I paraphrased what you wrote according to what it seemed like you were really trying to say. If I got it wrong I apologize as I certainly don't want to put words into your mouth. After reading this post it still sounds like you are more or less saying the same thing though.
To answer some of your points I would like to start off by pointing out that engineering is not a good example IMO. We need good engineering. As you said things would fall apart without that. We don't however need movies or pool or baseball. They could disappear entirely tomorrow and life wouldn't really change in any meaningful way. So yes, the importance of movies, or pool, or art, or baseball is entirely a preference thing.
I also kind of think you have the horse and the cart backwards for what most typically happens, but maybe I'm wrong. They didn't just make up the game of game of baseball one day, and then immediately start a professional baseball league that same day, and then because people saw those great baseball players that is why they started to play the game. No, what happened is people started playing baseball, and more importantly some people started having an interest in watching baseball, and things progressed organically from there to where we are now. The game started with a few neighbors playing in a vacant field, to neighboring streets forming teams to play each other (with perhaps a few friends and family coming to watch), to towns forming teams to play other nearby towns with even more people interested in watching, and so on until you ultimately had the professional league that traveled all over to play with lots of spectators.
Nobody wants to watch pool though. Nobody looks up to great pool players. Great pool players don't attract new players like you think. Heck, even pool players don't want to watch pool. To attract players in the way you are referring to you have to somehow change pool into a game that looks appealing and exciting so that people want to watch and you gain lots of fans, which will then make people look up to the great players and want to be like them and play the same game that they do. I'm not sure what pool would have to change to get there, but I am sure it would have to be drastic changes, and a lot of them, and it probably wouldn't even remotely resemble what we know as pool today.
Yes it's a bit of a catch 22 but for the most part I don't think good players create a strong pool scene as you said. I think a strong pool scene is what attracts and creates good players, and ultimately if the pool scene becomes big enough and strong enough it can create a decent fan base who want to be spectators, and if the fan base continues to get big enough the strong players will finally be somewhat of a draw that might help attract new players and they will finally be part of what solidifies that already strong pool scene. So no, until you are significantly larger and more successful than pool is, I don't think the strong players matter very much at all except to those that were already involved in pool and were already big pool fans. Hope that all made sense, and all IMO of course.
It's really quite simple I think, and yes I know you don't agree, but look, if you just lost every local tennis tournament and high school tennis events in the USA, it would have a huge impact on the entire tennis scene in the USA. The talent would not be nearly as strong, and there would be decreased levels of overall interest.
That's exactly what leagues have done to pool. I'd bet 8 or 9 out of ten people on here who are over 40 would agree that local pool tournaments have decreased while league operations were increasing. That's obviously what has happened all across the country... tournaments are being replaced by leagues.
This is all analogous to there not being any place for teenage tennis players to compete... not high school, not at the local court... nowhere for meaningful competition (which I don't personally think leagues are meaningful competition btw).
I see what you're saying when you brought up the baseball analogy moving from neighborhood to neighborhood, and what I got out of that is I agree, but I think those competitions between neighborhoods would get extremely fierce one day. That is sort of akin to a good tournament. I feel like the pool leagues are just going to leave the game in this limbo state. It may grow a little, but not in the way a sport could in the example you stated about baseball. The very thought of leagues, as far as I'm concered, brings about feelings of socializing, fun and as far as actual skill level go, mediocrity would be the word.
But you're right I am saying the same thing; that leagues will keep pool in a state of malaise in the USA. And i mean it's not going to get back to even where it was say in the 90's again. Yet I could be wrong no doubt.
Last edited: