Does Pool Need a Dominant Player to get World Wide Attention Like Other Sports?

[Celophanewrap]

what pool needs, maybe

My thought is that Pool needs an identifiable face and sorely needs media. While Jeanette Lee is very easy on the eyes, outside the pool world she's reasonably unknown. For a brief period Tom Cruise was the face of pool and and pool really took off in the USA, for a short time. Pool has had, and continues to have personalities that are some of the funest, most likable people in sports, anyone can identify with them, yet they remain obscure.

Like him or not Earl and his persona is (are? is?) really good for the game. Arrogant and obnoxious to the point of funny, pool needs his personality. Could you imagine a reality show in the mold of the Ultimate Fighter with the likes of Earl on one side coaching an APA or Valley team and Shannon Daulton on the other side coaching the other team . But still, it's a show that likely only the current pool community would watch.

I recall on summer several years ago when bowling got all sorts of press because of the guy that roll a strike or pick up a difficult spare and then turn to the crowd with a fist pump and a yell then a crotch chop. I don't bowl, I think my best game ever has been like 106, but I watched this guy when ever he was on TV because he was fun. For a summer he was the face of bowling, the we saw some of the lady bowlers and some of them were sort of hot so I tuned in to watch them too. Pool has some beautiful women, but no hook. Really, even bowling, Nike, Rebok, Addidas, Converse.... all make bowling shoes, pants, shirts. I've traveled a little in my time and I have yet to see one pair of Pool shoes or Pool Pants, save for my lucky socks, which happen to be Denver Bronco socks made by New Balance.

Every other sport, including bowling, gets press and coverage when it's time for the World Cup of that sport, or time for the U.S. Open, or the World Championships. Hunting for a live stream on the Filipino internet is not my idea of coverage. Only now on some cable network are we getting bits and pieces of last year's Mosconi Cup.

I don't think pool needs a dominant player or equipment upgrades that would be any more evolved that it would naturally. Pool needs a dominant face. Someone that people can identify in a restaurant or a casino or at the Academy's on the red carpet. Whether it's a handsome, all American guy, or a Pretty girl next door, or a shit talker, or whatever.

One of the problems that I can see is that pool is steeped in tradition and most of the players have a lot of respect for that tradition, in many ways it's inflexible. Maybe pool needs a brazen, loud, arrogant, smack-talkin' character that will turn to the Mosconi cup Crowd and crotch chop all of Europe after a 9 Ball combo on the hill.

I think until pool becomes an Olympic sport and gets Nike or Rebok - Serina Williams U.S. Open coverage it's going to remain an obscure basement game who's face you can't identify because it's either clouded by cigarette smoke, or blurred by booze. That's all pool players do anyway, smoke and drink, who want's to let their kid do that or hold out one of those derelicts as a role model, rotten pool players.

 

[CJ Wiley]

What Happened to Brunswick?

CJ, thanks for participating here and for always being a positive influence on the game of pool.

First, I ABSOLUTELY AGREE that the CLOTH USED TODAY IS WAY TOO FAST. It really penalizes those players that have developed strong strokes and rewards those with weaker strokes. You simply don't need a good stroke to move the cue ball around anymore, and balls go in off the break regularly even for players with weak breaks. Many shots executed routinely now by good amateurs were previously only within reach for the top pros, particularly long draw shots and multi-rail position shots. I think going back to a slower cloth would separate the top pros from the rest of the pack. I don't even watch matches where guys are cut-breaking. It's like watching Tiger chip rather than drive and the ball still goes 300 yards. Really tight pockets probably wouldn't be necessary with slower cloth, as players would be forced to cheat the pocket more, utilize more spin, and generally hit more powerful shots to be successful. I personally think 4 5/8" is about right. I thought I'd like watching the play on the 10 footers with tight pockets, but it didn't work out that well IMO. Too much conservative play and the rake has to be used much more, slowing the game down. I'm sure today's professionals would "adapt and overcome" given some time on them, though.

I don't think any of this helps mainstream popularity of pool, though, and I really don't think that should even be our goal. Too many other interests competing for people's time now. I think the pool world should concentrate on further developing its niche market (which is actually pretty strong) and convincing sponsors this niche is desirable from a marketing/investment standpoint. Major TV coverage from ESPN isn't really necessary anymore to reach that niche market with the internet rapidly becoming the dominant source of visual entertainment. Industry sponsorship is generally weak, but Brunswick is really the only (non-) player with the capital necessary to provide a big boost. With 2011 figures of $176 million earnings and $739 million liquidity, they could spend several million annually to support an entire tour and never miss it. Like it or not, the pool world needs their support, and it's way past time they provided it.

Lastly, pool will continue to languish long-term if the only access to a table remains "bar boxes" found in bars. A sport has no future if young people are not playing it. My 12 year-old son only picked it up because we happen to have a table at home. He otherwise would probably have never come in contact with it. Now that he's getting good, I can't even take him to local tournaments because most pool halls have gone to "Over 21 Only", which I certainly understand from an economic standpoint but it's still a huge barrier between between youth and exposure to the joy of playing pool. It's also a big reason we have very few young top American players. Most of our top guys have been on the tour for several decades and we only have Shane because he came from a pool-playing family. You don't see these barriers in the countries producing most of the young talent, particularly the Asian countries and now some of Europe. Poland has pool/billiards as a scholastic sport in many schools and is producing terrific young players. Someone mentioned on this thread the relative lack of support for American soccer, which may be true compared to the big 3 sports, but it still has grown exponentially over the last 15 years almost entirely on the back of youth soccer leagues. If kids want to play a sport, parents will spend untold fortunes to support them and this becomes a very desirable demographic with which to attract sponsorship.

ESPN was willing to put pocket billiards on because the ratings were always high going up against other sporting events....the last event I had anything to do with was in 1999 and it's a mystery to me what happened after that....I presume it was because no one else wanted to get involved, and I never got any calls about it so the whole thing slipped from my mind....your comment about BRUNSWICK got my attention and they were my "official table" for all my Televised events....that was something I was going to research asap, "What happened to Brunswick's participation?" ... I agree that with a well thought out business plan they should want to get more involved with the Professionals again....who could I get in touch with that is a decision maker at Brunswick? I'm convinced their sales could be raised substantially with more event presence and I'm in the process Right Now of making another instructional video on a Brunswick......and of course the MILLION DOLLAR CHALLENGE was won by Earl Strickland on a Brunswick as well......it just seems like a "natural fit"......if anyone knows a contact person at Brunswick let me know asap....I'll start checking around as well.

 

[Otterman]

Agreed!

That is a HUGE part of it but you failed to mention a major additional reason, the sport is presented to the viewers showing multiple golfers and the key/critical shots by the field both live and very slightly delayed.

If the PGA had decided

"we are going to make the sport on TV follow a single golfer over the course of the round. We will watch them hit the ball, then walk to the next shot, then wait for the green to clear, then hit their second shot, then walk to the green, then line up the putt for a minute, then putt, then sink the tap in for par, then walk to the next hole and wait for the group ahead to clear the fairway... "

the sport would have been dead in the water.

Basically pool did the above, but they went the added length of making it a 6 month old event that was being shown on TV to add some salt into the gaping wound.

Terrific point, and I absolutely agree. Heck, I edit out all the dead time between shots on videos of my son and me playing. I don't even want to watch myself walk around the table thinking.....

 

[Bob Jewett]

... Industry sponsorship is generally weak, but Brunswick is really the only (non-) player with the capital necessary to provide a big boost. With 2011 figures of $176 million earnings and $739 million liquidity, they could spend several million annually to support an entire tour and never miss it. Like it or not, the pool world needs their support, and it's way past time they provided it. ...

Well, no. Brunswick makes fishing boats and outboard engines. See the Brunswick Annual Report for more info. Bowling and billiards together (along with some other stuff) amount to less than 10% of their sales. But the bowling and billiards operations account for about 1/3 of the total employees. I suspect that bowling is a majority of the B&B sales.

A company has to decide where to put its efforts according to where it sees the possibility for profit. If you were the Brunswick CEO, would you invest as much in a tour as Kevin Trudeau did? The only way I can see that happening is if the tour were successful enough to attract major TV sponsors. Safer to invest in bass fishing contests.

 

[CJ Wiley]

too bad we can't play Augusta National

Either what you just said, or more likely pool rooms don't have the money to do this which results in a bigger disconnect between amateurs and the professional game. Either way, bad for pool.

It's not popular opinion that the general public has to play on the same equipment as the pros.....this certainly doesn't happen in golf, racing, basketball, football, etc....people watch their favorite sports, but almost always play on different courses, courts, fields, etc... the amateur's playing conditions are considerably easier than their pros.....it's just difficult to appreciate top professional pool players running racks on easy/fast conditions that don't require much power or speed in their shot selections.

 

[Otterman]

Uhhh, yes, I know that....

Well, no. Brunswick makes fishing boats and outboard engines. See the Brunswick Annual Report for more info. Bowling and billiards together (along with some other stuff) amount to less than 10% of their sales. But the bowling and billiards operations account for about 1/3 of the total employees. I suspect that bowling is a majority of the B&B sales.

A company has to decide where to put its efforts according to where it sees the possibility for profit. If you were the Brunswick CEO, would you invest as much in a tour as Kevin Trudeau did? The only way I can see that happening is if the tour were successful enough to attract major TV sponsors. Safer to invest in bass fishing contests.

Yes, I'm fully aware the billiards/bowling division of Brunswick is only a relatively small part of their operations. I'm a commercial banker; I read the annual report prior to posting. I certainly understand the investment/reward equation probably looks poor from their standpoint (based on much of their prior experience, I'm sure). Still, my point remains the same: they are the only industry player with the deep pockets required to make a significant change in the current state of pool.

 

[DogsPlayingPool]

It's not popular opinion that the general public has to play on the same equipment as the pros.....this certainly doesn't happen in golf, racing, basketball, football, etc....people watch their favorite sports, but almost always play on different courses, courts, fields, etc... the amateur's playing conditions are considerably easier than their pros.....it's just difficult to appreciate top professional pool players running racks on easy/fast conditions that don't require much power or speed in their shot selections.

By and large, in most sports the field of play is the same, not different. Professional golf is not played on tour pros only courses. They are played on private and public courses that are used by amateurs except for the 4 days a year the pros compete. Yes, the set up is different, but usually that is what the members want. But in any event, it certainly isn't bigger. The back tees are there for anyone who wants to play from them.

As for the other sports, even high school football, basketball, and tennis are all played on the same dimensions the pros play on - not different. And the conditions are pretty much identical to the professionals. The balls, the basket size and height, the goal posts, the surfaces are all the same. Heck, my HOA tennis court is the same as Flushing Meadows - same surface, same dimensions, same net height. There is nothing inherently more difficult about it when the pros play - other than the fact there is another professional on the other side of the net.

 

[one stroke]

By and large, in most sports the field of play is the same, not different. Professional golf is not played on tour pros only courses. They are played on private and public courses that are used by amateurs except for the 4 days a year the pros compete. Yes, the set up is different, but usually that is what the members want. But in any event, it certainly isn't bigger. The back tees are there for anyone who wants to play from them.

As for the other sports, even high school football, basketball, and tennis are all played on the same dimensions the pros play on - not different. And the conditions are pretty much identical to the professionals. The balls, the basket size and height, the goal posts, the surfaces are all the same. Heck, my HOA tennis court is the same as Flushing Meadows - same surface, same dimensions, same net height. There is nothing inherently more difficult about it when the pros play - other than the fact there is another professional on the other side of the net.

True dat , plus its hard to convince anyone pool players are athletes to begin with most think its a game, it has its nitch but thats all it will ever have its just not that entertaining


1

 

[Bob Jewett]

Yes, I'm fully aware the billiards/bowling division of Brunswick is only a relatively small part of their operations. I'm a commercial banker; I read the annual report prior to posting. I certainly understand the investment/reward equation probably looks poor from their standpoint (based on much of their prior experience, I'm sure). Still, my point remains the same: they are the only industry player with the deep pockets required to make a significant change in the current state of pool.

So far as I know, Brunswick is cutting back on it's billiards promotion budget. They were not involved in the last Mosconi Cup, IIRC, so it appears that they are going in the other direction. Perhaps this was prompted by their purchase and subsequent sale (at a loss?) of Valley. My conclusion is that it is unrealistic to expect them to "save pool". I suspect that there are larger billiard companies in the world and we are starting to see sponsorship by them. In this regard, I think Brunswick is maybe a $100M company.

Beyond that, I think industry sponsors can do little more than provide a some kindling; the real fire has to come from large commercial sponsors, not the industry.

It's too bad what happened to bowling didn't happen to billiards.

 

[Otterman]

I think you miss CJ's point....

By and large, in most sports the field of play is the same, not different. Professional golf is not played on tour pros only courses. They are played on private and public courses that are used by amateurs except for the 4 days a year the pros compete. Yes, the set up is different, but usually that is what the members want. But in any event, it certainly isn't bigger. The back tees are there for anyone who wants to play from them.

As for the other sports, even high school football, basketball, and tennis are all played on the same dimensions the pros play on - not different. And the conditions are pretty much identical to the professionals. The balls, the basket size and height, the goal posts, the surfaces are all the same. Heck, my HOA tennis court is the same as Flushing Meadows - same surface, same dimensions, same net height. There is nothing inherently more difficult about it when the pros play - other than the fact there is another professional on the other side of the net.

I think the point CJ (and me as well) are trying to make about the easy playing conditions is that they make the playing field far too even between amateur/weaker pro players to the elite players. Many of today's tournament conditions would be akin to making all the fairways 150 yds. long and the cup 12" in diameter in a golf tournament and letting anyone who could pay the entry fee play. You can't compare tennis and basketball directly to pool because those sports involve simultaneous play by both contestants on each side; you're playing your opponent and not the equipment (and yes, I've played both of those competitively as well as pool). Easy tournament playing conditions discourage pros from entering, particularly if they have to travel and incur those expenses to play, and this hurts the game. The conditions wouldn't matter much if the races were long enough to require a consistently well-played match to produce a victory over a stronger player, but that's not realistic from a time standpoint in most cases.

Ask 10 or 20 top players what their biggest issue with how today's game is played and the overwhelming majority will say the conditions are too loose and luck is too big a factor in the short races that make up tournament pool. As I said in a previous post, I don't think this helps the mainstream popularity of pool (directly, anyway), but it would help separate the elite players from the rest of the pack and make it much more likely they'll continue showing up at tournaments, which has to be a good thing for pool in the long run.

 

[CJ Wiley]

Key Players at Brunswick

So far as I know, Brunswick is cutting back on it's billiards promotion budget. They were not involved in the last Mosconi Cup, IIRC, so it appears that they are going in the other direction. Perhaps this was prompted by their purchase and subsequent sale (at a loss?) of Valley. My conclusion is that it is unrealistic to expect them to "save pool". I suspect that there are larger billiard companies in the world and we are starting to see sponsorship by them. In this regard, I think Brunswick is maybe a $100M company.

Beyond that, I think industry sponsors can do little more than provide a some kindling; the real fire has to come from large commercial sponsors, not the industry.

It's too bad what happened to bowling didn't happen to billiards.

Yes, "saving pool" is not a term I'm comfortable with.....I just thought someone might know a contact there to talk to about providing tables to TV Events....that's what I did with them before and then they donated some tables....the corporate sponsors are looking for something that's true across the board - Ratings ... and they will make deals, but they do require real business plans....a song and a dance as never worked or will it ever. imho

 

[Otterman]

What he said...

So far as I know, Brunswick is cutting back on it's billiards promotion budget. They were not involved in the last Mosconi Cup, IIRC, so it appears that they are going in the other direction. Perhaps this was prompted by their purchase and subsequent sale (at a loss?) of Valley. My conclusion is that it is unrealistic to expect them to "save pool". I suspect that there are larger billiard companies in the world and we are starting to see sponsorship by them. In this regard, I think Brunswick is maybe a $100M company.

Beyond that, I think industry sponsors can do little more than provide a some kindling; the real fire has to come from large commercial sponsors, not the industry.

It's too bad what happened to bowling didn't happen to billiards.

Agreed! It looks like we'll have to keep the embers burning with only kindling for the time being, I'm afraid.

 

[Otterman]

Exactly....

Yes, "saving pool" is not a term I'm comfortable with.....I just thought someone might know a contact there to talk to about providing tables to TV Events....that's what I did with them before and then they donated some tables....the corporate sponsors are looking for something that's true across the board - Ratings ... and they will make deals, but they do require real business plans....a song and a dance as never worked or will it ever. imho

Exactly. The corporate world is rapidly becoming more aware of and comfortable with promotional avenues other than network television, primarily internet/technology-driven venues like Facebook and Twitter. It's not a stretch at all to imagine events broadcast on live streams (or even delayed/edited matches available via internet) receiving major corporate sponsorship if you can show them a large enough audience with the right demographics.

Also, I didn't mean to imply earlier that I expected Brunswick or any other sponsor to step in and save pool, but only that they enjoy the capital structure to make a huge difference. And yes, I do think they have some duty to do so, if only from a purely capitalist viewpoint. Not providing meaningful promotion to pool/billiards is an indication to me that they either have very little concern for the future of their billiards/bowling division, or they haven't been provided quality opportunities to do so.

 

[CJ Wiley]

I think the point CJ (and me as well) are trying to make about the easy playing conditions is that they make the playing field far too even between amateur/weaker pro players to the elite players. Many of today's tournament conditions would be akin to making all the fairways 150 yds. long and the cup 12" in diameter in a golf tournament and letting anyone who could pay the entry fee play. You can't compare tennis and basketball directly to pool because those sports involve simultaneous play by both contestants on each side; you're playing your opponent and not the equipment (and yes, I've played both of those competitively as well as pool). Easy tournament playing conditions discourage pros from entering, particularly if they have to travel and incur those expenses to play, and this hurts the game. The conditions wouldn't matter much if the races were long enough to require a consistently well-played match to produce a victory over a stronger player, but that's not realistic from a time standpoint in most cases.

Ask 10 or 20 top players what their biggest issue with how today's game is played and the overwhelming majority will say the conditions are too loose and luck is too big a factor in the short races that make up tournament pool. As I said in a previous post, I don't think this helps the mainstream popularity of pool (directly, anyway), but it would help separate the elite players from the rest of the pack and make it much more likely they'll continue showing up at tournaments, which has to be a good thing for pool in the long run.

That is the point I am making.....it's not even fun to compete when the playing conditions are as easy as they are these days....and I know the real top pros want it to be a challenge so they just have to "grin and bear it" ...and don't get me wrong, I don't think the top 5 players would be much different, they would just be More dominant because players would have to really earn a victory over them.....for me coming back to this is like seeing "putt putt" as exciting....I guess the changes were made right under everyone's noses gradually.....I was pretty sure I'd find out there's nothing that can be done about it and that's fine....I've done my "due diligence", now I'm free to do my own thing in Dallas.

 

[CJ Wiley]

Live Events

Terrific point, and I absolutely agree. Heck, I edit out all the dead time between shots on videos of my son and me playing. I don't even want to watch myself walk around the table thinking.....

This is a great point and another thing we've been brainstorming about....the problem is it just works in post production and you can't trim out the dead time between shots LIVE...and Live events are going to be needed if there's going to be gambling involved.....or I guess they could be on streaming video, then post produce them for the TV....it still doesn't seem like any sport/game will ever do that well taped. Hmmm.....

 

[DogsPlayingPool]

I think the point CJ (and me as well) are trying to make about the easy playing conditions is that they make the playing field far too even between amateur/weaker pro players to the elite players. Many of today's tournament conditions would be akin to making all the fairways 150 yds. long and the cup 12" in diameter in a golf tournament and letting anyone who could pay the entry fee play. You can't compare tennis and basketball directly to pool because those sports involve simultaneous play by both contestants on each side; you're playing your opponent and not the equipment (and yes, I've played both of those competitively as well as pool). Easy tournament playing conditions discourage pros from entering, particularly if they have to travel and incur those expenses to play, and this hurts the game. The conditions wouldn't matter much if the races were long enough to require a consistently well-played match to produce a victory over a stronger player, but that's not realistic from a time standpoint in most cases.

Ask 10 or 20 top players what their biggest issue with how today's game is played and the overwhelming majority will say the conditions are too loose and luck is too big a factor in the short races that make up tournament pool. As I said in a previous post, I don't think this helps the mainstream popularity of pool (directly, anyway), but it would help separate the elite players from the rest of the pack and make it much more likely they'll continue showing up at tournaments, which has to be a good thing for pool in the long run.

I agree about the short races but not about the conditions being too easy. I hear far more name professionals say 4" pockets are too tight for rotation games than I hear conditions are too easy or the table isn't big enough.

I also don't think top players don't enter or especially don't travel to tournaments because the equipment is too easy so there is too much luck. Let's be honest, the top players will finish at the top anyway. The reason they don't travel to tournaments is because there is not enough money in it to cover expenses, pure and simple.

Name one major tournament in recent memory where the results clearly indicate the best players weren't at the top. I don't mean the occasional upset - but rather where name players clearly got knocked out by second tier or below guys and the top ten were mostly Cinderella stories. There is too much skill required to play pool expertly that table size is skewing the results in favor of luck, especially considering most events are double elimination.

To say the equipment is easy and results in too much luck to identify the best players you must first show that this is in fact what is happening. I don't see it.

There are easier and much more cost effective ways of dealing with this anyway. Slow the cloth down (which just changes the skill emphasis from touch to stroke), tighten the pockets more (which many pros won't like), go to seeding in all pro-only tournaments. Maybe best of all, go to longer races and play single elimination.

 

[CJ Wiley]

I agree about the short races but not about the conditions being too easy. I hear far more name professionals say 4" pockets are too tight for rotation games than I hear conditions are too easy or the table isn't big enough.

I also don't think top players don't enter or especially don't travel to tournaments because the equipment is too easy so there is too much luck. Let's be honest, the top players will finish at the top anyway. The reason they don't travel to tournaments is because there is not enough money in it to cover expenses, pure and simple.

Name one major tournament in recent memory where the results clearly indicate the best players weren't at the top. I don't mean the occasional upset - but rather where name players clearly got knocked out by second tier or below guys and the top ten were mostly Cinderella stories. There is too much skill required to play pool expertly that table size is skewing the results in favor of luck, especially considering most events are double elimination.

To say the equipment is easy and results in too much luck to identify the best players you must first show that this is in fact what is happening. I don't see it.

There are easier and much more cost effective ways of dealing with this anyway. Slow the cloth down (which just changes the skill emphasis from touch to stroke), tighten the pockets more (which many pros won't like), go to seeding in all pro-only tournaments. Maybe best of all, go to longer races and play single elimination.

The top players will be virtually the same, but it would give someone a chance to dominate and show extraordinary skill in doing it....when you can miss by a diamond and the balls still go in this is never going to happen....and the "kicking element" is one of the most difficult things to master and it's been toned down considerably due to the jump sticks...and the magic rack....well, everyone knows that's like break and first shot. Please don't take my word for it I've heard it from every top player there is except for Shane, but he's going to do well no matter what....it also comes down to dedication, it's just a lot more satisfying to see amazing play on tough, slower equipment rather than on loose "buckets".... it's like making the basketball rim 3 ft. in diameter...it just wouldn't be that big a deal for everyone to make all their free throws...imho

 

[Otterman]

Ok.....

I agree about the short races but not about the conditions being too easy. I hear far more name professionals say 4" pockets are too tight for rotation games than I hear conditions are too easy or the table isn't big enough.

I also don't think top players don't enter or especially don't travel to tournaments because the equipment is too easy so there is too much luck. Let's be honest, the top players will finish at the top anyway. The reason they don't travel to tournaments is because there is not enough money in it to cover expenses, pure and simple.

Name one major tournament in recent memory where the results clearly indicate the best players weren't at the top. I don't mean the occasional upset - but rather where name players clearly got knocked out by second tier or below guys and the top ten were mostly Cinderella stories. There is too much skill required to play pool expertly that table size is skewing the results in favor of luck, especially considering most events are double elimination.

To say the equipment is easy and results in too much luck to identify the best players you must first show that this is in fact what is happening. I don't see it.

There are easier and much more cost effective ways of dealing with this anyway. Slow the cloth down (which just changes the skill emphasis from touch to stroke), tighten the pockets more (which many pros won't like), go to seeding in all pro-only tournaments. Maybe best of all, go to longer races and play single elimination.

Actually, I may not be expressing myself the way I intend because this mostly represents my views as well. I don't advocate super-tough pockets; I think that's a huge mistake, and simple physics of ball size really come into play at anything less than 4 5/8" IMO. Running an OB down the rail towards a 4" pocket becomes a low percentage shot for anyone. I like going to a slower cloth that requires a stronger stroke to move the cue ball around just as you described and as C.J. suggested. I really like the seeding idea as well.

 

[Otterman]

Yippee!

That is the point I am making.....it's not even fun to compete when the playing conditions are as easy as they are these days....and I know the real top pros want it to be a challenge so they just have to "grin and bear it" ...and don't get me wrong, I don't think the top 5 players would be much different, they would just be More dominant because players would have to really earn a victory over them.....for me coming back to this is like seeing "putt putt" as exciting....I guess the changes were made right under everyone's noses gradually.....I was pretty sure I'd find out there's nothing that can be done about it and that's fine....I've done my "due diligence", now I'm free to do my own thing in Dallas.

Now that's the most encouraging news I've heard all day! :thumbup:

 

[ComptonCustomCues]

This was very exciting to watch
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nqOVI1fGNnI