BCA no longer a major

[JB Cases]

Sorry gotta think about that one.......naw I don't agree - they are NOT all champions or even champions in the making. Come on lets be real - some of the girls are stalemeated and just take up space....the top girls are cream...but there are a lotta girls that are no where near to EVER winning an event. It's the truth...and it hurts...but for the girls who are not doing what it takes to get better...it's their fault.

Well I think you understood the point well enough though. And in fact the lower half of the rankings on the women's side are champions back wherever their hometown is. That's how they get to the WPBA by being the best at the regional level. It's no different than any other professional sport. The bulk of the competitors are made up of good players who aren't GREAT players. It has to be this way or we would never see GREAT players.

Still each competitor has EARNED the right to be there. Each and every woman who played in this tournament has paid their dues on the pool table to deserve a spot in the tournament and continue their personal quest to master the table and all of their opponents. Whether each competitor is ready to do that is another topic. Some of them just don't have the skill. Some of them don't have the dedication. Some of them haven't had the same kind of training or experiences. But all of them are champions for the very fact that they are grinding it out and mixing it up.

So yes Phoebe, the Women's side of this tournament was not filled with Champions of Allison's caliber. However it was filled with players who are champions in their heart and who have sacrificed everything to do that which they love.

If we only count the Allisons of the world then all tournament would only be ten people invites.

That wouldn't be any fun would it?

 

[chris_williams]

That makes no sense. There was plenty of space to add more tables. The BCA chose this format because that is what they felt could be comfortably handled in conjunction with the trade show.

I am constantly down on the BCA and their choices. Looking at the poor amount of local promotion the BCA did and the beginning rounds I didn't feel too confident about the event.

However they pulled it off during the last two days and it ended up being a great event anyway.

As I stated before, this particular event put live pool in front of many influential folks inside and outside this industry. These are people who have never been to a live professional event.

I also stated that there were spectators at the event who have hundreds of millions of dollars to spend on marketing. Charlotte is known as the Wall Street of the South for a reason. There is a LOT of money here.

Now, the BCA could have left the tournament at the Riviera and it would have been a great event as always. For the league players and the diehard fans it would have been another great event with lots of pool stars in attendance.

But in fact it would have done nothing to elevate pool in the slightest degree.

For the things going on between the BCA board and Mark I can only comment that the BCA board is pretty dysfunctional in my view and they have certainly made a lot of wrong choices.

And this choice to bring the tournament to the Expo seems like a bad one but in my view it's the best thing the BCA could do with the event in light of all the bad choices that they have made in the past.

The fact of the matter is that pool is stagnant in the USA. We all know that. If pool as a sport is to grow and attract more people who want to play on a regular basis and invest in equipment to do that then it needs to become more visible to more people. And in order to do that pool needs to have outside money invested into it.

So instead of complaining about the fact that one tournament was changed and what that means for our pleasure as die hard pool fans how about we try and think of this tournament as shot at doing something to try and give pool a boost.

After all this is what we say we all want, isn't it?

As far as pool being stagnant for many years, I say that is the fault of the BCA. Arent they ones in charge of building our sport?

I think its funny when I hear people talking about outside money. If I was Nike or Coke and you wanted me to sponsor pool I would laugh my head off as I had security throw you out of my building. The fact is, we have no marketable product. We need to fix our sport and then seek sponsors not seek sponsors to fix our sport. Until everyone understands that I think we will continue to go backwards. Mark G gets that. Why doesnt the BCA? Is it egos getting on the way of common sense? Is it a power struggle between the powers to be? I am not sure what it is, but its not right. Like you said, the BCA has made many poor decisions and its hard for me to put my eggs in that basket.

 

[JAM]

As far as pool being stagnant for many years, I say that is the fault of the BCA. Arent they ones in charge of building our sport?

I think its funny when I hear people talking about outside money. If I was Nike or Coke and you wanted me to sponsor pool I would laugh my head off as I had security throw you out of my building. The fact is, we have no marketable product. We need to fix our sport and then seek sponsors not seek sponsors to fix our sport. Until everyone understands that I think we will continue to go backwards. Mark G gets that. Why doesnt the BCA? Is it egos getting on the way of common sense? Is it a power struggle between the powers to be? I am not sure what it is, but its not right. Like you said, the BCA has made many poor decisions and its hard for me to put my eggs in that basket.

There is a lot of common sense in what you write.

Personally -- and this is just my opinion -- I do not think it is fair that Steve Lipton and/or Peg L., et al., are in charge of hand-picking what male professional players they desire to compete in the so-called "BCA Open," which as we all know is not an open at all, by any stretch of the imagination.

I am reminded of a "waiting list" of years ago that Steve Lipton could pick and choose who he wanted to compete in the BCA Open in Vegas. Frankie Hernandez who was NOT a UPA member got in, but Danny Basavich, who was a UPA member and was left off the list by the UPA seemed to also get ignored for selection by Steve Lipton. This is the same year that Danny Basavich won quite a few tournaments. I think, subject to check, it was 2004.

Why are decisions made by vendors behind closed doors? Why is there no transparency on who gets selected to compete in the BCA Open for men?

Why was the tournament for men limited to 32 players this year, but the women were granted 64 slots?

I understand the WPBA's side of the BCA Open selection process. I do not understand the men's side of the BCA Open selection process.

The BCA recently took the ranking authority away from the UPA. Somebody needs to yank the ranking authority away from the BCA.

Hopefully, when the USA tour that Mark Griffin is working on comes to fruition, there will be a new pool sheriff in town. The BCA organization has done more damage than good to American pool due to its LACK of involvement. It's time for a revolution, an American pool revolution. Down with the BCA organization. Up with the new USA Tour. I always said that leagues is where it's at when it comes to the success of American pool.

JAM

 

[JB Cases]

As far as pool being stagnant for many years, I say that is the fault of the BCA. Arent they ones in charge of building our sport?

I think its funny when I hear people talking about outside money. If I was Nike or Coke and you wanted me to sponsor pool I would laugh my head off as I had security throw you out of my building. The fact is, we have no marketable product. We need to fix our sport and then seek sponsors not seek sponsors to fix our sport. Until everyone understands that I think we will continue to go backwards. Mark G gets that. Why doesnt the BCA? Is it egos getting on the way of common sense? Is it a power struggle between the powers to be? I am not sure what it is, but its not right. Like you said, the BCA has made many poor decisions and its hard for me to put my eggs in that basket.

It goes both ways. I do agree that having a marketable product is the right way to go. Really the only way to go. The BCA just can't agree on what a marketable product is as far as professional pool is concerned. Another thing is that the BCA board is made up of a lot of folks who are seemingly out of touch with the game on the street level. They are out of touch with the current culture it seems.

I did not say that this tournament will produce anything worthwhile on net. But one thing I do know is that many industry people were excited about being part of it. How do I know this? We had 55 VIP tickets that we used to invite many folks inside the industry and outside of it. Most of these folks had NEVER been to a professional event. NEVER. So now at least some of them are probably thinking about how cool it would be for them to have their logo on display for the world to see.

I know FOR A FACT that one of the people we invited who has a ten million dollar annual budget for advertising has said that she wants to invest some of that into pool as a result of being at the event. That alone made it worth it because IF her company likes what she does then they could duplicate it nationwide and even world wide.

No one is asking you to put your eggs in the BCA basket. The BCA is not at fault for pool not being more popular, they are just a small part of a small industry. They have done a lot of ad hoc and inconsistent things that were intended to bring more people to the game and of course none of them worked because those things are not even blips on the radar in our attention deprived world. If you want people to have pool on the brain then you have to inundate them with pool and that costs hundreds of times what the BCA's annual revenue is. I will say that IF they had pursued some sort of small but consistent marketing strategy then it would have been much better than all the one-off attempts.

If there had been a BCA sponsored tour of the country consisting of great players and trick shooters year after year after year then pool would be on the brains of many folks in a constant way.

In my opinion.

 

[JB Cases]

There is a lot of common sense in what you write.

Personally -- and this is just my opinion -- I do not think it is fair that Steve Lipton and/or Peg L., et al., are in charge of hand-picking what male professional players they desire to compete in the so-called "BCA Open," which as we all know is not an open at all, by any stretch of the imagination.

I am reminded of a "waiting list" of years ago that Steve Lipton could pick and choose who he wanted to compete in the BCA Open in Vegas. Frankie Hernandez who was NOT a UPA member got in, but Danny Basavich, who was a UPA member and was left off the list by the UPA seemed to also get ignored for selection by Steve Lipton. This is the same year that Danny Basavich won quite a few tournaments. I think, subject to check, it was 2004.

Why are decisions made by vendors behind closed doors? Why is there no transparency on who gets selected to compete in the BCA Open for men?

Why was the tournament for men limited to 32 players this year, but the women were granted 64 slots?

I understand the WPBA's side of the BCA Open selection process. I do not understand the men's side of the BCA Open selection process.

The BCA recently took the ranking authority away from the UPA. Somebody needs to yank the ranking authority away from the BCA.

Hopefully, when the USA tour that Mark Griffin is working on comes to fruition, there will be a new pool sheriff in town. The BCA organization has done more damage than good to American pool due to its LACK of involvement. It's time for a revolution, an American pool revolution. Down with the BCA organization. Up with the new USA Tour. I always said that leagues is where it's at when it comes to the success of American pool.

JAM

The women were not granted 64 slots. They elected to play what was in effect a qualifier to determine which 32 players got into the main event.

Jennie there is no doubt that a lot of politicking goes on with these things. In the end though it is one of those things where you just have to either accept that its their show and play along or refuse to play.

And like myself, and you, and Mark and many others have said, until there is a consistent tour with unified players there won't be much choice but to do what each individual promoter wants, if you want to compete at the highest level.

 

[JAM]

...Another thing is that the BCA board is made up of a lot of folks who are seemingly out of touch with the game on the street level. They are out of touch with the current culture it seems.

John, why are they still in charge of American professional pool then?

I know FOR A FACT that one of the people we invited who has a ten-million-dollar annual budget for advertising has said that she wants to invest some of that into pool as a result of being at the event. That alone made it worth it because IF her company likes what she does then they could duplicate it nationwide and even world wide.

That's pretty cool!

The BCA is not at fault for pool not being more popular, they are just a small part of a small industry.

I agree, and they should NOT be in charge of professional pool, in conjunction with WPA. They are industry-driven and not there for the professional players.

The Billiard Congress of America should be looking out for AMERICAN players, like other countries look for their lot of professional players. Our BCA welcomes international players from around the world to the BCA Open, which is an invitational once-a-year event. Let them have their international gala, but damn it, they should have a once-a-year tournament for AMERICANS only, this Billiard Congress of AMERICA.

If there had been a BCA sponsored tour of the country consisting of great players and trick shooters year after year after year then pool would be on the brains of many folks in a constant way.

Well said, and I do agree.

I'm not sure who or what needs to take over the professional pool governing situation in the States, but the BCA has been holding onto this duty for too long, with nothing happening to benefit American professional players, especially the men. They benefit industry members in every decision they make. What about the pros?

JAM

 

[chris_williams]

If there had been a BCA sponsored tour of the country consisting of great players and trick shooters year after year after year then pool would be on the brains of many folks in a constant way.

In my opinion.

Thats what Mark is trying to do with the USA pool league. I think, right now, its our only option if we want our sport to grow. I think everyone (player and vendor) should get behind Mark Griffin and make this work.

 

[JB Cases]

John, why are they still in charge of American professional pool then?

They aren't. The BCA is not in control of American professional pool. The BCA has the ability to grant invitation slots to WPA tournaments because the BCA is the North American member of the WPA. The BCA has nothing whatsoever to do with any other professional events in the USA aside from the one event that they produce annually. In that event they can do what they want to and the players can choose to play or not.

I agree, and they should NOT be in charge of professional pool, in conjunction with WPA. They are industry-driven and not there for the professional players.

The Billiard Congress of America should be looking out for AMERICAN players, like other countries look for their lot of professional players. Our BCA welcomes international players from around the world to the BCA Open, which is an invitational once-a-year event. Let them have their international gala, but damn it, they should have a once-a-year tournament for AMERICANS only, this Billiard Congress of AMERICA.

Well I am not quite do isolationist but I do think that there should be a way to crown American champions just to determine who is in fact the best in the USA. I don't really understand why there is no United States Championship in each discipline that is open only to U.S. citizens. And in the past this duty would have and should have been the BCA's responsibility. But you are quite correct in that the BCA has nearly abandoned it's original mission to standardize and popularize pool. In fact they are pretty much a trade show organization right now whose biggest mission seems to be selling real estate at the annual expo. They do this no matter what the cost is to industry members. It's truly sad. This year someone had a booth selling motor scooters among all the non-pool stuff there. And virtual golf. Hey maybe that will become popular and pool rooms will convert their table space to virtual golf and the pool pros can all become virtual golf pros instead. :-(

I'm not sure who or what needs to take over the professional pool governing situation in the States, but the BCA has been holding onto this duty for too long, with nothing happening to benefit American professional players, especially the men. They benefit industry members in every decision they make. What about the pros?

JAM

Jennie, the pros are not a charity case. Each one of them is in business for themselves and collectively they need to function as one voice in order to build their value to the industry and to the consumer. It is very difficult to put money into something where the return is nebulous at best. And since the BCA is unwilling to embark on a long-term and committed plan to make pool popular with consumers then they are ill-equipped to fund or run a pro tour. I have misplaced the annual report but I think that the BCA only has a few million a year to work with for all of their operating expenses. With the right plan, such as that which Mike Janis has proposed they could provide some consistent support to help establish a consistent and reliable tour.

However, given the current direction, the current board, and the current climate I don't see the BCA changing direction any time soon. It feels very much like a good old boys club and that was the tenor at the annual meeting.

I think it will take people like Mark Griffin and Mike Janis to build their organizations without the help and "blessing" of the BCA. The BCA is no longer a leader when it comes to pool in America.

The positive thing is that there are many people working on different fronts . Mark is going ahead with his plan, Mike is doing what he can with his. The Action Report is doing what they can. Many folks from Inside Pool to AZ Billiards' Run Out Radio and AZBTV and On The Break are doing video newscasting and events on the web. It will be from these folks that pool grows and not from any ivory-tower, marketing-firm scheme that the BCA board votes to throw money at.

For this particular event they did put on a good show though. Time will tell if they can change to become a positive force in pool again.

 

[JAM]

...Jennie, the pros are not a charity case. Each one of them is in business for themselves and collectively they need to function as one voice in order to build their value to the industry and to the consumer. It is very difficult to put money into something where the return is nebulous at best. And since the BCA is unwilling to embark on a long-term and committed plan to make pool popular with consumers then they are ill-equipped to fund or run a pro tour. I have misplaced the annual report but I think that the BCA only has a few million a year to work with for all of their operating expenses. With the right plan, such as that which Mike Janis has proposed they could provide some consistent support to help establish a consistent and reliable tour.

However, given the current direction, the current board, and the current climate I don't see the BCA changing direction any time soon. It feels very much like a good old boys club and that was the tenor at the annual meeting.

I think it will take people like Mark Griffin and Mike Janis to build their organizations without the help and "blessing" of the BCA. The BCA is no longer a leader when it comes to pool in America.

The positive thing is that there are many people working on different fronts . Mark is going ahead with his plan, Mike is doing what he can with his. The Action Report is doing what they can. Many folks from Inside Pool to AZ Billiards' Run Out Radio and AZBTV and On The Break are doing video newscasting and events on the web. It will be from these folks that pool grows and not from any ivory-tower, marketing-firm scheme that the BCA board votes to throw money at.

For this particular event they did put on a good show though. Time will tell if they can change to become a positive force in pool again.

You have once again provided a well-written explanation of the status quo. I agree with much of what you write. You do possess more of what I would term as "insider knowledge," being that you are an industry member.

I've given up on seeing professional pool shine and now have taken a stance that I will attempt to just enjoy pool when and if I do go to a pool tournament. To tell you the truth, I'm not even too excited about going to any pool tournaments anymore in the future.

Go to Philippines, Asia, and even Europe, pool players seem to receive a greater amount of respect, not only from the pool culture in those respective countries, but from the organizational entities. Look at the majority of the American pool culture -- not everyone -- and the BCA organization. It's pitiful.

JAM

 

[GMAC]

Well, major or not, it was fun and exciting to be there. As a fan it was a great tournament, as a sponsor we look forward to seeing a great match on ESPN for years to come. The only downside is that the finals were cut to race to 7 which is what ESPN does unfortunately. Other than that it was a great event with dozens and dozens of industry and outside industry heavy hitters in the audience.

Why do we allow ESPN to cut the finals if it isn't live, cant they do that in the editing room? We change the race in the finals for a taped match, what a joke. Only pool would mess with the integrity of the event so we can watch it 3 months later. Am i missing something?

 

[JCIN]

Why do we allow ESPN to cut the finals if it isn't live, cant they do that in the editing room? We change the race in the finals for a taped match, what a joke. Only pool would mess with the integrity of the event so we can watch it 3 months later. Am i missing something?

I would guess the reason is the one that makes the world go round. Money

TV production crews are paid by the hour. If they do it like last year and tape the final 3 matches of both the mens and womens events that is 6 races to 7 versus 6 races to 11. Add in all the little delays during taping and the fact that way over half of the footage in a race to 7 gets cut out anyway and it just makes no sense to spend the money on that longer race.

The TV crew doesnt care who wins they would tape a lightpole for 6 hours if you pay their rate.

I could very well be wrong . But I don't think I am.

I agree with you that it sucks.

 

[Nostroke]

I would guess the reason is the one that makes the world go round. Money

TV production crews are paid by the hour. If they do it like last year and tape the final 3 matches of both the mens and womens events that is 6 races to 7 versus 6 races to 11. Add in all the little delays during taping and the fact that way over half of the footage in a race to 7 gets cut out anyway and it just makes no sense to spend the money on that longer race.

The TV crew doesnt care who wins they would tape a lightpole for 6 hours if you pay their rate.

I could very well be wrong . But I don't think I am.

I agree with you that it sucks.

I have heard that there is a point that you have to pay the production crew ANOTHER DAYS Pay if the job goes over a certain time. They dont want to go near that point. Could be BS - I just dont know fer sure.

 

[jay helfert]

I would guess the reason is the one that makes the world go round. Money

TV production crews are paid by the hour. If they do it like last year and tape the final 3 matches of both the mens and womens events that is 6 races to 7 versus 6 races to 11. Add in all the little delays during taping and the fact that way over half of the footage in a race to 7 gets cut out anyway and it just makes no sense to spend the money on that longer race.

The TV crew doesnt care who wins they would tape a lightpole for 6 hours if you pay their rate.

I could very well be wrong . But I don't think I am.

I agree with you that it sucks.

This is it in a nutshell! It's all about saving money for the production costs. I think it's a big joke, and "pool" is the victim. It would be like shortening the final round in a golf tournament to 14 holes.

I will NEVER allow ESPN or any other network to dictate to me in any event I produce. I told them 15 years ago to pack up their equipment and go home. I wasn't about to change the races to suit them.

 

[phoebe choy]

Well I think you understood the point well enough though. And in fact the lower half of the rankings on the women's side are champions back wherever their hometown is. That's how they get to the WPBA by being the best at the regional level. It's no different than any other professional sport. The bulk of the competitors are made up of good players who aren't GREAT players. It has to be this way or we would never see GREAT players.

Still each competitor has EARNED the right to be there. Each and every woman who played in this tournament has paid their dues on the pool table to deserve a spot in the tournament and continue their personal quest to master the table and all of their opponents. Whether each competitor is ready to do that is another topic. Some of them just don't have the skill. Some of them don't have the dedication. Some of them haven't had the same kind of training or experiences. But all of them are champions for the very fact that they are grinding it out and mixing it up.

So yes Phoebe, the Women's side of this tournament was not filled with Champions of Allison's caliber. However it was filled with players who are champions in their heart and who have sacrificed everything to do that which they love.

If we only count the Allisons of the world then all tournament would only be ten people invites.

That wouldn't be any fun would it?

You are right JB....I don't disagree.

I'm just a little more "rigid" in my insights. Part of it is because I'm a disgruntled ex-player that used to "mix it up" too.....BUT I couldn't stand losing...and did not want to just "be there" .

Just saddened by the lack of heart/drive/dedication/willingness to learn/etc./etc. that some of the girls have......to me....it eventually reflects on how people perceive the sport too....believe me....they will see the lack of whatever that the girls have and of course get turned off by it.

In pro golf I see no hackers, pro tennis thay all can at least serve the ball, in pro pool...sheesh-a good amount of just bangers, some can barely break, or stop cue or draw, miss completely routine shot A LOT.....no wonder why only the final four are televised.

We think alike....you are just more eloquent!

 

[AuntyDan]

This is it in a nutshell! It's all about saving money for the production costs. I think it's a big joke, and "pool" is the victim. It would be like shortening the final round in a golf tournament to 14 holes.

I have to disagree with this. Yes, in terms of Pool as a sport you are, of course, absolutely correct. Any match of too short a length detracts from the game, especially when it is done just for the final rounds.

However there is no avoiding the fact that TV coverage is the one thing that almost everyone in the sport agrees is utterly essential if there is ever to be a useful amount of external money obtained from sponsorship. This was even the IPT's original public plan, and the only one that actually made a jot of sense. (As opposed to their many cunning super-secret wonder plans that involved arcane IPO rituals to honor the gambling gods in the Honk-Kong moonlight.)

The WPBA have been making this sacrifice for years now, paying ESPN to produce and for the airtime for their shows, cutting the format to fit into 45 minutes per match with space for adverts, making the audience cheer like retards for every shot and using their sponsor's equipment whether the pros like playing with them or not.

The WPBA are still the only reliably successful, consistently organized and resonably well-funded Pro Pool tour in the USA. No-one in the Mens' Pro game has come close to matching what they have achieved in the last 10 years.

So making format sacrifices for TV coverage is, in my opinion, a small price to pay if the same success could be achieved in the Mens' game. Failing to take advantage of this available, proven format is cutting off your nose to spite your face IMHO.

 

[sjm]

I have to disagree with this. Yes, in terms of Pool as a sport you are, of course, absolutely correct. Any race of too short a length detracts from the game, especially when it is done just for the final rounds.

However there is no avoiding the fact that TV coverage is the one thing that almost everyone in the sport agrees is utterly essential if there is ever to be a useful amount of external money obtained sponsorship. This was even the IPT's original public plan, and the only one that actually made a jot of sense. (As opposed to their many cunning super-secret wonder plans that involved arcane IPO rituals to honor the gambling gods in the Honk-Kong moonlight.)

The WPBA have been making this sacrifice for years now, paying ESPN to produce and for the airtime for their shows, cutting the format to fit into 45 minutes per match with space for adverts, making the audience cheer like retards for every shot and using their sponsor's equipment whether the pros like playing with them or not.

The WPBA are still the only reliably successful, consistently organized and resonably well-funded Pro Pool tour in the USA. No-one in the Mens' Pro game has come close to matching what they have achieved in the last 10 years.

So making format sacrifices for TV coverage is, in my opinion, a small price to pay if the same success could be achieved in the Mens' game. Failing to take advantage of this available, proven format is cutting off your nose to spite your face IMHO.

Very nicely said. Thanks for an exceptional post.