JCIN said on this very board that he only needed1k buyers per each PPV to make TAR viable, and he only got half that number only a handful of times. Seems to me like the long races just aren't good for business.
Yeah, but then he punked his hair and Ekono mopped him up 9-2 at the 2012 China Open. Ko is over the hair, er, hill.
That is the problem with shorter races, a guy like Ko can get beat by a guy like Ekonomopolous and a guy like SVB can get beat by a girl like Yu Ram Cha.
Your assuming that the length of the race is the only factor that could have been determining success vs failure. You are not taking into account the game played, the equipment, the cost, the production values, nothing. You are simply going on with
"well TAR had long races and they were not successful, therefore long races are bad for pool"
That is a textbook logical fallacy.
If it were truly as popular as people on here make it out to be, it'd still be around. After all, they had the best vs the best, playing the long races people in here love so much. Fact is, people didn't buy, forcing them to close up shop. The viewers weren't there
So if the race length was the reason for those low numbers where are the short race single match PPV's that are raking in the money and the viewers?
That is the whole point. Somebody needs to try it and see. Nobody has been doing them and they certainly haven't given them a long fair chance for years like they did with the really long races. So we just don't know how they will do. Maybe they will fail just as bad as the long races, who knows. But we KNOW beyond any and all doubt tested over the course of years that the long races failed miserably, so it is worth it to see if the shorter races, or the long sets that are a best of a number of shorter races, do any better. How can you possibly argue the logic of this?
Come on, you are talking about a race to 21 as if it is a race to 7 or 9. Obviously it is not quite as reliable for finding the best player as a race to 800, but a race to 21 isn't exactly short. I'd put it in the medium length category. By the way, the Alex verses Shane match that many consider to be the best match of all time was a race to 21. And I sure don't remember a soul crying about the race length of that match before, during, or afterwards. Pure edge of your seat excitement the whole way through. What a match.
Here is something else to consider. Even in long races, unless it is a blow out, it still doesn't tell you anything definitive (and if it is a blow out it is a bore fest). Take the Color of Money match with Efren and Earl for example. I'm going by memory here but it was a race to 120 and I believe Efren won it 120-117. But had it ended at 100 instead, Earl would have been the winner, and convincingly I might add as he was up a good amount.
So which one was the better player at that moment? Earl since he was far ahead when he hit 100 (the "standard" ultra long race number of today)? Or Efren who barely won at 120? And which format best finds the best player, a race to 100, or a race to 120? Because they would have been totally different results. Or would it be a race to 80? What about 140? It is all kind of arbitrary no matter what the race length. Just depends on who was ahead at that moment when you hit whatever arbitrary number you picked for the match length.
I think you got the wrong match, as the best match was Alex vs. Shane race to 100 where Alex made a great come back, coarse he couldn't have done that in a short race.
That's because most people didn't know about the match till afterwards, lol.
I think he was referring to the one at the derby in 2008. That was a great match. So was the one to 100.
The best match of all time line he used was Justin's way of selling the shorter match,
the better match was by far the race to 100, that was my point.
It is not just Justin that says that about the their race to 21, a whole lot of people do.
Their race to 100 was a great one too. But the races to 100 were rarely exciting like that one because most were blow outs. Yes, I know you will say "but you still got to see lots of great pool". Well just have Shane play the ghost a race to 100 on PPV if all you want to see is a lot of great pool. But if excitement is what you want, races to 21 are guaranteed to be more exciting, more often. Now whether they sell better remains to be seen. Highly doubtful they can sell any worse though.
I wouldn't mind seeing best three out of five races to 21.