Could Joe Rogan help with pool?

PoolPlayer4

AzB Silver Member
Silver Member
If it steered too clear of the underbelly world--ignoring it altogether, the story might have a credibility problem. Maybe if the interaction between the two world is a central tension the hero navigates, we the audience might be brought along with him or her on the journey to appreciating legitimate pool and the beauty of the game. There of course would be some hard lessons and betrayal along the way.
Don't forget that Beth gambled with Benny Watts at two different times. And, the second time, when she beat him and his companions, it was a turning point in her development into a champion.
 

sjm

Older and Wiser
Silver Member
Don't forget that Beth gambled with Benny Watts at two different times. And, the second time, when she beat him and his companions, it was a turning point in her development into a champion.
Wasn't that just a $5 a game match at speed chess?
 

De420MadHatter

SicBiNature
Silver Member
I just saw that. I wonder if it will turn out to be true.

Why would he switch when he's already getting the same where he is?



Jeff Livingston
Spotify doesn't believe in free speech, why wouldn't he tell them to pound sand?
Hopefully Rogan gives them the middle finger and moves on to a better platform.
 

Poolplaya9

Tellin' it like it is...
Silver Member

he just got offered 100 million bucks from rumble. i doubt he needs our help
The best thing Joe could ever do would be to take this offer and get away from those fascists that want to force their control through censorship. Censorship has been a core component of every fascist and dictator and violent political ideology in history and always ends up leading to somewhere very bad.
 

Dead Money

AzB Silver Member
Silver Member
Spotify doesn't believe in free speech, why wouldn't he tell them to pound sand?
Hopefully Rogan gives them the middle finger and moves on to a better platform.
Update on the side show:


I think long term the "drama" involving Rogan will be a net positive for him.

If he decides to take his power and interest in pool and help grow the game it would be cool. His choice of course.
 

mikepage

AzB Silver Member
Silver Member
Update on the side show:


I think long term the "drama" involving Rogan will be a net positive for him.

If he decides to take his power and interest in pool and help grow the game it would be cool. His choice of course.
Here's Rogan getting introduced to Fargo Ratings
 

Bishop

AzB Silver Member
Silver Member
He
I just saw that. I wonder if it will turn out to be true.

Why would he switch when he's already getting the same where he is?



Jeff Livingston
He’s getting way more and Rumble is a joke. Spotify has demographics that don’t even exist on Rumble.

Joe’s not a flavor of the month. He‘a been long established. He’s a brand not just a podcast. Spotify helps diversify him and it’s no surprise that people are going after him. It’s why he shut his forum down years ago. So it’s nothing new.

Billiards was discussed frequently in his old forum but it never gained significant traction and his forum was as big as it gets.

I don’t think he can save pool.

I will say this though. A strong central organization like what the UFC does for mma would certainly help.

I also don’t think pool is as dead as some make it out to be. It’s just not a part of major marketing like professional sports is.
 

Bishop

AzB Silver Member
Silver Member
Spotify doesn't believe in free speech, why wouldn't he tell them to pound sand?
Hopefully Rogan gives them the middle finger and moves on to a better platform.
All they’ve done is remove the N word.

They stood by him and they should. Cancel culture isn’t the way to go.

Spotify has done the right thing here.

Joe’s not a far right alt source. He’s an objective thinker and Rumble is a horrible platform that would ultimately marginalize his voice.

The only people who see rumble as a respectable platform are people who are defined by politics and conspiracies. Joe would eat that place up. His followers would expect it.

Clearly the bandwagon crowd has no clue what Joe really stands for. They think he’s some anti liberal hero. 🤣. Sorry, not even close.
 

Poolplaya9

Tellin' it like it is...
Silver Member
All they’ve done is remove the N word.
But, if what Joe is saying is true, the N word was never used in an inappropriate way. And the race of the person saying the word is immaterial, the context is either appropriate, or it's not. To have the race of the person who utters the word, rather than the context the word is used in be what makes the difference, is racist by definition. Treating people differently solely because of their skin color is racist. Discriminating based solely on skin color is racist. Having double standards depending on the race involved is racist. Always.
Spotify has done the right thing here.
Actually, they haven't really. They went to Joe and told him they didn't like some of his podcasts, and "through conversations with Joe he voluntarily agreed to remove them". This could easily be kind of like when you give your employee the option to resign instead of getting fired, you and they can say it was voluntary, but it really wasn't voluntary at all.

Also, Spotify isn't doing this out of principle, but rather because of what they gain from Joe, and what they will lose if they were to end up losing him. I have yet to see them say "we condemn censorship and won't be standing for it in principle ever against anyone". No, all they said is that "we aren't going to be doing anything". They aren't taking a stand on principle one way or the other, and in fact are intentionally avoiding doing that. All they have done is inform us of their current choice of action, not the reason for it.

Rest assured, they would censor Joe or anybody else for political reasons just like the rest of their side of the aisle does if it wouldn't prove too costly to them, but at this moment Joe is just too big and it would prove too costly and so they are aren't able to do it even though they would love to be able to.
They think he’s some anti liberal hero. 🤣. Sorry, not even close.
Actually Joe is big time Bernie Sanders supporter and voter, and self describes as being very liberal. But, and these buts are key... Joe may be wrong on a lot of things, but he is an independent thinker who calls it the way he sees it, and he has some strong viewpoints that fall on the conservative side of the aisle as well. He doesn't rely on anyone else including a political party to tell him what he should believe and want, but instead he tries to determine those things for himself. He doesn't play political games, and isn't afraid to denounce BS regardless of which side it comes from, or to support good principles or actions or policies regardless of which side they come from. He believes that open conversation and debate that is not censored by anyone is at the end of the day the best for the nation, and the best way to learn, and the best way to find the best solutions to problems and issues.

I think hero is a bit strong of a word, but everyone from both sides of the aisle should fully support his principles regarding his approach to these matters, even if they don't always agree with the conclusions he ultimately reaches on certain issues, because those principles of approach (freedom of speech, free and open political debate without any kind of censorship, along with various other freedoms) are at their core what America was founded on and indeed are directly responsible for making it into by far the greatest country to have ever existed.
 

Bishop

AzB Silver Member
Silver Member
But, if what Joe is saying is true, the N word was never used in an inappropriate way. And the race of the person saying the word is immaterial, the context is either appropriate, or it's not. To have the race of the person who utters the word, rather than the context the word is used in be what makes the difference, is racist by definition. Treating people differently solely because of their skin color is racist. Discriminating based solely on skin color is racist. Having double standards depending on the race involved is racist. Always.

Actually, they haven't really. They went to Joe and told him they didn't like some of his podcasts, and "through conversations with Joe he voluntarily agreed to remove them". This could easily be kind of like when you give your employee the option to resign instead of getting fired, you and they can say it was voluntary, but it really wasn't voluntary at all.

Also, Spotify isn't doing this out of principle, but rather because of what they gain from Joe, and what they will lose if they were to end up losing him. I have yet to see them say "we condemn censorship and won't be standing for it in principle ever against anyone". No, all they said is that "we aren't going to be doing anything". They aren't taking a stand on principle one way or the other, and in fact are intentionally avoiding doing that. All they have done is inform us of their current choice of action, not the reason for it.

Rest assured, they would censor Joe or anybody else for political reasons just like the rest of their side of the aisle does if it wouldn't prove too costly to them, but at this moment Joe is just too big and it would prove too costly and so they are aren't able to do it even though they would love to be able to.

Actually Joe is big time Bernie Sanders supporter and voter, and self describes as being very liberal. But, and these buts are key... Joe may be wrong on a lot of things, but he is an independent thinker who calls it the way he sees it, and he has some strong viewpoints that fall on the conservative side of the aisle as well. He doesn't rely on anyone else including a political party to tell him what he should believe and want, but instead he tries to determine those things for himself. He doesn't play political games, and isn't afraid to denounce BS regardless of which side it comes from, or to support good principles or actions or policies regardless of which side they come from. He believes that open conversation and debate that is not censored by anyone is at the end of the day the best for the nation, and the best way to learn, and the best way to find the best solutions to problems and issues.

I think hero is a bit strong of a word, but everyone from both sides of the aisle should fully support his principles regarding his approach to these matters, even if they don't always agree with the conclusions he ultimately reaches on certain issues, because those principles of approach (freedom of speech, free and open political debate without any kind of censorship, along with various other freedoms) are at their core what America was founded on and indeed are directly responsible for making it into by far the greatest country to have ever existed.
You’re all over the place here.

He wasn’t canceled or fired nor was his job threatened.

You’re upset that that the N word was removed with Joe’s approval.

Even in context and no malicious intent he shouldn’t have used the word.

The apes comment was out of line and he owned it. Way out of line.

Sorry you can’t have the N word on podcasts and news being said by white people. It’s a sad day for your definition of “censorship” but that’s the way it is. Hopefully you can continue to use that word in private and feel better.

For the record Spotify owns control of the content on their platform so it’s technically their content to control.

Some of you don’t have a clear understanding of what censorship really is.
 

HawaiianEye

AzB Silver Member
Silver Member
Learn to read. Where did I say that saying the N word was ok? As you and I and everybody else knows, I didn't. You are simply trying to distract from your racism because you can't defend it. All I've said is that for speech or action or whatever else there are not nor can there ever be double standards based on skin color, because that is racism. Go back to NPR with your racism, racist.
You are arguing with the Black Savior.

He is a PC SJW super hero.

You may as well give up now.

You have already won the argument.

If you don't, all you will get in return from him is more idiotic babbling like Rain Man.
 

punter

AzB Silver Member
Silver Member
Yes, but the Queen's Gambit was the story of a young, introverted girl who was a social misfit and had substance abuse issues. Beth Harmon was the kind of person we all root for, because we all admire those who emerge from life's deepest trenches and find success of any kind.

In pool movies/shows, pool has never been presented as the outlet for a troubled introvert suddenly obsessed with the game's inner beauty but instead as a haven for those who want to win money gambling at it with less skilled players.

Beth Harmon, unlike any pool player ever presented in film, etched her entire legacy in the legitimate world of tournaments, and her journey helped us to understand, with great fascination, what serious chess is all about and what it is like to compete at the very highest level. We learned what it's like to sit across the table from the world title holder ready to try to match wits with a champion whose legend is both enormous and intimidating. We learned what's it like to win and receive genuine admiration and positive feedback from your opponent.

If a pool equivalent of "the Queen's Gambit" were made, unless it steered clear of the seedy world of action pool, the public would not be able to fully appreciate the world of legitimate pool and the true beauty of the game when played by the world's greatest players. As long as the top pool players are viewed by the public as predatory gamblers, pool will always have an image problem that will obstruct its wide acceptance.

For as long as I have read your posts, you have always put down gambling in pool. That's fine, you certainly are entitled to your opinion. But both The Hustler and Color of Money had A LOT of gambling in them. Practically what they were about. And both of them gave pool a great boost.

You could have a movie exclusively about 'legitimate pool' and the world's greatest players in tournaments, certainly doable, a good script doesn't have to include gambling. But I don't see it as the negative that you apparently do. If anything gambling is more widespread and accepted than it was when those other movies were made.

What is needed is a good script, a good director, and star power. How about Tarantino or the Coen brothers? Would love to see what they could come up with, but I'm not sure the result would do any cleaning up of pool's image. But pretty sure it would increase interest.
 
Top