International Open 2025

if i was running a big event and was given the chance to put a retired, hall of fame, internationally feared and respected, multi discipline world champion in the broadcast booth i wouldn’t hesitate for a moment to give mike sigel the microphone

but, i am not running the event i’ll be watching from home and if sigel is in the booth i can’t listen to him at all

that’s just me, i’ve tried and can’t

i did count him say the word ‘perfect’ 42 times calling a match from last year’s international on accustats last month

hey mike congrats on that comment by efren when he called you his most feared opponent or whatever he said about you- big respect on that
 
Positively Ralf said:
John Schdmit and Mark Wilson work well together. Although, sometimes you can tell Schdmit likes to take over, mainly because Mark has these silent spells more often than not.
Click to expand...
I tend to agree with you, John isn’t a bad pairing with Mark and while Mark isn’t liked by some he’s relatively knowledgeable of the game and respectful of it. The best pairing they had was when Jeremy Jones joined Mark after Danny Diliberto moved on but I guess with his joining Matchroom’s team he’s moved on as well which is truly a shame as he’s often paired there with that insipid English guy whose knowledge of the game is non existent. They’ve occasionally paired Scott Frost with Mark as well and that’s a pretty good pairing as well, I like Scott a lot. Truthfully, anyone but Siegel, as fellow member here Skor noted in a post on this thread, Mikes so full of himself that it does border on being comical, his ego is the size of a continent.
 
Bob Jewett said:
(As said already, "added money" is the part of the prize fund added by the promoter and not from entry fees.)

It is a holdover from when pool tournaments were almost completely funded by the entry fees. The added money was an indicator of how competent the promoter was at finding sponsors and spectators and how good the players' "money odds" were at the tournament.

Of course at other sports the concept is bizarre. Imagine Wimbledon mentioning their "added money". Do they even have an entry fee?

And then there are the American tournaments that advertise, say, $5000 in added money but also charge the 64 players $30 each in "greens fees". To me, that is $3000 in added money.

The recent UK Open did not say anything about added money, but it was 66% of the prize fund. More than 50% was almost unheard of in traditional player-funded US events. Well, they did occur. I played in one event in the 1970s with a $50,000 advertised prize fund, a $300 entry fee and about 56 players. That would be about 66% added money. The interesting twist was that the prize fund was actually only $17,000, or zero added money. Everyone entered knew the deal except one surprised player from Colorado (Scott Smith) who was in New Jersey expecting good money odds.

I think it will be a sign that pool has really succeeded when the term is no longer used.
Click to expand...
Thanks for the further explanation, Bob. I might be an obsessive pool junkie now, but I am still a relative newbie to the pro scene.
 
Frosty said:
I tend to agree with you, John isn’t a bad pairing with Mark and while Mark isn’t liked by some he’s relatively knowledgeable of the game and respectful of it. The best pairing they had was when Jeremy Jones joined Mark after Danny Diliberto moved on but I guess with his joining Matchroom’s team he’s moved on as well which is truly a shame as he’s often paired there with that insipid English guy whose knowledge of the game is non existent. They’ve occasionally paired Scott Frost with Mark as well and that’s a pretty good pairing as well, I like Scott a lot. Truthfully, anyone but Siegel, as fellow member here Skor noted in a post on this thread, Mikes so full of himself that it does border on being comical, his ego is the size of a continent.
Click to expand...

I do not like one pocket but in the Reyes vs tony chohan match from the derby that accustats uploaded to their YouTube channel, my eyes and ears were glued to the screen because that pairing of Scott Frost and Jeremy Jones may just be the greatest commentated match I've ever heard.
 
I am excited it is going to happen. I think Sigel does a good job. You learn things. The worst commentator is that guy from Inside Pool. He ruined those matches. Better to just watch on mute. My favorite is Mika. He explains things well. Also, the European commentators are good. The play may not be great for the Women's European Championship, but the commentators really try to disect the rack and explain what they would do.
 
Positively Ralf said:
John Schdmit and Mark Wilson work well together. Although, sometimes you can tell Schdmit likes to take over, mainly because Mark has these silent spells more often than not.
Click to expand...

+1 for schmidty

accustats has had a tendency of "hook a buddy up" instead of going for the best product for the fans. the result is sometimes ignorance and self promotion. if they can't get a great comm from their own generation (like nick varner) in the booth, maybe try someone younger. schmidt is good. josh roberts too. corey deuel is knowledgeable but a bit reticent. i'm sure there are others
 
I'm fine with Siegel, Frost, Mika, Schmidt, Varner, and Jeremy. Not so thrilled with Mark Wilson, who's knowledgeable but bland as a dishrag. Jeremy's nervous tic of a laugh also can get on my nerves.

At the risk of showing my age, I think the best commentating by far was the team of Grady and "Cardone". They were the perfect combination of knowledge and humor. Danny D was also great until he kept repeating his cliches ("sleeping in the streets", etc.) over and over. And I could listen to Buddy Hall's commentary just for the sound of his accent.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top