Looking for opinion on Az Money List

azhousepro

azhousepro

Administrator
Staff member
Admin
Moderator
I have been wondering about something and thought maybe the best way to come to a decision was to ask the forums their opinion.

Should we include things like TAR and the Philippines Big Time Billiards matches in the money list?

We have never done it in the past, partly because I didn't consider it a "tournament".

I don't want to start adding entries to the database every time some random shortstop matches up with a nobody at Joe's Bar & Grill. And I don't want to start getting emails from someone saying he won $100,000 gambling at Derby.

But, both TAR and the Big Time matches are well promoted events. And I consider them a little different than your average money game.

Thoughts? Opinions?

Mike
 
I think you should stick with larger tournaments where numerous people have the opportunity to enter. Stay away from TAR, gambling, etc. as it will distort the numbers too much.
 
In my O-pinion, the money list doesn't serve much of a purpose. Since players are being backed sometimes, they might only be getting 50% of their winnings, or who knows what kind of deal is being made.

And perhaps a player cashed for $500 in the US Open, but he also paid $500 to enter. So why should his "winnings" be $500?

The money list gives a false sense of what the players earn. I'm not saying it's a bad thing. It's completely fine if you understand how things work in pool. Most people don't have an idea and think that the number actually reflects the income.
 
Money?

I think you should stck to your format, it has worked well before and is very fair to all.
Do not include private matches but real tournaments. that was the intention all along. Tournaments that are reported with the relevant information are worthy of your mag.
Bless you for your hard work, I for one knows of the long hours
Your fan always

Willy Hermoza, Niagara Falls Ontario
 
Keep it as is. Individual match-up have no place in the money list IMO.
 
AzHousePro said:
I have been wondering about something and thought maybe the best way to come to a decision was to ask the forums their opinion.

Should we include things like TAR and the Philippines Big Time Billiards matches in the money list?

We have never done it in the past, partly because I didn't consider it a "tournament".

I don't want to start adding entries to the database every time some random shortstop matches up with a nobody at Joe's Bar & Grill. And I don't want to start getting emails from someone saying he won $100,000 gambling at Derby.

But, both TAR and the Big Time matches are well promoted events. And I consider them a little different than your average money game.

Thoughts? Opinions?

Mike
Click to expand...

No. Since those events are strictly invitational in nature they are more akin exhibitions than tournaments. Perhaps though you could maintain a separate list for individual matchups.

However if you include the Challenge of Champions then perhaps you should include TAR and Big Time Billiards and other such PROMOTED matchups. I would definitely NOT include the gambling matches that just happen.
 
I think you should keep it as it is if all the tournaments you have on the list are open tournaments. However if the Tournament of Champions is on your list I think it should not be as only a hand full of people are invited to it. The list should in my opinion only tournaments that are open to all to keep it fair. Thank You for all your hard work .


Ps.I miss looking at all the cues that used to be in the wanted/sale section it's just not the same any more.
 
I would prefer one list for open tournaments and a second list that includes both open and invitational tournaments. Success in the open tournaments leads to most of the invites to the special events - Challenge of Champions, Mosconi Cup, etc. For example, winning the US Open leads directly to a spot in the Challenge of Champions and a nice head start at a Mosconi Cup invite.

One-off match-ups like TAR matches should not be included. If TAR matches are included, do you also include action room matches from the Derby or smaller match-ups in everyone's local room? This gets too difficult to keep up with very quickly.

Poker has the same issues because there is so much prestige for being known as the all-time money winner. If 2 guys get together and have a $10 million dollar entry heads-up match, the winner would automatically be the all-time money winner. Almost everyone agrees that this is not in the spirit of the money list's purpose.
 
I agree with most that it shouldn't be included in the totals.

I did notice that the Fatboy challenge at Derby also wasn't included. That is a tournament I would think should be added to their totals.
 
Not ONE person so far has brought up what I talked about, which proves my point.

Do you understand that some pros are being backed, and that the player is not keeping 100% of what he wins.

Do you understand that the cost of entry fees are not subtracted from the total winnings.

Do you understand that travel and lodging can often cost as much as you win in a tournament.

The raw number does not reflect anything significant. You can somewhat compare the numbers to see who has done better, but it does not reflect in any way the income of a player.

You have players traveling together and splitting everything they win 50/50, all sorts of arrangements.

This is not the PGA where the prize money outweighs all of the costs, and where everything is already paid for.


Just the fact that nobody else mentioned this tells me something.....
 
I agree, tournament winnings only. That said, the Fatboy Challenge is one of the toughest to win and definitely should be included. Only sixteen of the best players in the world!
 
WhatsTheSpot said:
Not ONE person so far has brought up what I talked about, which proves my point.

Do you understand that some pros are being backed, and that the player is not keeping 100% of what he wins.

Do you understand that the cost of entry fees are not subtracted from the total winnings.

Do you understand that travel and lodging can often cost as much as you win in a tournament.

The raw number does not reflect anything significant. You can somewhat compare the numbers to see who has done better, but it does not reflect in any way the income of a player.

You have players traveling together and splitting everything they win 50/50, all sorts of arrangements.

This is not the PGA where the prize money outweighs all of the costs, and where everything is already paid for.


Just the fact that nobody else mentioned this tells me something.....
Click to expand...

No one mentioned your post because it is irrelevant. No one is going to try and keep track of all of the expenses a player has or if they are splitting with a backer or other players.

The list is just a total of money that they won from tournaments, it is not what they have to report to the IRS.

Do you think when poker tournament winnings are listed they take into account all of the expenses of the poker players? The answer is no and their entries into the tournaments are MUCH higher. You might see someone listed with 400K in tournament winnings that has paid 500K in entry fees.

I know that a lot of tournaments give free entry fees to certain players and also gives them airfare and hotels.

The money list is just to compare who is doing better in tournaments, it is not supposed to be an actual indication of how much money they made that year.

On a side note, in TAR's recent Podcast he mentioned that he was considering having a king of the hill structure where the winner would get 5K and the loser nothing. I think in this type of match it should be included in the list because we know that the total is going to the player and any top player can challenge to become king of the hill and win the 5K.
 
TheMarsMan said:
No one mentioned your post because it is irrelevant. No one is going to try and keep track of all of the expenses a player has or if they are splitting with a backer or other players.

The list is just a total of money that they won from tournaments, it is not what they have to report to the IRS.

Do you think when poker tournament winnings are listed they take into account all of the expenses of the poker players? The answer is no and their entries into the tournaments are MUCH higher. You might see someone listed with 400K in tournament winnings that has paid 500K in entry fees.

I know that a lot of tournaments give free entry fees to certain players and also gives them airfare and hotels.

The money list is just to compare who is doing better in tournaments, it is not supposed to be an actual indication of how much money they made that year.

On a side note, in TAR's recent Podcast he mentioned that he was considering having a king of the hill structure where the winner would get 5K and the loser nothing. I think in this type of match it should be included in the list because we know that the total is going to the player and any top player can challenge to become king of the hill and win the 5K.
Click to expand...

If you're trying to see who is doing better in tournaments, then you can't use money won as an indicator. Players are not playing in the same number of tournaments, and they are playing in different tournaments with differing amounts of money.

It is like keeping track of the NBA standings, but some teams play 82 games, some play 60 games, some only 41, some only 10. So when you see which team has the most wins, is it really comparable?

Do you see what's going on here......
 
WhatsTheSpot said:
If you're trying to see who is doing better in tournaments, then you can't use money won as an indicator. Players are not playing in the same number of tournaments, and they are playing in different tournaments with differing amounts of money.

It is like keeping track of the NBA standings, but some teams play 82 games, some play 60 games, some only 41, some only 10. So when you see which team has the most wins, is it really comparable?

Do you see what's going on here......
Click to expand...

No, clue me in what is going on here....
 
JB Cases said:
No. Since those events are strictly invitational in nature they are more akin exhibitions than tournaments. Perhaps though you could maintain a separate list for individual matchups.

However if you include the Challenge of Champions then perhaps you should include TAR and Big Time Billiards and other such PROMOTED matchups. I would definitely NOT include the gambling matches that just happen.
Click to expand...

I agree. Johnnyt
 
JB Cases said:
No. Since those events are strictly invitational in nature they are more akin exhibitions than tournaments. Perhaps though you could maintain a separate list for individual matchups.
Click to expand...

Definitely agree with John on this one. Invitational tournaments should *not* be included nor should the one-on-one action matches whether PPV, Ustreamed, or at an event.
 
Looks to me that you have your answer. I agree with everyone else. Leave it as it is.
 
JB Cases said:
No. Since those events are strictly invitational in nature they are more akin exhibitions than tournaments. Perhaps though you could maintain a separate list for individual matchups.

However if you include the Challenge of Champions then perhaps you should include TAR and Big Time Billiards and other such PROMOTED matchups. I would definitely NOT include the gambling matches that just happen.
Click to expand...

I agree totally
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top