And.....NO blue font
! Welcome back Joey :thumbup:!!!!!Just messin' with ya', bud
!!!Maniac
Pool has a "FATAL FLAW"
- Thread starter Paul Schofield
- Start date
And.....NO blue font
! Welcome back Joey :thumbup:!!!!!Just messin' with ya', bud
!!!Maniac
Tiny pockets are killing the game,but aside from one pocket pool is no fun to watch for me.
I would not walk across the street to see 10 championship of the world
I once playedone pocket with a well known player from seatle in front of 2000 people at Reno in the practice room,while about 6 people watched the 9 ball championship in the ball room
This was over 20 years ago and I knew pool was doomed a long as 9 ball was concerned,at least for the spectator or sponsor
I would not walk across the street to see 10 championship of the world
I once playedone pocket with a well known player from seatle in front of 2000 people at Reno in the practice room,while about 6 people watched the 9 ball championship in the ball room
This was over 20 years ago and I knew pool was doomed a long as 9 ball was concerned,at least for the spectator or sponsor
Golf did not find its path to popularity and success through miniature golf. Miniature golf will never be considered a sport. I think that it is possible that if Eight-Ball was structured differently, it could have a universal appeal. (could)
I don't agree with the FF theory.
Soupy Logic
Think of the distribution of pool players as being represented by a soup ladle type curve.
At the top of the ladle's handle we have the bar leaguers (arguably the healthiest sector of our sport).
Following the handle down...
down...
down...
...we get to the dying middle of the player distribution. This is the group that everybody thinks is going to defrib itself...<insert your money-making idea here to save pool, apple pie and the American way>.
Anecdotal Evidence
The last 10 or so "pool halls/bars" that I have gone into (in CO, WI, WA & BC) I've thrown out 9 balls on the table and shot left-handed for 15 minutes without getting anyone wanting to play.
Further evidence (IMHO) that this sector is on life support is that in each of these establishments the employees behind the counter did not have any passion for the game: it was just a job.
The Pros
At the end of Ladle Rd. are our pros and other great players. Players destined to play within their little group forever. The top 5 or 10 elite players in our sport might be lucky enough to earn in a year what a top tour caddy can earn in a month.
Paradigm Shift
Sorry for being so cynical, but we need to think way outside the box.
I don't have any magical answers for this paradigm shift. But isn't rule #1 in the brave new world that the old rules don't apply?
Hint: Change the capabilities of the equipment, and the games will follow.
_
Soupy Logic
Think of the distribution of pool players as being represented by a soup ladle type curve.
At the top of the ladle's handle we have the bar leaguers (arguably the healthiest sector of our sport).
Following the handle down...
down...
down...
...we get to the dying middle of the player distribution. This is the group that everybody thinks is going to defrib itself...<insert your money-making idea here to save pool, apple pie and the American way>.
Anecdotal Evidence
The last 10 or so "pool halls/bars" that I have gone into (in CO, WI, WA & BC) I've thrown out 9 balls on the table and shot left-handed for 15 minutes without getting anyone wanting to play.
Further evidence (IMHO) that this sector is on life support is that in each of these establishments the employees behind the counter did not have any passion for the game: it was just a job.
The Pros
At the end of Ladle Rd. are our pros and other great players. Players destined to play within their little group forever. The top 5 or 10 elite players in our sport might be lucky enough to earn in a year what a top tour caddy can earn in a month.
Paradigm Shift
Sorry for being so cynical, but we need to think way outside the box.
I don't have any magical answers for this paradigm shift. But isn't rule #1 in the brave new world that the old rules don't apply?
Hint: Change the capabilities of the equipment, and the games will follow.
_
And.....NO blue font
Just messin' with ya', bud
Maniac
I just bring out the large blue font when people start messin' wid me. :wink:
Maybe a new type of game format is needed instead of messing with whats current.
Something thats between tricks shots and running balls at the same time showing that there is creativity in shot making, which is really what is missing. The game would be point based with a set limit of time for each player to make as many points as necessary. Whoever is ahead in points at the end of the time limit is the winner
My suggestion would be called Bank, Carom, or Combo. As the name implies, only banks, caroms or combos are consider valid shots.
Points are award based on the degree of difficulity of the shot. Such as a one rail bank is 1 point, two rails would be 2 and so on.
2 ball combo would be 2 points, 3 ball would be 3 points and so on.
Then there are points for combination of shots like a carom, combo where the total points for the shot would be based on the point value of the carom and combo added together.
Say each player has a total time of 30 minutes to make x amount of points.
Anyway, just a general idea for something new that also brings some shots to the public awareness you would never see or rarely anyway in pro play.
Something thats between tricks shots and running balls at the same time showing that there is creativity in shot making, which is really what is missing. The game would be point based with a set limit of time for each player to make as many points as necessary. Whoever is ahead in points at the end of the time limit is the winner
My suggestion would be called Bank, Carom, or Combo. As the name implies, only banks, caroms or combos are consider valid shots.
Points are award based on the degree of difficulity of the shot. Such as a one rail bank is 1 point, two rails would be 2 and so on.
2 ball combo would be 2 points, 3 ball would be 3 points and so on.
Then there are points for combination of shots like a carom, combo where the total points for the shot would be based on the point value of the carom and combo added together.
Say each player has a total time of 30 minutes to make x amount of points.
Anyway, just a general idea for something new that also brings some shots to the public awareness you would never see or rarely anyway in pro play.
"golf : miniature golf" is not even remotely comparable to "pool on a 9 foot : bar pool". You've got to be joking.
A better comparison would be golf course with 18 holes vs golf course with 9 holes. People still enjoy both.
I disagree. Your comparison of an 18 hole golf course to a 9 hole course is closer to comparing a 18 table pool room to a 9 table pool room, both having all different size tables. The only point I am really making is that these two entities of pool exist in two different worlds. Regulation-table pool has a shot of making the game into a sport. Bar-pool does not. Bar-pool is a highly skilled and popular bar-room amusement. Put your quarters in and play.
Pool didn't lose it's popularity because it suddenly became passe. The issues with pools popularity, as with anything, are far more complicated than that. You can't expect to change one or two things and make something popular over night. Even if we came up with a winning formula, gains would be projected for 5-10 years down the road.
Poker and the UFC may seem like they were overnight sensations, but it only appears that way to the general public. Afficianados watched they're favorite past times/passions/whatevers build slowly.
If you study a bit of billiards history, you'll find that prior to the 19th century turns were one shot opportunities. In other words, whether you score or not your opponent shoots the next shot. Being able to string endless shots together is what made the game something that could be defined as a 'sport'. The amount of skill involved in keeping an endless run going is astronomical. Whereas the ability to make tough shots, well lets just say that plenty of amateurs are just as good as the pros. But they can't control the cue ball consistently off it.
The ability to shoot till you miss is the defining feature of Pool/snooker/billiards. Take that away and you have just another parlor game.
Finally as I've mentioned many times before, these legendary runs are legendary for a reason. They don't happen often. It's very rare that a player does not recieve equal opportunity to participate and even rarer that he or she doesn't lose because of poor shot, no matter how difficult it was.
During some of the World Pool Championships run by Matchroom sport prior to 2005, the pockets were so easy and players were running so many racks. In a situation which involved the very best players in the world on easy pockets someone SHOULD have run out an entire set. But no one did as far as I can recall. And if it happened it was only once. (I believe Steve Knight ran out a 5 game set in the group stages, but I'm referring to races to 9 or better).
Poker and the UFC may seem like they were overnight sensations, but it only appears that way to the general public. Afficianados watched they're favorite past times/passions/whatevers build slowly.
If you study a bit of billiards history, you'll find that prior to the 19th century turns were one shot opportunities. In other words, whether you score or not your opponent shoots the next shot. Being able to string endless shots together is what made the game something that could be defined as a 'sport'. The amount of skill involved in keeping an endless run going is astronomical. Whereas the ability to make tough shots, well lets just say that plenty of amateurs are just as good as the pros. But they can't control the cue ball consistently off it.
The ability to shoot till you miss is the defining feature of Pool/snooker/billiards. Take that away and you have just another parlor game.
Finally as I've mentioned many times before, these legendary runs are legendary for a reason. They don't happen often. It's very rare that a player does not recieve equal opportunity to participate and even rarer that he or she doesn't lose because of poor shot, no matter how difficult it was.
During some of the World Pool Championships run by Matchroom sport prior to 2005, the pockets were so easy and players were running so many racks. In a situation which involved the very best players in the world on easy pockets someone SHOULD have run out an entire set. But no one did as far as I can recall. And if it happened it was only once. (I believe Steve Knight ran out a 5 game set in the group stages, but I'm referring to races to 9 or better).
Same games played on different size 'fields'.
There are thousands and thousands of players who play on both size tables. Probably into the millions.
Bar pool is where the public's familiarity with 8 ball comes from, which you earlier advocated as a better game for pro tournaments due to that familiarity. Now you're saying bar pool isn't even a sport (which I actually agree with). Kinda contradictory, IMO, particularly since you make the point that bar table players don't venture into the regulation table world.
8 ball isn't normally played in higher-caliber, regulation table tournaments because most accomplished players hate playing it. 9 ball and 10 ball each require way more skill to play at a high level. Most pros will tell you they require more skill than straight pool as well (and I like straight pool).
Ideas....
Back to the pros and cons of "winner breaks" vs. "alternate breaks". The arguments for winner break primarily center on the excitement that is built when a player is stringing racks. Everyone (except the opponent in the chair) wants to see how many they can run, and the alternate breaks format takes this away. I don't disagree with this argument, but I think a change to the competition format (not the games) could add enough excitement to overcome the loss of stringing racks. Adopt a "win by two games" format similar to tennis. Long tennis sets generate the same type of interest as stringing racks, and the players will be under intense pressure while trying to win or stay in the match. Some type of tie-breaker can be utilized if the match becomes too long, maybe even Sudden Death tiebreakers. For 9 ball, I'd like to see races to 7, must win by 2 games, and best 2 out of 3 sets. And yes, alternating break formats DO favor the strongest players, but isn't that the essence of competition? Players with exceptional ability, skill, and the work ethic to develop those attributes should win over less skilled players most of the time.
Venue has been brought up numerous times in this thread. How about pool tables in a casino with betting allowed between players and spectators? Or, spectators are allowed to bet, and the winner of the pool match gets paid based on the betting funds drawn in. Poker has become wildly popular on numerous television stations. Instead of distancing pool from the gambling world, the pool world could simply embrace it and could very well attract some of pokers large sponsors in the process, adding desparately-needed funds for the pro tour and players.
I maintain my position that there's nothing wrong with the games of pool that call-shot, incoming player having the option to pass the shot back on misses, and alternating breaks don't overcome. The pro tour just needs the sponsorship necessary to run nice events and pay the players like a professional athlete (or poker player!) should be. A league system for amateurs like they have in many European countries would be nice as well. Most accomplished amateurs I know hate playing bar table 8 ball (me included).
Back to the pros and cons of "winner breaks" vs. "alternate breaks". The arguments for winner break primarily center on the excitement that is built when a player is stringing racks. Everyone (except the opponent in the chair) wants to see how many they can run, and the alternate breaks format takes this away. I don't disagree with this argument, but I think a change to the competition format (not the games) could add enough excitement to overcome the loss of stringing racks. Adopt a "win by two games" format similar to tennis. Long tennis sets generate the same type of interest as stringing racks, and the players will be under intense pressure while trying to win or stay in the match. Some type of tie-breaker can be utilized if the match becomes too long, maybe even Sudden Death tiebreakers. For 9 ball, I'd like to see races to 7, must win by 2 games, and best 2 out of 3 sets. And yes, alternating break formats DO favor the strongest players, but isn't that the essence of competition? Players with exceptional ability, skill, and the work ethic to develop those attributes should win over less skilled players most of the time.
Venue has been brought up numerous times in this thread. How about pool tables in a casino with betting allowed between players and spectators? Or, spectators are allowed to bet, and the winner of the pool match gets paid based on the betting funds drawn in. Poker has become wildly popular on numerous television stations. Instead of distancing pool from the gambling world, the pool world could simply embrace it and could very well attract some of pokers large sponsors in the process, adding desparately-needed funds for the pro tour and players.
I maintain my position that there's nothing wrong with the games of pool that call-shot, incoming player having the option to pass the shot back on misses, and alternating breaks don't overcome. The pro tour just needs the sponsorship necessary to run nice events and pay the players like a professional athlete (or poker player!) should be. A league system for amateurs like they have in many European countries would be nice as well. Most accomplished amateurs I know hate playing bar table 8 ball (me included).
Last edited:
I will repeat what I said in post #244: "I think that it is possible that if Eight-Ball was structured differently, it could have a universal appeal. (could)"
The reasons why the better players just hate Eight-Ball is a whole other topic...and a good one, I might add.
Last edited:
Tzytnt
Registered
The problems you addressed is more likely occur when a dominant player is running balls...this is more common in sports such as 8/9-ball and 14.1, 10 ball is a good alternative from my perspective.
Also, when talking about sitting idly on the seat, how about safety plays? As far as i know safety plays are exactly when the 2 players compete at the same time both strategically and mentally. Even when you sitting you still have to think about your next move, guess what your opponent is thinking....etc.
For me, the game is fine. Personally I dont see any 'fatal flaw' in the game of pool. It is fascinating for me and interesting to almost everyone. Think about how much money cycles everyday in thousands of pool halls around the globe. It would be really decent. I guess the problem of pool is that it lacks professionalism, not popularity or a good game structure. The majority regard pool as a 'game' instead of 'sports', that is the problem. I guess it would help if they incorporate pool into the Olympics...
Also, when talking about sitting idly on the seat, how about safety plays? As far as i know safety plays are exactly when the 2 players compete at the same time both strategically and mentally. Even when you sitting you still have to think about your next move, guess what your opponent is thinking....etc.
For me, the game is fine. Personally I dont see any 'fatal flaw' in the game of pool. It is fascinating for me and interesting to almost everyone. Think about how much money cycles everyday in thousands of pool halls around the globe. It would be really decent. I guess the problem of pool is that it lacks professionalism, not popularity or a good game structure. The majority regard pool as a 'game' instead of 'sports', that is the problem. I guess it would help if they incorporate pool into the Olympics...
Honestly, we keep jumping to new games? Wasn't it straight pool for decades and 9 Ball for decades after that? I'd hardly call that jumping around from game to game. And the current increase in popularity of 10 Ball is not really about players not getting enough chances in 9 Ball. You know better than most what it is about - no conflict and reducing the luck factor.
I remember when I was sisteen and started playin pool,then got interested in tae kwon do,then came paintball,in tae kwon do i got kick in the head hard and thought forget it.In paintball there is a lot of cheating,a wipe here ,a wipe there.So i went back to the game i like the most.That game is pool.
Thumbs up here.
IMO, it is not the strategy that makes One-Pocket pools most fabulous game. It is the back and forth with both players involved. Good competition is always great to watch. Dippy Dave can play One-Pocket with champions and it is exciting to watch. Can you imagine if they played Eight, Nine, or Ten-Ball? It would never happen. The competition is bad. The structure of the games is wrong for players who's abilities are so far apart. Any two players can play One-Pocket and it can make sense.
Last edited:
Are any of you old enough to remember when the finals of the World Straight-Pool Tournament was televised on ABC Wide World of Sports in the late 60s and early 70s? Players were Lassiter, Crane, Breit, and the like. There were always runs of 70 or more. ABC would never show the long run. They would always show the tail end of a run, a miss, and then the incoming player starting a turn at the table. ABC showed the exchange of opportunity at the table. They knew that viewers did not want to see a one sided long run. It makes for bad theatre.
I have watched Nine-Ball matches on television where the score is 2-2 and viewing is fast forwarded through one sided play to a point where the score is 6-2. They show us a rack where both players come to the table more than once or twice in that one rack.
The networks know what makes for good competition and good entertainment. Not only does a player not want to be an opponent and have to sit idly in a chair during a run, the average audience does not want to have to sit and watch it either.
I have watched Nine-Ball matches on television where the score is 2-2 and viewing is fast forwarded through one sided play to a point where the score is 6-2. They show us a rack where both players come to the table more than once or twice in that one rack.
The networks know what makes for good competition and good entertainment. Not only does a player not want to be an opponent and have to sit idly in a chair during a run, the average audience does not want to have to sit and watch it either.
Last edited:
I just watched a 20 year old video of the last game of a hill-hill One-Pocket finals between Danny DiLiberto and Ronnie Allen. Just take the pool and set it aside. We know One-Pocket will never be "IT". That being said, the interaction, drama, theatre, and competition was just spectacular. The last rack lasted an hour. Each player was up and out of their chair fifty times. The suspense, body language, facial expressions, bantering between the players, and intereaction with the spectators made for fabulous entertainment.
This is true for every sport: The sport is overshaddowed and enhanced by the human story. What makes Tiger Wood's golf play so entertaining is the full diynamic of the spectical. Other golfers are playing and they become props for Tiger. The audience gets to compare the performance of the field to Tiger's. We get to see every player's performance and watch the flow of human emotion.
Compare this to pool and its fatal flaw. I say that if any player sits idly in his chair for longer than a few minutes, pool loses.
This is true for every sport: The sport is overshaddowed and enhanced by the human story. What makes Tiger Wood's golf play so entertaining is the full diynamic of the spectical. Other golfers are playing and they become props for Tiger. The audience gets to compare the performance of the field to Tiger's. We get to see every player's performance and watch the flow of human emotion.
Compare this to pool and its fatal flaw. I say that if any player sits idly in his chair for longer than a few minutes, pool loses.
I agree live film productions of pool tournaments are limited in terms of camera angles.
If pool video producers had a process after they get their footage, like a reality show, a better story could be portrayed through film. The details you noted are frames that enhance the story-telling process. And with a post production process, you can get players to put a personal touch on the commentary about what they were doing and the expectations they had.
It would be instructional and like a personal pool journal for the players.
I'd buy a video with Earl complaining after a tournament about who was "purposely distracting him as he was getting down on a shot."
Last edited: