SVB featured on 60 min (dropped 10 hrs ago)

[sjm]

Better than the Hustler? Whatsa matter with you?

Although I love it, I don't think that The Hustler is a pool movie. It's better described as a soul-searching drama about how much one has to give up to be a successful predator on the money-making circuit. Pool was its backdrop, but anything could have been the backdrop to a movie like this.

Color of Money is a pool movie that examines every aspect of making money at pool, both ethical and unethical, and offers a comprehensive look at the pool scene.

 

[overlord]

Just watched it. Isn't this merely an excerpt from last year's piece?

Emily was the one who really made the piece work. She made it clear that having pool players make enough money in competition that they won't need to gamble is the dream, not the reality. I think Emily is right in suggesting that once prize money rises significantly, pool's profile will grow, and its best players will become household names.

Lest we forget, none of us would know the names of Steve Davis, Steve Hendry and Ronnie O'Sullivan had it not been for Matchroom. Their names didn't grow because viewers came to admire the inherent beauty of snooker but because they came to view the cueists as extraordinarily successful sportsmen.

Shane's mild denunciation of action pool, extremely hypocritical by any reasonable measure, cannot be viewed as anything but an attempt to demonstrate that the top players are buying in to realization of the world of which Emily dreams. I give him a pass here.

60 minutes is supposed to be a news show and more and more news is fake and that's the problem.

To have SVB denounce action is like having the former Orson Welles denounce food.

Most of the romance in pool is centered around playing for money.

Playing for money is not really gambling in the sense of rolling dice down a craps table or spinning a roulette wheel.

No one goes out to Las Vegas which is a corporate gambling Mecca and lectures them about appearances.

I think it's great that Matchroom is getting behind pool and I hope they are successful in lifting the profile of the game.

That being said, we need more pool rooms or we won't have a sport left.

 

[King T]

Although I love it, I don't think that The Hustler is a pool movie. It's better described as a soul-searching drama about how much one has to give up to be a successful predator on the money-making circuit. Pool was its backdrop, but anything could have been the backdrop to a movie like this.

Color of Money is a pool movie that examines eveyy aspect of making money at pool, both ethical and unethical, and offers a comprehensive look at the pool scene.

I love the Hustler, but your right!

 

[Buddy]

Ok so who hit Shane in the chest with a pool ball?

 

[Rocket354]

Although I love it, I don't think that The Hustler is a pool movie. It's better described as a soul-searching drama about how much one has to give up to be a successful predator on the money-making circuit. Pool was its backdrop, but anything could have been the backdrop to a movie like this.

Color of Money is a pool movie that examines every aspect of making money at pool, both ethical and unethical, and offers a comprehensive look at the pool scene.

I like that distinction. I was lukewarm on TCoM, but it's still the second-best pool movie around...first if you discount The Hustler. The Hustler is just a great movie, period. It's the only movie about pool that I recommend to anyone. It's a character study/drama which involves pool.

 

[Rocket354]

It's like the "Say nice things about Detroit" campaign. Here's how you address it. When 60-minutes puts a TV camera in front of your face you talk about Mosconi Cup, Predator World Championships in Puerto Rico, FSR having a dream year, Fedor winning over American hearts while banned, SVB on a hunt for a sixth US Open, Savannah Easton playing on the women's professional circuit, Niels getting elected into the hall of fame, Philippines reclaiming the world cup of pool, etc. and nothing else. You don't lie about your bruises but you don't bring them up either. Because honestly in my opinion the things I just listed outshine those bruises in 2023 by a factor of 1,000,000:1 when you actually view pool from the inside.

I agree 100%. But many people who have a perception of pool as a, to borrow a phrase, wretched hive of scum and villainy, and they will not care the slightest about what's getting reported--they'll tune it all out. They need to have their perceptions to some degree validated, and only then can those perceptions be budged. "Yes, this is how pool was, but now it's a legit sport under the professional eye of Matchroom." Only then might they pay attention to all the positives going on.

I'm not saying focusing on the negatives should be a permanent part of the sales brochure. But there needs to be a transitionary period wherein the message isn't that people are wrong (thus getting tuned out immediately), but simply allows them to see that the game is changing and evolving for the better.

 

[MattPoland]

I agree 100%. But many people who have a perception of pool as a, to borrow a phrase, wretched hive of scum and villainy, and they will not care the slightest about what's getting reported--they'll tune it all out. They need to have their perceptions to some degree validated, and only then can those perceptions be budged. "Yes, this is how pool was, but now it's a legit sport under the professional eye of Matchroom." Only then might they pay attention to all the positives going on.

I'm not saying focusing on the negatives should be a permanent part of the sales brochure. But there needs to be a transitionary period wherein the message isn't that people are wrong (thus getting tuned out immediately), but simply allows them to see that the game is changing and evolving for the better.

I can appreciate the logic of that. However. That “transition messaging” you’re describing is more likely to pick old scabs than it is to heal. Not that I’m here to give marital advice but that’s been my experience in that front as well and I think it’s apt here too.

 

[jay helfert]

So here's the reality whether you like it or not. JMHO as always. If you made a movie/documentary about backroom gambling with all the woofing, handicapping, arguing, and big money on the line, THAT would be a hit with the public! Better that it be real, as in live shots from real action rooms, perhaps following a couple of high rolling hustlers (Chohan and ?) as they make their way across the country chasing action.

This is the world we live in today where people want to see the underside of life and people surviving in a counter culture that is totally contrary to what most people know. So no I don't agree that we need to hide anything about the pool world. Take another look at The Hustler. It was as down and dirty as it gets, and it sparked a huge boom in pool. Same could be said for TCOM. As far as the 60 Minutes segment goes, I think Emily did a better job than me in explaining where pro pool was headed. They didn't need both of us saying the same things. Plus, she's a lot prettier than me, has a pleasing personality, throw in her delightful English accent and I'm onboard.

 

[skogstokig]

60 minutes is supposed to be a news show and more and more news is fake and that's the problem.

To have SVB denounce action is like having the former Orson Welles denounce food.

do people even watch these kind of magazine programmes anymore? i mean people barely watch broadcast TV full stop. i think we can rule out that any significant number of young potential players put their phones away for an hour to watch this. but i guess there's an off-chance that an aging, potential sponsor took to shane and his story, or emily's drive.

i think a netflix documentary of the same length just following shane around would do significantly better. shane is a character, and he's funny in a laconic way ("obama? he can't beat me"). then there's the other types of netflix sports documentary series that have raised the interest for various sports insanely, such as formula 1: drive to survive, the last dance and noami osaka. imagine a similar documentary on pool..

 

[maha]

people always are enamored with gambling and gambling events and stories. look at all the money bet on sports. nfl has billions bet on it illegally and now legally. bookies put up lines on most sports. that is what the general population is interested in.

not some uninteresting guy running racks of nine ball.

if you think pool tournaments will ever get to real large numbers, it isnt going to happen. it only will happen if the entry fees get huge and betting becomes part of it. so then it becomes exciting.

think about poker. it is analogous to pool. a very uninteresting game to watch unless the public gets involved in the action or with it in their hearts.

they have to have idols and interesting people to love and hate other wise its just a flop. poker did it and pool doesnt want it.

 

[Donkeybutt]

Netflix should do a mini-series similar to Queen's Gambit for pool. Make the story about a young orphan girl prodigy that eventually makes it to the top and beats Shane. "The Safety Gambit"

 

[overlord]

I agree 100%. But many people who have a perception of pool as a, to borrow a phrase, wretched hive of scum and villainy, and they will not care the slightest about what's getting reported--they'll tune it all out. They need to have their perceptions to some degree validated, and only then can those perceptions be budged. "Yes, this is how pool was, but now it's a legit sport under the professional eye of Matchroom." Only then might they pay attention to all the positives going on.

I'm not saying focusing on the negatives should be a permanent part of the sales brochure. But there needs to be a transitionary period wherein the message isn't that people are wrong (thus getting tuned out immediately), but simply allows them to see that the game is changing and evolving for the better.

The way I see it, there is less and less sneaking up on marks going on in today's pool world.

In the room I used to play in for a decade and a half, there was always one pocket action and you could get a game 90% of the time.

Everybody played out in front of a gallery of folks watching. The speed of the players that were regulars was clocked.

Occasionally someone would show up that nobody had seen before that was really a fine player but that was fairly rare.

Ego is what makes folks lose money. Money never lies but your ego will tell you big stinkers.

Folks have no chance in Vegas but they don't think the folks that run casinos are villains.

 

[Black-Balled]

They flew me back to New York for this segment on 60 Minutes. I did a six hour interview with Jon Wertheim where I was repeatedly asked about my gambling background and history as a money player (the producers and Jon had read my book Pool Wars). I chose not to go into depth with my answers and instead focused on the progress that had been made in the professional area of our sport. They cut my entire segment from the final show that aired.

In hindsight I could have blown my own horn and given them some interesting stories about my life on the road, but chose not to. I really believed they would see the value in what I was telling them about how much pro pool had changed for the better. My mistake.

Disagree. You made the right choice, as unentertaining as it may have been found.

I wouldn't be a jump to believe you would have been portrayed as precisely the seedy side that kept pool in the gutter since 1846.

 

[briankenobi]

With regards to poker, I think poker blew up because a "non pro" won the WSOP main event. Anyone can learn the game in about an hour and then start playing. Not that way with pool. You can't pick it up as fast and then play with the games best. Poker grew like crazy because anyone can play it.

 

[Philthepockets]

Just watched it. Isn't this merely an excerpt from last year's piece?

Emily was the one who really made the piece work. She made it clear that having pool players make enough money in competition that they won't need to gamble is the dream, not the reality. I think Emily is right in suggesting that once prize money rises significantly, pool's profile will grow, and its best players will become household names.

Lest we forget, none of us would know the names of Steve Davis, Steve Hendry and Ronnie O'Sullivan had it not been for Matchroom. Their names didn't grow because viewers came to admire the inherent beauty of snooker but because they came to view the cueists as extraordinarily successful sportsmen.

Shane's mild denunciation of action pool, extremely hypocritical by any reasonable measure, cannot be viewed as anything but an attempt to demonstrate that the top players are buying in to realization of the world of which Emily dreams. I give him a pass here.

Just making a slight historical correction In the 70's and 80's the top snooker players were already household names well before Matchroom took over in 2010, they took over when snookers sponsorship was drying up.

 

[Rocket354]

With regards to poker, I think poker blew up because a "non pro" won the WSOP main event. Anyone can learn the game in about an hour and then start playing. Not that way with pool. You can't pick it up as fast and then play with the games best. Poker grew like crazy because anyone can play it.

I have to disagree with that narrative, although I know it's a common one. Poker was already on the upswing in 2003 when Chris Moneymaker won, and in 2002 another amateur, Robert Varkonyi, won to little fanfare. What also happened in 2003 that really created a boom in TV popularity (and therefore, in-person participation) was the addition of cameras for people's hole cards. Before that no one knew what people had until and unless the cards were turned over after the hand. Being able to actually see the cards the entire hand made poker a true spectator sport game. Moneymaker's win was just icing on the cake, as it allowed people to rightfully conclude that literally anyone could win.

 

[JustPlay]

They really should have done the segment with Emily of MatchRoom Sports. She smiled the whole time, 100% positive about the direction that pocket billiards was going in and gave some needed excitement to pool. Maybe sprinkled in the success of Snooker players or European pocket billiards and its success. MattPoland did say it seemed like a pity part and I agree. If it wasn't for the influx of European & Asian players since about 2005 ish, American pool players and tournaments would mostly be extinct. The top players are making 6 figures from tournaments and more from sponsorships. There is only one American player at the top and that is SVB consistently. I guess there is Cornhole. They have a canned bean company sponsoring them. Thanks for reading.

 

[Banger]

I have to disagree with that narrative, although I know it's a common one. Poker was already on the upswing in 2003 when Chris Moneymaker won, and in 2002 another amateur, Robert Varkonyi, won to little fanfare. What also happened in 2003 that really created a boom in TV popularity (and therefore, in-person participation) was the addition of cameras for people's hole cards. Before that no one knew what people had until and unless the cards were turned over after the hand. Being able to actually see the cards the entire hand made poker a true spectator sport game. Moneymaker's win was just icing on the cake, as it allowed people to rightfully conclude that literally anyone could win.

I first started playing poker in Las Vegas, back in the 1990's. I was playing at the Mirage one day (it was really the only place to play, back then), while the World Series was going on, when someone joined the game and said: "Have you heard that 300 people signed up for the main event this year?" And someone else replied, that they never thought they would see the day when they could get 300 people to put up $10,000 to play in a poker tournament.

Times sure have changed.

 

[sjm]

Just making a slight historical correction In the 70's and 80's the top snooker players were already household names well before Matchroom took over in 2010, they took over when snookers sponsorship was drying up.

Thanks for that. I should have said "those who got snooker on BBC Television TV." As noted, the first time I ever watched it on BBC was in 1989.

 

[Nick B]

I have to disagree with that narrative, although I know it's a common one. Poker was already on the upswing in 2003 when Chris Moneymaker won, and in 2002 another amateur, Robert Varkonyi, won to little fanfare. What also happened in 2003 that really created a boom in TV popularity (and therefore, in-person participation) was the addition of cameras for people's hole cards. Before that no one knew what people had until and unless the cards were turned over after the hand. Being able to actually see the cards the entire hand made poker a true spectator sport game. Moneymaker's win was just icing on the cake, as it allowed people to rightfully conclude that literally anyone could win.

Absolutely. Every poker player alive should be sending residual checks to the family of the guy who thought up the holecam.