Shane Van Boening on 60 Minutes?

S

SPetty

AzB Silver Member
Silver Member
I came here to find out what y'all know about it, and can't find anything here. Please accept my apology if you already know about this...

Tonight on CBS at 7pm Central Time, there's this description for 60 Minutes. WTH is 60 Minutes doing on a Wednesday?

1690412957595.jpeg
 
Last edited:
Yes, the Shane segment on 60 minutes was, perhaps, pool's highlight of 2022 from a marketing standpoint. His is a gripping human interest story. The package was wrapped up neatly when Emily shared her ambitious plans for the sport. Not to be taken likely is that Emily foresees a day in which the top players won't need to gamble to supplement the income available from competition. This should sit well with parents of players and potential players. Casual players and those who don't play at all were put on notice that pro pool is becoming a more prestigious and more lucrative endeavor.

Is the growth we all hope for within reach? We won't know for quite a while, but this piece on "60 Minutes" can only help.
 
Last edited:
I watched it again, thanks for the link Jam. That was a fun watch for sure, I was smiling the whole time.

It's funny though, the only reason Shane rarely gambles now is he can't get a game, ha ha. Maybe he was referring to the "road" aspect of gambling drunk strangers. We all know better, he's gambled a ton, and even became first widely known on TAR 1.

The comment from Emily about pool players under her watch won't "need" to gamble might very well become true. In golf, the professionals don't gamble at the game, their tournaments and sponsorships make them all wealthy. However, the club players still gamble all the time. I could see pool like that, and I think that would be a great mix.
 
I'm not so sure about gambling. To me when Shane or anyone bets money on themselves it's a "Wager." My skill against your skill, mano e' mano so to speak. This is not flipping coins or drawing high card, it's a game of skill and a wager on yourself. It could be for a basket of tomatoes or $10K same thing. We see from the last dance with Michael Jordan how gambling or wagering took place all the time in professional basketball. So let's leave the pool players alone and let them wager after all we all love those PPV matches amongst the top players, don't we?
 
Yeah, I'll say for me personally, I started playing pool about 13 years old in the early 90's. I had no idea what pro pool was, didn't have cable at home for ESPN, and never saw a pro match until a few years later. At the pool hall there was the paper magazine that I'd flip through once in a while. I liked the cues more than the pro coverage. I had no idea pro players could not make a living.

Yet, all I cared about was beating my "buddy" for a few bucks! It wasn't about winning money. It was the pride of winning, and money was just a vehicle to that. If pros became multi-millionaires, I don't think the gambling at the local level could ever be separated, nor should it. IMO. It might go away at the top level, simply because "pride" would be WAY better measured amongst them with trophies, rather than money matchups.
 
Baby Huey said:
I'm not so sure about gambling. To me when Shane or anyone bets money on themselves it's a "Wager." My skill against your skill, mano e' mano so to speak. This is not flipping coins or drawing high card, it's a game of skill and a wager on yourself. It could be for a basket of tomatoes or $10K same thing. We see from the last dance with Michael Jordan how gambling or wagering took place all the time in professional basketball. So let's leave the pool players alone and let them wager after all we all love those PPV matches amongst the top players, don't we?
Click to expand...
A reasonable post, but in a best-case scenario, these PPV matches could go on but without players being at risk for a single dollar. If the pool players become big stars, they'll demand nothing less and they'll get it, too. For example, $5,000 to the winner and $2,500 to the loser. Today, pros gamble because they have to in order to make a better living at pool, but that can change at some point.
 
Maybe a good way to explain it is this....

Bet on yourself, it's a wager.
Betting on someone else, its gambling.
 
sjm said:
A reasonable post, but in a best-case scenario, these PPV matches could go on but without players being at risk for a single dollar. If the pool players become big stars, they'll demand nothing less and they'll get it, too. For example, $5,000 to the winner and $2,500 to the loser. Today, pros gamble because they have to in order to make a better living at pool, but that can change at some point.
Click to expand...
If pool really got to high level, these one on one matches could be worth 100 thousand. Shane and Filler could be #1 and #2 after a year of tournament play, trading trophies all season. Emily sets up a 1-1 match with them to settle "who is best", for all the fans, broadcast worldwide. That's a far stretch:) But maybe one day:)
 
iusedtoberich said:
If pool really got to high level, these one on one matches could be worth 100 thousand. Shane and Filler could be #1 and #2 after a year of tournament play, trading trophies all season. Emily sets up a 1-1 match with them to settle "who is best", for all the fans, broadcast worldwide. That's a far stretch:) But maybe one day:)
Click to expand...
I don't see it. Once a sport "arrives" there is no need for this. In golf, there are two guys who've been trading places for the number one ranking of late, and that's Rahm and Scheffler. Who needs a one-on-one between them to decide who's best, and would a head-to-head match really resolve anything? They'll decide who is best in tournament play, and that's as it should be.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top