but it is a lottery to win and that is the only tournament with decent money.

if you take out the world snooker title and the 147 bonus the other competitions have next to no money, being a top 10 player is the equivilent to someone having a well paid job and nothing more. you cant just play snooker part time and compete with the top boys you need to play all the time and most players now cant really get ahead financially

and apart from ronnie who is a machine at snooker there is maybe an alternating 2 or 3 players who will do well for one year in the worlds or another comp then earn not much for the next year or so.

people here think that earning 200k at billiards is good money yes it is when your living in one city and busy working 40 hours a weeks to get it, but take out your hotel/travelling costs your money you spend cause your bored in a strange city and living a pro sports lifestyle etc almost half in tax there is not much left and it is comparable to someone earning 80k at home.

i know because i earned that and more for years at snooker, now how many players earn that in snooker consistantly year in year out? not many. so believe me the grass is not that green over there. and i was frustrated for many years playing snooker before it went down 50% now unless your a top 4 player or a complete freak like ronnie its a futile game if you want to get ahead financially. the most popular option with players these days is to live a shit lifestyle sharing crap accomadation or live at home till your mid twenties living day to day and watching all the pennies and just living on a table most of your life hoping to become a top 4 player alot of guys have to do this and these guys are ranked 20 and 30 in the world.
 
Congrats to Ronnie! He is my favorite snooker player. I got to see him play in the Singha Masters Tournament in 1999 in Bangkok.
 
justnum said:
Money is important. Other things are important too. Find a balance between the two.
Click to expand...

i agree but unless you are top 3 or 4 or a freak like ronnie you will have to live on an average income to play snooker, thats all i am saying it is a tough way to survive. if you love it more than other things in life then fair enough go and do it
 
chamillionare said:
actually snooker is not doing well at all

ronnie is a legend and he will always clean up at snooker but it is not doing good financially, the world title is the only tournament with the same money as before all the other competitions are down 50%. its like comparing it to 9 ball world title which is 100,000us to winner which is good but it is a lottery to win and that is the only tournament with decent money.

if you take out the world snooker title and the 147 bonus the other competitions have next to no money, being a top 10 player is the equivilent to someone having a well paid job and nothing more. you cant just play snooker part time and compete with the top boys you need to play all the time and most players now cant really get ahead financially

and apart from ronnie who is a machine at snooker there is maybe an alternating 2 or 3 players who will do well for one year in the worlds or another comp then earn not much for the next year or so.

people here think that earning 200k at billiards is good money yes it is when your living in one city and busy working 40 hours a weeks to get it, but take out your hotel/travelling costs your money you spend cause your bored in a strange city and living a pro sports lifestyle etc almost half in tax there is not much left and it is comparable to someone earning 80k at home.

i know because i earned that and more for years at snooker, now how many players earn that in snooker consistantly year in year out? not many. so believe me the grass is not that green over there. and i was frustrated for many years playing snooker before it went down 50% now unless your a top 4 player or a complete freak like ronnie its a futile game if you want to get ahead financially. the most popular option with players these days is to live a shit lifestyle sharing crap accomadation or live at home till your mid twenties living day to day and watching all the pennies and just living on a table most of your life hoping to become a top 4 player alot of guys have to do this and these guys are ranked 20 and 30 in the world.
Click to expand...


i thought that snooker couldn't be doing all that well when some of the top players came to play the ipt
 
quentin is right - it's easy, especially for people in the US, to look at snooker and get the false impression that they are getting paid like gods to wield their cues. many in the game are worried about it's steady decline and like quentin said with the numbers - the money is going down fast and the game needs sponsors. the biggest key to snooker success up till now has been the bbc providing plenty of coverage regularly for years now, and that really has been a godsend for them.

sadly pool has never had anything like that.

but still it does have to be said that compared to pool, snooker is a rich man's sport as far as a tour and money in tournaments is concerned.

i thought that snooker couldn't be doing all that well when some of the top players came to play the ipt
Click to expand...

exactly. i remember a few seasons back when steve davis and john parrott were discussing in the studio some of the players's intentions to play pool in america a bit for more money. now most snooker fans and players really don't know much about pool at all. this isn't an insult just stating the facts - they don't have to know anything about the game if they don't want to, they're not pool players at the end of the day. anyway point is steve davis, who knows about pool more than most snooker players had to kind of calm everybody down and explain that there isn't exactly a tour over there like snooker, and the american pool 'circuit' isn't some great big cash cow to be milked and to not get carried away.
 
Last edited:
chamillionare said:
actually snooker is not doing well at all
Click to expand...


your 100% right, from what I know about snooker.

here is my question to you and I know your very sharp and will have a good accurate answere, PM me if you dont want to make it public, i would appericate it, as a business man to business man conversation. this interests me. its kinda long but there is more commentary than questions, but it will shed some light for Americans like me to understand more about snooker, if you dont want to answere thats cool I understand.

If snooker losses 888.com or other online gaming like KT lost for the IPT, KT told me this at my house that he relied on internet gaming as his revinue engine for the IPT, which is reasonable business model, (this is not a KT debate) as it has proved to be successful for snooker since the tobbacco loss, correct? Isnt online gaming advertizing $$$ the biggest sponsership $$$ behind most pro-snooker?

If thats the big money for snooker that is comming from since the tobacco loss and it gets killed in the EU or the UK like it did here(USA) by making online gaming illegal(sure the hard core played didnt stop playing but thats a small%) for the most part, who is gonna sponser snooker to post up the $$$ and financially secure the top 32 or 48? however its done there, to make sure there is a viable pro circut.

This is what happened to KT no sponser to tour. Ever see a tour in any individual sport that was successful with out a tour sponsered by a industry(online gaming for snooker, tobaco in the past or Fed-Ex for golf)??? You wont that has real money in it.

you made the point that you could do better than snooker anyways and for this discussion now I believe you as you have been successful outside of snooker. Seems to me snooker might be in deep trouble without online casinos etc. Sure "Freaks like Ronnie" will awalys make $$$ and social players will still have fun but the top 64 might not be the glory days of the past, high quality of the 63 ranked player because he is selling insurance not playing for 22,000 pounds a year not covering costs as an example. Or the income level to hold peoples attention to play or make economic sence.

It seems corporate sponsering with a piece of a F-1 team or motoGP is a better investment of advertizing dollars in the EU, Than paying snooker players snooker players in the top 64 or 32 just to play better and the quality of professional snooker might suffer greatly as the top players will have day jobs and 3-4 guys like Ronnie will be making all the $$$.

I put alot of effort into this post, alot of people dont understand a simple business concept, the guys with the check books who own F-1 teams(Know one-a gazillionaire) he hates F-1 its a business. they guys paying snooker players might not like snooker, do you really think they wanted Ronnie to make the 147 tonight or miss the last black? I would hate to blow my advertiving $$ on that. Its all biz if the R.O.I. on snooker isnt good enough(return on investment=what they pay snooker players dosent make them more than they are making from the shows they produce thye wont produce any more.

I own a boxing radio show in Vegas sometimes til my back got too bad I would go to the fights and sit on the apron of the ring and those guys were miserable, they did it for 8-9 years I was there for 6 and saw it all. paying off people for favoriable return on their investment, one night a kid died in the locker room, they were worried about the nev. Althic comission comming after them etc. they didnt care a 20 year old boy died, its marketing and advertizing it has nothing for the love of the sport in boxing and I bet snooker isnt far off, God forbid any top player dies I bet the investors are worried about how to replace him not how the decesed's mom feels.

am I right? snooker is gonna be hurt if they lose online gaming, the promoters dont care who lives or dies, wins or loses as long as they get paid? alot of people live sheltered life's and sometimes I wish I havent seen what I have, takes the fun away from it sometimes. you agree.
 
chamillionare said:
...so believe me the grass is not that green over there. and i was frustrated for many years playing snooker before it went down 50% now unless your a top 4 player or a complete freak like ronnie its a futile game if you want to get ahead financially. the most popular option with players these days is to live a shit lifestyle sharing crap accomadation or live at home till your mid twenties living day to day and watching all the pennies and just living on a table most of your life hoping to become a top 4 player alot of guys have to do this and these guys are ranked 20 and 30 in the world.
Click to expand...

Wow, does this sound familiar or what?! :(

I am sorry to learn that snooker is not as lucrative as some may think.

Reading your post makes me sad. I learned that pool was a "shit lifestyle" the hard way.

The most fun I ever had with pool is when I was playing on leagues, a social shooter, a bar banger, if you will. Professional pool may provide a little pleasure for some, a viewing audience, an aspring player pursuing his dream, but it will bankrupt your soul, if you let it.

I like Ronnie, though I don't know him. He was fun-loving and friendly, the first time I did get to see him in action. He is one of the fortunate few players in the world who has been rewarded financially for his skills on a field of green. The majority of pool players, whether they be snooker or other billiard games, struggle to make ends meet.

JAM
 
Last edited:
I watched it live on TV here in Kuwait. Ronnie is to snooker, what E. Reyes is to Pool, there may never be better players.
 
bummer about the snooker losing $ but its all cyclical right? No cue sport is popular forever....

I just think I missed my time here by about 30 years being born in 1966 and missing the hay day of pool. I just keep hoping someone comes up with a plan for a standardized tour with an understandable structure. It's been done before with the Camel Tour, only to lose the sponsor to make it fail, not the structure of the thing.....it was rolling pretty strong IMO.

G.
 
Fatboy said:
your 100% right, from what I know about snooker.

here is my question to you and I know your very sharp and will have a good accurate answere, PM me if you dont want to make it public, i would appericate it, as a business man to business man conversation. this interests me. its kinda long but there is more commentary than questions, but it will shed some light for Americans like me to understand more about snooker, if you dont want to answere thats cool I understand.

If snooker losses 888.com or other online gaming like KT lost for the IPT, KT told me this at my house that he relied on internet gaming as his revinue engine for the IPT, which is reasonable business model, (this is not a KT debate) as it has proved to be successful for snooker since the tobbacco loss, correct? Isnt online gaming advertizing $$$ the biggest sponsership $$$ behind most pro-snooker?

If thats the big money for snooker that is comming from since the tobacco loss and it gets killed in the EU or the UK like it did here(USA) by making online gaming illegal(sure the hard core played didnt stop playing but thats a small%) for the most part, who is gonna sponser snooker to post up the $$$ and financially secure the top 32 or 48? however its done there, to make sure there is a viable pro circut.

This is what happened to KT no sponser to tour. Ever see a tour in any individual sport that was successful with out a tour sponsered by a industry(online gaming for snooker, tobaco in the past or Fed-Ex for golf)??? You wont that has real money in it.

you made the point that you could do better than snooker anyways and for this discussion now I believe you as you have been successful outside of snooker. Seems to me snooker might be in deep trouble without online casinos etc. Sure "Freaks like Ronnie" will awalys make $$$ and social players will still have fun but the top 64 might not be the glory days of the past, high quality of the 63 ranked player because he is selling insurance not playing for 22,000 pounds a year not covering costs as an example. Or the income level to hold peoples attention to play or make economic sence.

It seems corporate sponsering with a piece of a F-1 team or motoGP is a better investment of advertizing dollars in the EU, Than paying snooker players snooker players in the top 64 or 32 just to play better and the quality of professional snooker might suffer greatly as the top players will have day jobs and 3-4 guys like Ronnie will be making all the $$$.

I put alot of effort into this post, alot of people dont understand a simple business concept, the guys with the check books who own F-1 teams(Know one-a gazillionaire) he hates F-1 its a business. they guys paying snooker players might not like snooker, do you really think they wanted Ronnie to make the 147 tonight or miss the last black? I would hate to blow my advertiving $$ on that. Its all biz if the R.O.I. on snooker isnt good enough(return on investment=what they pay snooker players dosent make them more than they are making from the shows they produce thye wont produce any more.

I own a boxing radio show in Vegas sometimes til my back got too bad I would go to the fights and sit on the apron of the ring and those guys were miserable, they did it for 8-9 years I was there for 6 and saw it all. paying off people for favoriable return on their investment, one night a kid died in the locker room, they were worried about the nev. Althic comission comming after them etc. they didnt care a 20 year old boy died, its marketing and advertizing it has nothing for the love of the sport in boxing and I bet snooker isnt far off, God forbid any top player dies I bet the investors are worried about how to replace him not how the decesed's mom feels.

am I right? snooker is gonna be hurt if they lose online gaming, the promoters dont care who lives or dies, wins or loses as long as they get paid? alot of people live sheltered life's and sometimes I wish I havent seen what I have, takes the fun away from it sometimes. you agree.
Click to expand...

Quinten will probably in due course answer your "what if....." question Fatboy but I hope you don't mind if in the meantime I mention a couple of things which have some relevance to your question.

The nature of the political administrations and history dictate that there is absolutely zero chance of the Uk and/or of the majority of mainland Europe EEC countries ever banning their citizens from participating in online gaming so "if" snooker loses any sponsorship it presently gets from online gaming related companies it will not be for anything connected with that potential reason.

Just in case there is any misunderstanding of the situation with online gambling sponsorship of snooker, pool or indeed any other sport let's be clear on something......online gambling companies and High Street betting shops in Uk and elsewhere in the world can offer betting on any sport they like, snooker and pool included, usually without any obligation to pay one red cent to the sport concerned in fees or sponsorship. Indeed right now, at least several hundred betting shops and online gambling companies are perfectly legally taking bets on the snooker world championship matches presently taking place. They would get no further significant advantage in what bets they are permitted to offer punters online by being involved in any sponsorship of snooker. The online company presently sponsoring the snooker world championships could offer exactly the same betting service to their online clients whether or not they were sponsors.

Accordingly potential snooker or pool sponsors are in essence almost identical to any other type of company considering sponsorship of snooker or pool.....i.e they are basically measuring their investment against the benefits of exposure of their brand at the events and in the publicity and reporting surrounding the events and not against any advantages gained in the form of any special rights or privileges to a bigger or better share of the online gambling market related to snooker or pool. Furthermore most online punters are spoilt for choice and many simply go where the best odds are available, so the aforementioned brand exposure may have limited value in any case in terms of potential increase in actual betting revenue generated.

I don't want to open up old wounds but since you mentioned it, it's pretty clear that the IPT online gaming issue may have been at least partly a spurious argument for generally similar reasons.
 
Last edited:
JAM said:
Wow, does this sound familiar or what?! :(

I am sorry to learn that snooker is not as lucrative as some may think.

Reading your post makes me sad. I learned that pool was a "shit lifestyle" the hard way.

The most fun I ever had with pool is when I was playing on leagues, a social shooter, a bar banger, if you will. Professional pool may provide a little pleasure for some, a viewing audience, an aspring player pursuing his dream, but it will bankrupt your soul, if you let it.

I like Ronnie, though I don't know him. He was fun-loving and friendly, the first time I did get to see him in action. He is one of the fortunate few players in the world who has been rewarded financially for his skills on a field of green. The majority of pool players, whether they be snooker or other billiard games, struggle to make ends meet.

JAM
Click to expand...

i can relate to your league playing days being the most fun i always raced motor cross when i was young i was as good at it as i was at pool/snooker i got back into super bikes at 22 y/o, started riding on the streets with friends which was great fun, but then i started racing pouring in alot of money and getting very serious with it. but i stopped enjoying riding with friends and wished i never started racing as the only buzz i can get now is pushing it to the limits on a race track, and pushing the limits on a super bike is a whole lot of commitment. speaking with friends after this we all agreed that ignorance is bliss and wished we just stayed riding on the road believing we were all better than we were but having tons of fun.

the same goes for pool/snooker once it was a source of income for me i started to not enjoy it anymore the 2 things i enjoyed the most in life were gone sometime ignorance is bliss. as for being a snooker pro i would never let my kids play pool or snooker the game has no future, and to play it well it takes away most of your chances of succeding elsewhere.

i agree ronnie is the most genuine snooker player i meet on tour we did not speak much but he is a nice intelligent guy who sometimes does not feel like playing snooker and he is honest about it. he has had more problems than most people ever will but still managed to play snooker to an amazing standard and become a huge success i see his life as amazing highs and tough lows. he carries snooker on his shoulders sure the game would survive without him but it would not be the same, everone loves watching him and no one else even comes close to him for entertainment value or pure genius
 
  • Like
Reactions: JAM
Fatboy said:
your 100% right, from what I know about snooker.

here is my question to you and I know your very sharp and will have a good accurate answere, PM me if you dont want to make it public, i would appericate it, as a business man to business man conversation. this interests me. its kinda long but there is more commentary than questions, but it will shed some light for Americans like me to understand more about snooker, if you dont want to answere thats cool I understand.

If snooker losses 888.com or other online gaming like KT lost for the IPT, KT told me this at my house that he relied on internet gaming as his revinue engine for the IPT, which is reasonable business model, (this is not a KT debate) as it has proved to be successful for snooker since the tobbacco loss, correct? Isnt online gaming advertizing $$$ the biggest sponsership $$$ behind most pro-snooker?

If thats the big money for snooker that is comming from since the tobacco loss and it gets killed in the EU or the UK like it did here(USA) by making online gaming illegal(sure the hard core played didnt stop playing but thats a small%) for the most part, who is gonna sponser snooker to post up the $$$ and financially secure the top 32 or 48? however its done there, to make sure there is a viable pro circut.

This is what happened to KT no sponser to tour. Ever see a tour in any individual sport that was successful with out a tour sponsered by a industry(online gaming for snooker, tobaco in the past or Fed-Ex for golf)??? You wont that has real money in it.

you made the point that you could do better than snooker anyways and for this discussion now I believe you as you have been successful outside of snooker. Seems to me snooker might be in deep trouble without online casinos etc. Sure "Freaks like Ronnie" will awalys make $$$ and social players will still have fun but the top 64 might not be the glory days of the past, high quality of the 63 ranked player because he is selling insurance not playing for 22,000 pounds a year not covering costs as an example. Or the income level to hold peoples attention to play or make economic sence.

It seems corporate sponsering with a piece of a F-1 team or motoGP is a better investment of advertizing dollars in the EU, Than paying snooker players snooker players in the top 64 or 32 just to play better and the quality of professional snooker might suffer greatly as the top players will have day jobs and 3-4 guys like Ronnie will be making all the $$$.

I put alot of effort into this post, alot of people dont understand a simple business concept, the guys with the check books who own F-1 teams(Know one-a gazillionaire) he hates F-1 its a business. they guys paying snooker players might not like snooker, do you really think they wanted Ronnie to make the 147 tonight or miss the last black? I would hate to blow my advertiving $$ on that. Its all biz if the R.O.I. on snooker isnt good enough(return on investment=what they pay snooker players dosent make them more than they are making from the shows they produce thye wont produce any more.

I own a boxing radio show in Vegas sometimes til my back got too bad I would go to the fights and sit on the apron of the ring and those guys were miserable, they did it for 8-9 years I was there for 6 and saw it all. paying off people for favoriable return on their investment, one night a kid died in the locker room, they were worried about the nev. Althic comission comming after them etc. they didnt care a 20 year old boy died, its marketing and advertizing it has nothing for the love of the sport in boxing and I bet snooker isnt far off, God forbid any top player dies I bet the investors are worried about how to replace him not how the decesed's mom feels.

am I right? snooker is gonna be hurt if they lose online gaming, the promoters dont care who lives or dies, wins or loses as long as they get paid? alot of people live sheltered life's and sometimes I wish I havent seen what I have, takes the fun away from it sometimes. you agree.
Click to expand...

i have to run i will give you my opinion when i log in again
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top