IPT Million-Dollar Tour: The savior of American pool?

iusedtoberich said:
Would you guys gamble with a "pharmacutical dealer"? Some here won't, but I bet the majority would. Those dealers make their money in one of the worst ways possible, but you would still gladly take it in a pool match.
Click to expand...
When someone plays a drug dealer, it's not about how they made the money. It's that the drug dealers POSTS up the money when asked, so you know what your playing for up front.
KEVIN has yet to post. He's still negotiating the game, to see if he can win or not.
The fact that he's asking for money, ties in with the fact of how he made his money to begin with.

If he was really interested in doing this tour, he would GIVE out the membership and entry fees, and invite all the players that wanted in, and they would know that in subsequent years, they would need to purchase a membership, and an pay an entry fee for every tournament.
The fact that he is asking for money up front, when he's allegedly investing millions is what seems odd to me. I mean, for someone who is dumping millions into it, and who has a 2 billion dollar empire (lol), what's and extra $134850 as a show of faith. If he was serious, he's GIVE the entries away, so that there would be no argument from anyone. ESPECIALLY if the money he made was cause a bunch of suckers bought his book!

iusedtoberich said:
My point is that we as a people blindly trust others who have REALLY screwed us, without knowing that they screw us. What is the difference with Kevin? Maybe he screwed others (assuming he did) so that he could spend his money on us. If we are his "pet project" that he can spend his "unethically earned money" on, SO BE IT!
Click to expand...

we are not talking about corperate america and the governament.
The Point is, that him spending money on us REMAINS TO BE SEEN.

and who is the guy that's gonna pick who can and can't play on the tour, Kevin himself? Is MIKE SIGEL gonna be the one?
God help us if he's the one deciding poolplayer's fates.

The word EGOMANIAC come to mind.
 
SUPERSTAR said: When someone plays a drug dealer, it's not about how they made the money. It's that the drug dealers POSTS up the money when asked, so you know what your playing for up front.
KEVIN has yet to post. He's still negotiating the game, to see if he can win or not.
The fact that he's asking for money, ties in with the fact of how he made his money to begin with.

iusedtoberich replies: You have a valid point, however your analogy is not completely valid. He didn't just "take the money and run" which is what your analogy of getting stiffed in a money game depicts. He did deliver products to those who paid him. Whether or not they were worth the money I have no idea.

SUPERSTAR said: If he was really interested in doing this tour, he would GIVE out the membership and entry fees, and invite all the players that wanted in, and they would know that in subsequent years, they would need to purchase a membership, and an pay an entry fee for every tournament.
The fact that he is asking for money up front, when he's allegedly investing millions is what seems odd to me. I mean, for someone who is dumping millions into it, and who has a 2 billion dollar empire (lol), what's and extra $134850 as a show of faith. If he was serious, he's GIVE the entries away, so that there would be no argument from anyone. ESPECIALLY if the money he made was cause a bunch of suckers bought his book!

iusedtoberich replies: I thought this way myself at first myself. Its obvious the player contribution to the prize funds is insignificant. From his point of view, it would be a drop removed from the bucket if he didn't charge player entry fees. So why charge them? FOR COMMITMENT!. If it was free, I'm sure hundreds of people will tell him, "I'll definitely be there Kevin!" Then when its time to show up, maybe 50 people will be there. The others will think its too good to be true. Or they won't want to pay the travel expense. Or they'll think its a big joke, etc. So the first event will be a bust, because no one showed up. The real mindset of the player, however, for not showing up if its free is the following:

People like to pay for things. If you give someone free advice, they won't listen to you. However, if you charge them, they will think you know everything and will follow your advice. If you make people pay for this, they WILL show up and take it SERIOUSLY.



SUPERSTAR said: we are not talking about corperate america and the governament.
The Point is, that him spending money on us REMAINS TO BE SEEN.

and who is the guy that's gonna pick who can and can't play on the tour, Kevin himself? Is MIKE SIGEL gonna be the one?

God help us if he's the one deciding poolplayer's fates.

The word EGOMANIAC come to mind.[/QUOTE]

iusedtoberich replies: I think we can all safely assume that Sigel will be involved in picking the players. So what? So he picks all the old timers. How many of them are there? Plus its not like they can't play. There is still plenty of room for the current generation of players. And as stated during his CCB interview, the bottom 50 money earners each year will lose their tour card and have to re-qualify. The re-qualification process is open to all. So it might be slightly skewed for the first year, but after that it will be based on ability, and not who Sigel likes. Plus, there would be no fair way to pick the first 150 anyway. No matter what you come up with, I guarantee it will be unfair to many groups of players and areas of the world for the first 150.
 
It's not about taking the money and running, it's about everyone knowing what they are getting into before putting up any money.

The only analogy that mimics yours, is when you win a BCA qualifier.
You must fly to vegas, and it is only THERE, that you get reimbursment for the monies that you had won to begin with.
Problem is that with IPT, if he wants a serious commintment, he must show his whole hand. To ask for a commitment without the players knowing all the details, is asking too much for some. THAT way, they can commit KNOWING everything they need to.

so for all the skeptics, they can wait to see if the tour pans out, and then they can go try to qualify if they want, which is what i've been saying all along.

to wait and see.
 
That is fine for the skeptics.

However, when the skeptics turn into believers it will be too late. If/when the whole world knows this is legit, there might be a thousand players trying to qualify for the remaining 50 spots. And I bet a good number of them will be as good as any top 30 to 50 current pro. How would you like the odds of having to beat those people to get in? Compared to possibly being able to play without having to even put your stick together if a good skeptic was accepted onto the tour.

Regardless, I understand the skeptic, and can respect his reasoning.

Personally, gambling is in my blood and I see this as a very good wager.
 
iusedtoberich said:
Personally, gambling is in my blood and I see this as a very good wager.
Click to expand...

you and me both, but i'd rather have someone post, instead of risking the air barrel

plus i can afford to questions stuff, as pool isn't my priority anymore.

to me, it's a big SO WHAT!
 
Yeah I guess I can understand the skeptics somewhat, but some people just like to wee all over anything that seems like a good thing:D

I would understand more if Kevin had no interest in pool, but this guy loves the game, it's no different then someone buying a sports team, they don't always do it for the money, they love to be around the game. This is what Kevin wants, imagine if he pulls this off, you know how big that will be, that will be a huge accomplishment. Pool King Kevin

As for showing his hand, I would consider the fact that he he has spent tons of money already on promotion, and has hired many top level people for the tour, plus the event taking place this weekend. This is all a huge show of his intentions.

I'm totally with Iusedtoberich, he's sees this like I do, Kevin is sincere and trying to help make pool like golf, or even bowling for that matter, heck even skateboarding is bigger now:D

It's going to be a fun ride one way or the other, and Kevin is the man for the job.
 
All of you skeptics are whats wrong with pool. Wait and see what happens and then start your bitching.
 
I do hope this tour succeeds. This would be great for pool; we need both the money and media coverage it promises.

Another note: it was mentioned that players who become members of this tour will be penalised with a four or five year ban from another billiard tour. This is ridiculous. We should be working together, which includes not scheduling seperate tournaments on the same week or weekend. (This adolescence will only result in failure, as players will be forced to decide which tournament in which to participate. There is unity in women's pool; a reason for their success.) I suppose the other tours will feel threatened with the introduction of a new tour, but the IPT will be strictly eight-ball, and I don't believe pool players will all-together give up nine-ball. They will simply be afforded the luxury of playing in those tournaments where the payout may not be so grand. Has anyone else heard about this and have any thoughts/comments?
 
Last edited:
The recurring theme is that most people thought because poker was a success pool can be a success.

Looking back on those posts, people were excited because they thought big payouts would lead to better matches.

From an advertising view IPT was smart because they were trying to copy something successful and he was the first to do it. People supported something they thought they could copy because it worked in another industry, poker was getting big at the time.

What ideas can room owners copy that are successful in other industries?

More media coverage can still be delivered, it may not be mainstream, but viewers can find it on demand via the web.
 
Sorry, but Halloween was last week so it is no longer socially acceptable to try to raise the dead.
 
The movie rounders is what made poker jump out into the main stream.

justnum said:
The recurring theme is that most people thought because poker was a success pool can be a success.

Looking back on those posts, people were excited because they thought big payouts would lead to better matches.

From an advertising view IPT was smart because they were trying to copy something successful and he was the first to do it. People supported something they thought they could copy because it worked in another industry, poker was getting big at the time.

What ideas can room owners copy that are successful in other industries?

More media coverage can still be delivered, it may not be mainstream, but viewers can find it on demand via the web.
Click to expand...

It was just a little while after Rounders came out that the WSOP became popular, they started to show it on tv and then couch warriors started to get into it when all the internet poker sites started popping up.

It's impossible to do the same thing with pool because you can't play online.

Besides, just like I've said with the way ESPN has edited pool in the past, the average player can't have the willing suspension of disbelief to think that they could possibly do what they see on tv.

In golf, they focus on the mistakes, the sand landings, the water landings, the hooks off into the bushes.

In pool they edited out mistakes and it's really just played at too high a level for anyone watching that isn't close to that level to convince themselves that they might have a chance to do the same themselves.

In a sport like baseball, you can think back on your high school playing and say, "hey, I'm capable of a .300 batting average". You're not really at least against that level of competition, but it's easier to tell yourself that.

You can't watch pool and say, "Hey, I'm capable of a .934". Not unless you are close to really being able to.

With poker, you can get lucky and win, most people will go broke, but they can lie to themselves from their home games, and again, the tv shows FOCUS on the shit outs and the bad beats.

Pool was the only televised sport (when it was televised) to only showcase the perfection, and people wonder why no one wanted to watch.

Because of that type of editing, people still think that the black widow is better than the top men who don't know any better.

It was alright to do that with the women, because (like it or not) the women weren't EXPECTED by the general viewing public to play that well. They're watching and surprised that they play that well, so they're enthralled. Combine that with some decent looking women and you've got a somewhat good audience.

I still say that a mutli-match jump around tv format like they do in golf, with highlights of the mistakes and amazing shots is the way to get the viewing public interested in watching pool on tv and once you have that, pro pool is good again.

However, I also say that true media advertis.... hold that thought, I'm still in development on that and don't wish to talk about on here right now..

JAden
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top