In advance of this post, I must note that I will only consider things as they pertain to American-based professionals and to the American pool scene in general.
The facts are the facts, and right now, the fact is that the US Open is losing money. Some suggest, although not me, that Barry Behrman would be justified in raising entry fees, increasing admission costs, reducing prize money, and discontinuing the policy of paying the entry fee of former champions. However, Behrman, who may have his limitations as an event organizer and proprietor, isn't doing that. He is, instead, trying to stay the course and make the US Open remain lucrative for the players and cost effective for the fans to the greatest extent possible. He has struggled to make payments in the past, and can reasonably be expected to struggle again. The players are right in feeling entitled to prompt payment. After all, their expenses of participation are, typically, borne up front. I can appreciate why the ABP would feel that with the boycott comes a chance for progress, but the boycott also comes with some dangers.
Why the Boycott May Result in Progress
1) Behrman may be induced to escrow prize fund money in the future
This can only happen if sponsorship dollars make it possible, but perhaps the professionals can work wth him to make it happen. Under this scenario, the US Open would continue to exist and the players would not have to worry about being paid prize moneys due.
2) Would-be Producers Will Understand that Late Payers are not Welcome
Scaring away those who are not confident that they can make prompt payments of prize money makes sense, so those who produce tournaments in the future will be more reliable than those of the past.
3) An Era of Greater Understanding Between American Professionals and Tournament Producers Might Result
The boycott, if it results in better results in payment of prize monies, may usher in an era of greater understanding and better feelings between pool entrepreneus and pool professionals, which would be very desirable, and might lead to an increase in the number of tournaments, perhaps even a legitimate professional men's tour in America that is sufficiently lucrative to attract the participation of overseas-based stars.
4) The US Open Could be Produced by a More Reliable Entrepreneur
If the US Open as it exists today proves beyond repair, perhaps another pool entrepreneur will opt to take it over and run it in a way that is more in line with the requirements of the professional playrs. In this case, the prestige of the tournament will be retained, and participation will become more attractive.
The Dangers, as I See Them
1) There is a Great Scarcity of Pool Entrepreneurs in America
There are just a few promoters in America that roll the dice on pro pool these days. With no disrespect for all the others that finance pool events in America, three of them are more visible than the others, because they run the three large-field events having elite international fields and significant fan attendance, and they would be Greg Sullivan (DCC), Mark Griffin (BCAPL) and Barry Behrman (US Open). Scaring away one of them may be a bad idea, and would-be pool entrepreneurs might be turned off by the fact that the American professional pool playing community deserted a long-term business partner.
2) A Migration of the Pool Scene Away from America is in Progress
Major new events are emerging overseas, chiefly in Asia and the Middle East, but not many mjor events are emerging in America. Bit by bit, the elite pro pool scene is leaving America. With a few exceptions, most notably Van Boening, American professionals are opting not to play in even the most elite international events because they cannot justify the steep costs of participation. Maintaining the few jewels on the American pool calendar is, in my view, of fundamental importance to sustaining the vitality of pro pool in America, as well as the attention of pool's American fan base. Does anyone think that the average American pool fan even knew about the event a couple of weeks ago in Qatar? Isn't it obvious that an American company sponsoring a player got almost no exposure among American fans in that event, even if their player competed? If the result of the ABP boycott is the end of the US Open, certainly a possibility, it is a significant blow to the American pool scene.
3) American Proessionals May Lose Touch with the American Amateur Pool Playing Community
The DCC in January, the BCAPL event in May, and the US Open in the early autumn are, arguably, the only time is on the American pool calendar that there is substantial interaction betwen the pro and amateur ranks. These are the core pro events in American pool, the only ones attended by at least one thousand amateurs, and if we lose any of these events without replacing them, we lessen the landscape of American pool and risk a greater disconnect between the pro and amateur ranks.
4) There May be Reduced Participation of Elite Overseas-based Foreign Professionals in United States Based Events
An issue closely tied to the migration of the pool scene away from the United States is the growing absence of the elite foreign superstars of the game in American based events. This is a problem that will get worse if the US Open is lost. The danger is that Americans would have fewer opportunities to compete against the international stars of the game, and not only will it make them less competitive, but it could make their events seem second-rate.
In Conclusion
I see no reason to predict what the result of the boycott will be. I fully support the professional players in their pursuit of a better career in pool, and wish them every possible success as they map out a course for a better future. Nontheless, as I've indicated, some of the possible consequences of the boycott are a cause of concern for me.
