MatchRoom's response to the WPA player sanctions:

justnum

Billiards Improvement Research Projects Associate
Silver Member
I'm beginning to believe this too.

Matchroom is effectively using FB to be available and transparent with players, specifically Emily Frazer.

WPA is more formal with their press statements.

Ive never been more excited for a Molina, Joey, and Panozzo interview. I hope they get federation reps for discussion.
 

JAM

AzB Silver Member
Silver Member
Matchroom is effectively using FB to be available and transparent with players, specifically Emily Frazer.

WPA is more formal with their press statements.

Ive never been more excited for a Molina, Joey, and Panozzo interview. I hope they get federation reps for discussion.
I disagree. The WPA president came on two different podcasts and answered questions live. As well, the European Pocket Billiard Federation (EPBF) board member David Morris has expressed his concerns regarding the World Nineball Tour. Shane Tyree of BCA and WPA also did a podcast. Matchroom's Karl Boyes will be on a podcast Monday, tomorrow, and share his thoughts on the recent happenings. I'm not sure what podcasts you've been watching, but I've seen all of them.
 
  • Like
Reactions: VVP

justnum

Billiards Improvement Research Projects Associate
Silver Member
I disagree. The WPA president came on two different podcasts and answered questions live. As well, the European Pocket Billiard Federation (EPBF) board member David Morris has expressed his concerns regarding the World Nineball Tour. Shane Tyree of BCA and WPA also did a podcast. Matchroom's Karl Boyes will be on a podcast Monday, tomorrow, and share his thoughts on the recent happenings. I'm not sure what podcasts you've been watching, but I've seen all of them.

Emily is building relationships with players.

WPA is creating a platform to attract more federations or attract new federation members.

Emily speaks to the values of a player, through their pov. She is always taking in feedback and making moves with players in their hometowns. Fulda, Germany is on the map because of her. The vision to grow the sport like this is unimagined by pool players for decades.


WPA messaging has been about the machinery of the sport. Their vision is for the sport not players. Their newest events are not locations known for
billiards or have any significance to the existing pool community.

WPA is forcing an integration with universal ban rules. They explained it clearly, but they dont have the evidence to show WPA fields will be empty if they gave the choice.
 

JAM

AzB Silver Member
Silver Member
Emily is building relationships with players.

WPA is creating a platform to attract more federations or attract new federation members.

Emily speaks to the values of a player, through their pov. She is always taking in feedback and making moves with players in their hometowns. Fulda, Germany is on the map because of her. The vision to grow the sport like this is unimagined by pool players for decades.


WPA messaging has been about the machinery of the sport. Their vision is for the sport not players. Their newest events are not locations known for
billiards or have any significance to the existing pool community.

WPA is forcing an integration with universal ban rules. They explained it clearly, but they dont have the evidence to show WPA fields will be empty if they gave the choice.
Thanks for sharing your opinion. That's all it is. Everybody comes at it from different vantage points with different opinions. In case you haven't noticed, many of the federation pro players are radio silent.

To hold court in public fora and social media is not good for the sport.
 

Island Drive

Otto/Dads College Roommate/Cleveland Browns
Silver Member
I'm beginning to believe this too.
I don't.... I think we all need different ideas perspectives & thoughts to help one another, business or life.
Kids arguing with parents are right about 20% of the time, their thoughts and ideas are formed via adults and peer group.
And us adults know we're never right all the time.... tho I'm sure we've all met a few that would Narcissistically argue their point.
I've noticed Predator make changes... and felt they were listening to the AZ board and it's feedback.
 
Last edited:

Kim Bye

AzB Silver Member
Silver Member
So let me get this right: This case is about two different providers of pool content and tournaments that can't work togheter? So nothing has changed then.. Is it so damn hard to have a governing body on a world wide basis that can disseminate rules, work with tournaments, broadcasters, sponsors etc?
Uniting pool players is like hearding cats.
 

iusedtoberich

AzB Silver Member
Silver Member
What's going on is akin to overthrowing a national government (applied to our sport of course).

The careful Europeans are being smart keeping their mouths shut on social media, as Jam said radio silence. I think many players are not decided what side they want to be on. Its not clear cut, IMO.

Remember, if there was no WPA, and its member federations, there would never have been a world championship for 30 years. It would instead have been some random guy in the USA calling his event a WC with no international players in attendance. Cue the "back pocket 9 ball world championship", or Charlie's "World Tournaments".

Herding pool cats may be one of the hardest jobs in the world. The WPA and its member federations did do that, which resulted in many fine international competitions over the past 30 years.

Now, if IPT or MR comes along and throws millions at the sport, they might do a much better job herding all the pool cats. That is simply money talking. The WPA and its members did that without much money. It's commendable.
 
Last edited:

iusedtoberich

AzB Silver Member
Silver Member
The players will go where the money is. Always have, always will!

How do you think a promoter of a major WPA event will feel if most, if not all, the top players are banned from participating because they are playing the Matchroom events? Who will they blame for that and how will they respond? I suspect they would no longer be interested in paying a worthless sanction fee first of all. Perhaps they would then consider becoming part of the Matchroom group of events. Just food for thought.
Agree, and I wrote similar in the Yap banning thread. If the WPA loses the top players, the promoters putting up the money won't put it up anymore to host a tournament with low level players, and simply pull out of the whole promotion business. I hadn't thought that they would join forces with MR instead like you mention. That's a good possibility.

The same can be said of MR. If they lose all the top players, maybe they will fold up? Would we watch a MR event with the local shortstops instead of the pros? I don't know...
 

MattPoland

AzB Silver Member
Silver Member
I’m curious if the WPA is voting to suspend players for (1) participating in unsanctioned events, (2) participating in unsanctioned events when a sanctioned event is available, or (3) participating in an unsanctioned event when a significantly major sanctioned event (like a World 8-ball Championship) is available. I don’t like player suspensions at all. But I do wonder if most of the public is assuming #1 and maybe the intent is actually #3. There’s definitely a lot of knee jerk emotional reactions and exaggerations going on. I’m trying to make sure I have a good grasp on the facts and getting a chance to respond rather than react.
 

Cameron Smith

is kind of hungry...
Silver Member
Agree, and I wrote similar in the Yap banning thread. If the WPA loses the top players, the promoters putting up the money won't put it up anymore to host a tournament with low level players, and simply pull out of the whole promotion business. I hadn't thought that they would join forces with MR instead like you mention. That's a good possibility.

The same can be said of MR. If they lose all the top players, maybe they will fold up? Would we watch a MR event with the local shortstops instead of the pros? I don't know...
We don’t know how many players are getting a salary or help from local federations. But it’s surely not enough to leave us with local shortstops and APA 7s.

But even if worst case scenario, they lost the top 50 on the Fargo rankings the players don’t have near enough commercial recognition with large broadcasters at this stage to be major sticking point. MR could build a tour with whatever players they have left because the WPA players would be out of sight out of mind for all intents and purposes. And outside of the true connoisseur, I doubt many fans would be able to tell the difference between a 770 player and an 830 player without looking at the Fargo rankings.

When you have the biggest platform and the most exposure, the top players are who you say they are.
 

MattPoland

AzB Silver Member
Silver Member
IMG_3913.jpeg
IMG_3914.jpeg
 

MattPoland

AzB Silver Member
Silver Member
Not sure if that’s just accounting for direct player support and perhaps overlooking government money added to local events
 

Scratch85

AzB Gold Member
Gold Member
Silver Member
. . . Would we watch a MR event with the local shortstops instead of the pros? I don't know...

If MR removed the top 10 Fargo rated from their events, I would still watch and be impressed. I would hate to lose them but if they became unknowns, I would know no difference.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 

VTEC John

Active member
I'm kind of shaking my head that so much of the debate is about supporting the players, or supporting WPA, or supporting MR. Nobody has mentioned supporting the fans. Without fans, pro pool doesn't exist, period. To make a semi-analogy, big companies fail when they're too inward looking; but those that start with a customer mindset make better decisions and prosper. I just wonder if WPA and MR have gotten a little tunnel-visioned, and how they might see things differently if they held every decision up the the light of whether it's going to help pool's fans.
 

justnum

Billiards Improvement Research Projects Associate
Silver Member
This is the beginning of universal standards in pool. A universal bans means all federations lose their ability to self govern.

With a law to control all players the WPA will control the culture of pool from recruitment to championship titles.

The WPA is bringing in governments as a client. These governments have different ambitions than previous parties interested in billiards.
 

Island Drive

Otto/Dads College Roommate/Cleveland Browns
Silver Member
I'm kind of shaking my head that so much of the debate is about supporting the players, or supporting WPA, or supporting MR. Nobody has mentioned supporting the fans. Without fans, pro pool doesn't exist, period. To make a semi-analogy, big companies fail when they're too inward looking; but those that start with a customer mindset make better decisions and prosper. I just wonder if WPA and MR have gotten a little tunnel-visioned, and how they might see things differently if they held every decision up the the light of whether it's going to help pool's fans.
The product MR is creating is going after the fans and the player$.
They know from Snooker experience how pool player$ think.
Mosconi Cup is an example.
I don't know of the WPA going after the fans. By creating, improving and making their events better each year.
If I'm wrong, let me know.
 

BasementDweller

AzB Silver Member
Silver Member
Personally I think the pool world has improved more in the last 4 years with MRs involvement than it did in the 29 previous years.
I tend to agree. I find myself watching vintage snooker matches quite often. They are great to drift off to sleep to. Anyway, snooker both pre and post Matchroom did and have done a way better job of building their product. Pool has just never been able to do that without Matchroom. Live snooker matches in the 80s were bigger than today's pool, with in match cutaways to studio commentators, like major sports here. I'm not saying that some like Accu-stats haven't done a good to great job of broadcasting matches for us pool nuts, but nobody has been able to elevate the game beyond us.

It will be interesting to see how the purses play out with Matchroom though, when Barry Hearn himself has said something along the lines of not caring if the players below the top ten are struggling to make a living. He wants the top players to be rewarded. This was said during his segment with Stephen Hendry and it can be watched on YouTube. They are a long ways down the road with snooker and I think it's greatly exaggerated how well the snooker players are doing. Yeah, I'm sure the top handful of guys are doing great but if you're outside of that, it sounds like they are struggling just like pool players.
 

VTEC John

Active member
The product MR is creating is going after the fans and the player$.
They know from Snooker experience how pool player$ think.
Mosconi Cup is an example.
I don't know of the WPA going after the fans. By creating, improving and making their events better each year.
If I'm wrong, let me know.
I agree with you about MR. Both MR and WPA can argue that they're supporting fans by building the sport, but MR has a much more compelling argument. What fans want most is to see the best players. WPA is limiting fans' access to the best players by dictating where they can play. Matchroom isn't. My point is the better you serve the fans, the better you build the sport. Matchroom has the edge in that regard, so I'm with them.
 

Nick B

This is gonna hurt
Silver Member
The WPA is like a mob boss that gets offended when you stop handing them envelopes. "What do you do for me?"..."I'm here to assure nothing happens to you"...but what do I get for my money? It's a head tax. Very little value is provided for the funds. There will be a little pain for some but once they break free they will look back at this and say we are better off today. Otherwise it's a viscous circle of going nowhere.

Remember the old days of having the world championships for the amusement of a couple of Oil rich Sheikhs? The WPA was more than happy to just cash the check.

Compare this to a MR event:
 
Last edited:
Top