If the payout in pool were anything like poker, I think we would be exposed to a higher calibur of play. I think that if these top players could make a great living playing the game, they would do nothing but practice. Of course I understand that to become a great player, you have to do more than practice, like gambling, but practice of course is a big element in consistency. I think that since we would be exposed to an extraordinarily high calibur of play, that 9-ball would be thrown out the door, and tougher game would be created and then implemented, but something that requires alot of offense, to make it good for TV. I think that with large sums of money payouts, there would be more coverage by the media, and more people would take up the game. Everybody likes pool, the problem is that not everyone likes the element that surrounds pool, whether it be real or fake. By this I mean the dark, smoky poolroom with hustlers lurking about. I think that since more people would have aspirations to become professional (because of the payouts), poolhalls would do alot more business, and make alot more money, and PERHAPS the poolhalls would do something for pool. What do you think?
If Pool Payed Well.....
- Thread starter LastTwo
- Start date
Well, IMO, you make a valid point concerning the road players who have game, but refuse to go Pro. However, from the way I understand it most of these types of players are men and the way the men’s tour is set up as alot to do with their decision not to attempt to qualify. I also understand that this is getting better. I will also be the first to say that payout to the Pros needs to significantly increase...enough that it is up to par with other sports, however, I don't think you should be so short to discredit those Pros who are already playing. I think passion for the game and the desire to win has alot to do with the caliber of play we the audience/fans witness...
As far as seeing other games...that would be fantastic to have Pro tours of other games, however, televising some of these games could be a challenge, just because of the time to play. Not only are the time constraints a problem with one pocket and 14.1, but even 8-ball. I have seen one 8-ball last over an hour because of safeties and what not. But OMG, I would LOVE to see these games televised...
As far as seeing other games...that would be fantastic to have Pro tours of other games, however, televising some of these games could be a challenge, just because of the time to play. Not only are the time constraints a problem with one pocket and 14.1, but even 8-ball. I have seen one 8-ball last over an hour because of safeties and what not. But OMG, I would LOVE to see these games televised...
Poker is a gambling game. Nobody would watch it on TV if it were played for fun, or even low stakes, which is never televised due to lack of interest. All the interest is in high stakes gambling. All the players in the World Series of Poker paid $10k for their seat, except those who won a seat through satellite tournaments or internet sponsorships. I've never heard of a pool tournament where all the players paid $10k to enter (gambling)...it might build a good prize making for more public interest. Pool needs to overcome its shady past by not being ashamed of its past and flaunt it for what it is now, and openly accept that gambling is a big part of it for serious players. Poker has a pretty shady past, too, but that is part of its attraction.
rayjay
rayjay
Yours is a very well-reasoned post, Last Two. People drift to where the money is, and if this kind of money were available in pool, a lot more people would take up serious pool, the standard of play would go up, poolroom would do better, and room proprietors would do more for emerging players.
Still, this argument puts the cart before the horse. Yes, if the money were there, a lot of good things would come of it, but for the money to be there, somebody has to be willing to make a large investment in the game. That investment will, most likely, only come after pro pool shows itself to be a product worthy of a large investment. Unfortunately, on that rare occasion that some person or enterprise with money gets close enough to men’s pool that a substantial investment might be possible, the men always make sure to portray themselves as losers undeserving of such investment.
How do you think Hilton Hotels, the company that, in 2004, anted up the money for a new men’s tour, felt after, on the first day of the first event of their new tour, Larry Nevel and Corey Deuel (in two different matches) unscrewed in mid-match, the latter reportedly to go golfing. As they say, you only get one chance to make a good first impression, and the men seem to get it wrong every time. Perhaps one day the men will take the business interests of their sponsors seriously by taking their sport seriously, but that day certainly hasn’t arrived
Of course, there’s the other way to get big money into the sport and that would be to have events with big entry fees, and get amateurs to participate. Somebody tried to do this just over a year ago, and there weren’t nearly enough takers. There also weren’t enough who trusted those who would hold the money, and that’s understandable in pool. After all, 1) when the PBT folded in the late 1990’s, some of the players never got paid their prize money from the last few events, and 2) only a few years ago, players were not paid the money due them at the US Open.
Perhaps the ring game represents a step in the direction of huge entry fee events, but as we on the forum know so very well, filling the field in a ring game is like pulling teeth, and while we all applaud the efforts of Grady Matthews for all his hard work to make ring games click, we also feel his pain when he struggles to fill ring game fields. Even at pro level, how many would want to stake themselves to see whether they can outlast pool’s most elite in a winner-take-all format.
Like you, Last Two, I’m searching for answers. The pro pool product remains something I believe in, and those in the know are still trying to work out the winning formula. I think it all begins with the men having more respect for their sport, and that’s why we must all celebrate the UPA’s decision to hit Danny Harriman hard for his middle-of-match exit at The Bicycle Club last weekend. Perhaps pool is turning over a new leaf.
Still, this argument puts the cart before the horse. Yes, if the money were there, a lot of good things would come of it, but for the money to be there, somebody has to be willing to make a large investment in the game. That investment will, most likely, only come after pro pool shows itself to be a product worthy of a large investment. Unfortunately, on that rare occasion that some person or enterprise with money gets close enough to men’s pool that a substantial investment might be possible, the men always make sure to portray themselves as losers undeserving of such investment.
How do you think Hilton Hotels, the company that, in 2004, anted up the money for a new men’s tour, felt after, on the first day of the first event of their new tour, Larry Nevel and Corey Deuel (in two different matches) unscrewed in mid-match, the latter reportedly to go golfing. As they say, you only get one chance to make a good first impression, and the men seem to get it wrong every time. Perhaps one day the men will take the business interests of their sponsors seriously by taking their sport seriously, but that day certainly hasn’t arrived
Of course, there’s the other way to get big money into the sport and that would be to have events with big entry fees, and get amateurs to participate. Somebody tried to do this just over a year ago, and there weren’t nearly enough takers. There also weren’t enough who trusted those who would hold the money, and that’s understandable in pool. After all, 1) when the PBT folded in the late 1990’s, some of the players never got paid their prize money from the last few events, and 2) only a few years ago, players were not paid the money due them at the US Open.
Perhaps the ring game represents a step in the direction of huge entry fee events, but as we on the forum know so very well, filling the field in a ring game is like pulling teeth, and while we all applaud the efforts of Grady Matthews for all his hard work to make ring games click, we also feel his pain when he struggles to fill ring game fields. Even at pro level, how many would want to stake themselves to see whether they can outlast pool’s most elite in a winner-take-all format.
Like you, Last Two, I’m searching for answers. The pro pool product remains something I believe in, and those in the know are still trying to work out the winning formula. I think it all begins with the men having more respect for their sport, and that’s why we must all celebrate the UPA’s decision to hit Danny Harriman hard for his middle-of-match exit at The Bicycle Club last weekend. Perhaps pool is turning over a new leaf.
I believe the interest in poker is not only about the large prizes but also due to the ability of the average American being able to relate.
Let's face it... 95% of people who play pool play 8 ball in a bar setting. There are no safeties played (that's "dirty" pool), no rule about needing to hit your object ball first, etc. What is shown on ESPN are battle safeties in a totally different game. It's boring for the average American to watch. The avearge American (8 ball bar player) cannot relate.
Until some format (8 ball tournaments on 7' foot table with no safeties allowed somehow) comes to fruition and is televised, pool exposure will not change. No exposure... no sponsors... no money. Poker is made exciting by the exciting "all-in" hands while the standard "fold, fold, fold, fold, fold" hands are edited out.
I never understood how some on this forum complain about the ESPN coverage. If they showed coverage closer to what people on this forum seem to want (no commentary, full safety battles shown, and so on), pool exposure will continue to slip away. Although the intentions are good ones, sponsors need to appease the masses, not us.
Put on top of this the feeling I get as a spectator that the pros dress like slobs (why no tuxedos anymore?), the perception that fans owe the pros (rather than the other way around), and all the excellent points made by SJM, and we have a sport going nowhere.
Let's face it... 95% of people who play pool play 8 ball in a bar setting. There are no safeties played (that's "dirty" pool), no rule about needing to hit your object ball first, etc. What is shown on ESPN are battle safeties in a totally different game. It's boring for the average American to watch. The avearge American (8 ball bar player) cannot relate.
Until some format (8 ball tournaments on 7' foot table with no safeties allowed somehow) comes to fruition and is televised, pool exposure will not change. No exposure... no sponsors... no money. Poker is made exciting by the exciting "all-in" hands while the standard "fold, fold, fold, fold, fold" hands are edited out.
I never understood how some on this forum complain about the ESPN coverage. If they showed coverage closer to what people on this forum seem to want (no commentary, full safety battles shown, and so on), pool exposure will continue to slip away. Although the intentions are good ones, sponsors need to appease the masses, not us.
Put on top of this the feeling I get as a spectator that the pros dress like slobs (why no tuxedos anymore?), the perception that fans owe the pros (rather than the other way around), and all the excellent points made by SJM, and we have a sport going nowhere.
can't argue with that.
however the game lacks seriously in one area......... there's no structure to teaching. in this aspect, the game is populated with very selfish players. this is where the gambling part comes in because that's the way pool has been "taught".
yup,,,everything you said would certainly clear all that up. and i think structure to the game would naturally evolve.
......................but that ain't happening.
however the game lacks seriously in one area......... there's no structure to teaching. in this aspect, the game is populated with very selfish players. this is where the gambling part comes in because that's the way pool has been "taught".
yup,,,everything you said would certainly clear all that up. and i think structure to the game would naturally evolve.
......................but that ain't happening.
bruin70 said:
This is critical in my opinion. There is no proper development system for players. The 'go on the road and try to survive' approach will only be taken by the few who are inclined to such a life. This is not a formula for mass participation and excellence. As bruin70 suggests, it breeds selfishness.
It is amazing what a proper development sytem will do for a sport. We develop an inordinate number of NHL hockey players out of Saskatchewan, with a population base of under 1 million people. Why ? We have a world class development system for players. Pool needs something better than the current environment, which in my opinion drives players away rather than attract them.
Dave
PS We have great curling programs, and lots of participation in local and regional events that pay the winners more than big pool tournaments.