I agree, although I don't know what size pockets Chris Melling's famous out was done on. I'm torn between whether we should wish pool was a major spectator sport or accept that making it a spectator sport may fundamentally change the game we love into something else. I am certain that pool, even in the current state, has more spectator potential that can be realized although I'm not sure how.It also ups the highlights for SoMe consumption
No, I would not pay $1 more to fund some tournament. I would buy a ticket. If I want to support a pro I will take a lesson or play them cheap. I have done that. I would potentially buy stuff from their sponsor. $1/hr for their purses? NFW.I agree, although I don't know what size pockets Chris Melling's famous out was done on. I'm torn between whether we should wish pool was a major spectator sport or accept that making it a spectator sport may fundamentally change the game we love into something else. I am certain that pool, even in the current state, has more spectator potential that can be realized although I'm not sure how.
Part of the problem is that when pool is played well, it often looks unimpressive, especially to the untrained eye. I don't think the flow of the typical match builds a lot of excitement for the average person, either.
Here's a question: would you pay an extra dollar an hour for a table if that money went to professional pool purses? In this hypothetical, the money makes it to the prize fund without any administrative costs or grift. I feel like large prizes might drive more interest in the game, and make playing professionally viable for many more players.
It just occurred to me that we already are, in a way. That's where that $100 added came from.No, I would not pay $1 more to fund some tournament
And playing those sports often requires supporting courts, courses, and clubs that pay into the national organization. I should have actually stated that, but I do think a good strong governing body could help. I may be mistaken, but the majority of pool tournaments seem to be independent operations. Leagues don't seem to be closely aligned with the professional game.Golf and tennis were built on the amateur game.
three cushion can be mesmerizing to watch. I'm convinced some of those guys should be burned at the stake for witchcraft.I actually thought 3C might get a little traction after it was on ESPN some years ago. Big impressive shots for the people who have never seen it, etc...
4" corners, 4½" sides. RYO Rack Classic Championship, July 2017.... I don't know what size pockets Chris Melling's famous out was done on. ...
“Enbiggening”Cool. So let's speed up events and make more interesting shot making by enbiggening the pockets.
Yes.
Realistically, you have to have more skill than the other player, regardless of pocket size. And maybe for every unknown that goes on a heater, there's someone else that sits in their chair watching Filler run out a set. I do honestly believe that the highlight reel shots can generate some interest in the game. How many shots from the top tournaments do you think are highlight material? Not to us, who know how difficult it is, but to someone watching sportscenter. I think the circus shots make the game exciting and are important.
The problem is that the pros have gotten so good that the pockets had to be tightened up, reducing the spectacular shots, and hoping the consequences for a missed one.
Yes.
Realistically, you have to have more skill than the other player, regardless of pocket size. And maybe for every unknown that goes on a heater, there's someone else that sits in their chair watching Filler run out a set. I do honestly believe that the highlight reel shots can generate some interest in the game. How many shots from the top tournaments do you think are highlight material? Not to us, who know how difficult it is, but to someone watching sportscenter. I think the circus shots make the game exciting and are important.
The problem is that the pros have gotten so good that the pockets had to be tightened up, reducing the spectacular shots, and hoping the consequences for a missed one.
Not sure why this keeps coming up. We all just need to recognize that as the game has grown, and turned into a more international affair, the players have gotten better. With this improvement, we had to change the game or change the equipment. We sort of settled on keeping 9 ball and changing the equipment. If we wanted to keep the cavernous pockets and with them -- all the kisses, caroms, rail-first shots, and combos, we would have needed to change the game. Maybe moving to full rack rotation would have done the trick.
Got that right. See it all the time.This "keeps coming up" because the problem keeps getting worse. It has even filtered down to amateur pool where it completely counterproductive, pushing away new players and making the game less fun for everyone. You hear APA 4s saying that 5-inch pockets are "buckets" even while they can't run more than 3 balls in a row.
I don't entirely disagree with you regarding how amateur players think and talk, but amateur pool is thriving! It's even thriving on Valley bar tables. It doesn't get any easier than that! So I don't actually see a problem at all on the amateur side. Would APA 6's have more fun playing on 5 inch Gold Crowns than tight Diamonds? Probably, but very few of them are going to be playing on 9 foot tables at all so why's it even matter?This "keeps coming up" because the problem keeps getting worse. It has even filtered down to amateur pool where it completely counterproductive, pushing away new players and making the game less fun for everyone. You hear APA 4s saying that 5-inch pockets are "buckets" even while they can't run more than 3 balls in a row.
How far back in time do we need to go to see the slow cloth that everyone speaks of? Simonis has been the standard for over 30 years. IPT did the "slow cloth" gimic and it didn't change a thing.I’ll ask the question: What would happen in a pro tournament if tables were 4.5” on GCIV’s with slow cloth, no jump sticks allowed (ok to jump with full length cue), and let’s just say for giggles no break cues allowed either. Winner breaks. First to 18 games wins (since it’s so easy, people would run out like tap water then, right?). Heck, 18 games might not be enough. May need to be 25.
Sounds better than a stop shot safety jump a ball snooze fest.
Invite the world. Top 10 pays out.
How far back in time do we need to go to see the slow cloth that everyone speaks of? Simonis has been the standard for over 30 years. IPT did the "slow cloth" gimic and it didn't change a thing.