TAR, King of the hill, rankings, payouts.

Celtic

Celtic

AZB's own 8-ball jihadist
Silver Member
TAR has often said they are going for a UFC style of ranking system, the winner of the upcomming Archer Bustamente match is going to be the first TAR King of the Hill (aka the champ). People will play to get the right to play that champ and take their crown.

I was talking to a friend of mine about this whole setup and trying to figure out a way to add pressure and excitement to the TAR matches and we both agreed that the SVB/Archer match had way more tension and pressure due to the fact the player who won would get to come back and play the following week for another payday and the pride that comes with having won that right.

Much like the UFC tends to pay more to the champions I was wondering if TAR could eventually get sorted into a ranking system where the lower rank matches pay less money then the higher rank matches.

For the sake of an example lets make up a short imaginary ranking list.

Champion
1) Bustamante

#1 Contender
2) Archer

1st tier
3) SVB
4) Orcullo
5) Morris
6) Deuel

2nd tier
7) Hatch
8) Souquet
9) Hohmann
10) Immonen

In order to play the Champion you need to climb the ranking to the #1 contender position. A championship match pays $6000 to the winner and $2000 to the loser.

Players in tier 1 are playing each other to become the #1 contender. Matches in Tier 1 pay $4000 to the winner and $1000 to the loser.

Players in Tier 2 and playing to move up to Tier 1. Matches in Tier 2 pay $3000 to the winner and $500 to the loser.

This way the players are not only playing for that single payday of the TAR match, they are playing for a chance to move up in the ranks and play more matches for even bigger paydays and also playing for the pride of being in the higher tiers and postions. It adds a huge amount of excitement and pressure over the one off TAR matches.

There would be a ranking system, working something like this example.

Winning a tier 2 match would gain a player 250 ranking points, losing a tier 2 match does not lose any points (this is the lowest division where people with 0 points enter).

Winning a tier 1 match gains a player 500 ranking points, losing a tier 1 match loses 250 points.

Winning the championship match gains you 500 ranking points while losing one loses 1000 ranking points. (This makes it unlikely for two players to dominate the top and become unreachable).

So it could be like this

Champion
Bustamante (2500)

#1 contender
Archer (2000)

1st tier
3) SVB (1500)
4) Orcullo (1000)
5) Morris (800)
6) Deuel (600)

2nd tier
7) Hatch (500)
8) Souquet (400)
9) Hohmann (300)
10) Immonen (0)

The non-champion who is highest in ranking points is always the #1 contender, if two non-champions are tied in ranking points then they must play to determine the #1 contender and who will play for the championship.

Tier 2 players can only play other tier 2 players for the smaller prizes, you must therefore climb the ladder to tier 1.

Tier 1 players play other tier 1 players in an attempt to climb to the "#1 contender" position on the chart and a chance to play for the championship.

The champion is determined by winning a championship match, not ranking points, so if this happens...

Champion
Bustamante (4000)

#1 Contender
SVB (2000)

and SVB wins the match then SVB is the champ despite the fact that the new ranking would look like this...

Champion
SVB (2500)

#1 Contender
Bustamante (3000)

The champion actually has less ranking points then the #1 contender now, possible due to a really dominant stretch by the champion where they won alot of matches, but they still lose their championship by losing the match but the points can likely get them a quick rematch if they were really dominant in their reign.

The whole (losing 1000 points by losing a championship match) thing is what makes sure it is not an endless cycle of two guys playing each other at the top and gives lower people a chance to leap frog the people reaching the top if they lose a championship match.

Points would be viable on a rolling three year window (any result older then 3 years is wiped out) so that it is fairly current results that matter and someone does not build an insurmountable point cushion over decades of play.

I think something like this could work very well for TAR and add alot more excitement and importance to each match and make alot of players alot more keen on getting in the ring to climb the ladder and get up to the big payday positions. It would be extremely exciting for the fans and players alike and TAR could really market the whole thing with important matches having crucial implications for players shifting tiers or getting title shots.
 
I have to admit, this looks pretty interesting.

The continued rotation of top contending players would ensure plenty of excitement and unique matchups, while the influx of new players into the lower tiers would not only provide some drama, but could almost become a training ground for young up and coming players out to prove themselves.

I'd sweat it...

Celtic said:
TAR has often said they are going for a UFC style of ranking system, the winner of the upcomming Archer Bustamente match is going to be the first TAR King of the Hill (aka the champ). People will play to get the right to play that champ and take their crown.

I was talking to a friend of mine about this whole setup and trying to figure out a way to add pressure and excitement to the TAR matches and we both agreed that the SVB/Archer match had way more tension and pressure due to the fact the player who won would get to come back and play the following week for another payday and the pride that comes with having won that right.

Much like the UFC tends to pay more to the champions I was wondering if TAR could eventually get sorted into a ranking system where the lower rank matches pay less money then the higher rank matches.

For the sake of an example lets make up a short imaginary ranking list.

Champion
1) Bustamante

#1 Contender
2) Archer

1st tier
3) SVB
4) Orcullo
5) Morris
6) Deuel

2nd tier
7) Hatch
8) Souquet
9) Hohmann
10) Immonen

In order to play the Champion you need to climb the ranking to the #1 contender position. A championship match pays $6000 to the winner and $2000 to the loser.

Players in tier 1 are playing each other to become the #1 contender. Matches in Tier 1 pay $4000 to the winner and $1000 to the loser.

Players in Tier 2 and playing to move up to Tier 1. Matches in Tier 2 pay $3000 to the winner and $500 to the loser.

This way the players are not only playing for that single payday of the TAR match, they are playing for a chance to move up in the ranks and play more matches for even bigger paydays and also playing for the pride of being in the higher tiers and postions. It adds a huge amount of excitement and pressure over the one off TAR matches.

There would be a ranking system, working something like this example.

Winning a tier 2 match would gain a player 250 ranking points, losing a tier 2 match does not lose any points (this is the lowest division where people with 0 points enter).

Winning a tier 1 match gains a player 500 ranking points, losing a tier 1 match loses 250 points.

Winning the championship match gains you 500 ranking points while losing one loses 1000 ranking points. (This makes it unlikely for two players to dominate the top and become unreachable).

So it could be like this

Champion
Bustamante (2500)

#1 contender
Archer (2000)

1st tier
3) SVB (1500)
4) Orcullo (1000)
5) Morris (800)
6) Deuel (600)

2nd tier
7) Hatch (500)
8) Souquet (400)
9) Hohmann (300)
10) Immonen (0)

The non-champion who is highest in ranking points is always the #1 contender, if two non-champions are tied in ranking points then they must play to determine the #1 contender and who will play for the championship.

Tier 2 players can only play other tier 2 players for the smaller prizes, you must therefore climb the ladder to tier 1.

Tier 1 players play other tier 1 players in an attempt to climb to the "#1 contender" position on the chart and a chance to play for the championship.

The champion is determined by winning a championship match, not ranking points, so if this happens...

Champion
Bustamante (4000)

#1 Contender
SVB (2000)

and SVB wins the match then SVB is the champ despite the fact that the new ranking would look like this...

Champion
SVB (2500)

#1 Contender
Bustamante (3000)

The champion actually has less ranking points then the #1 contender now, possible due to a really dominant stretch by the champion where they won alot of matches, but they still lose their championship by losing the match but the points can likely get them a quick rematch if they were really dominant in their reign.

The whole (losing 1000 points by losing a championship match) thing is what makes sure it is not an endless cycle of two guys playing each other at the top and gives lower people a chance to leap frog the people reaching the top if they lose a championship match.

Points would be viable on a rolling three year window (any result older then 3 years is wiped out) so that it is fairly current results that matter and someone does not build an insurmountable point cushion over decades of play.

I think something like this could work very well for TAR and add alot more excitement and importance to each match and make alot of players alot more keen on getting in the ring to climb the ladder and get up to the big payday positions. It would be extremely exciting for the fans and players alike and TAR could really market the whole thing with important matches having crucial implications for players shifting tiers or getting title shots.
Click to expand...
 
Celtic said:
TAR has often said they are going for a UFC style of ranking system, the winner of the upcomming Archer Bustamente match is going to be the first TAR King of the Hill (aka the champ). People will play to get the right to play that champ and take their crown.

I was talking to a friend of mine about this whole setup and trying to figure out a way to add pressure and excitement to the TAR matches and we both agreed that the SVB/Archer match had way more tension and pressure due to the fact the player who won would get to come back and play the following week for another payday and the pride that comes with having won that right.

Much like the UFC tends to pay more to the champions I was wondering if TAR could eventually get sorted into a ranking system where the lower rank matches pay less money then the higher rank matches.

For the sake of an example lets make up a short imaginary ranking list.

Champion
1) Bustamante

#1 Contender
2) Archer

1st tier
3) SVB
4) Orcullo
5) Morris
6) Deuel

2nd tier
7) Hatch
8) Souquet
9) Hohmann
10) Immonen

In order to play the Champion you need to climb the ranking to the #1 contender position. A championship match pays $6000 to the winner and $2000 to the loser.

Players in tier 1 are playing each other to become the #1 contender. Matches in Tier 1 pay $4000 to the winner and $1000 to the loser.

Players in Tier 2 and playing to move up to Tier 1. Matches in Tier 2 pay $3000 to the winner and $500 to the loser.

This way the players are not only playing for that single payday of the TAR match, they are playing for a chance to move up in the ranks and play more matches for even bigger paydays and also playing for the pride of being in the higher tiers and postions. It adds a huge amount of excitement and pressure over the one off TAR matches.

There would be a ranking system, working something like this example.

Winning a tier 2 match would gain a player 250 ranking points, losing a tier 2 match does not lose any points (this is the lowest division where people with 0 points enter).

Winning a tier 1 match gains a player 500 ranking points, losing a tier 1 match loses 250 points.

Winning the championship match gains you 500 ranking points while losing one loses 1000 ranking points. (This makes it unlikely for two players to dominate the top and become unreachable).

So it could be like this

Champion
Bustamante (2500)

#1 contender
Archer (2000)

1st tier
3) SVB (1500)
4) Orcullo (1000)
5) Morris (800)
6) Deuel (600)

2nd tier
7) Hatch (500)
8) Souquet (400)
9) Hohmann (300)
10) Immonen (0)

The non-champion who is highest in ranking points is always the #1 contender, if two non-champions are tied in ranking points then they must play to determine the #1 contender and who will play for the championship.

Tier 2 players can only play other tier 2 players for the smaller prizes, you must therefore climb the ladder to tier 1.

Tier 1 players play other tier 1 players in an attempt to climb to the "#1 contender" position on the chart and a chance to play for the championship.

The champion is determined by winning a championship match, not ranking points, so if this happens...

Champion
Bustamante (4000)

#1 Contender
SVB (2000)

and SVB wins the match then SVB is the champ despite the fact that the new ranking would look like this...

Champion
SVB (2500)

#1 Contender
Bustamante (3000)

The champion actually has less ranking points then the #1 contender now, possible due to a really dominant stretch by the champion where they won alot of matches, but they still lose their championship by losing the match but the points can likely get them a quick rematch if they were really dominant in their reign.

The whole (losing 1000 points by losing a championship match) thing is what makes sure it is not an endless cycle of two guys playing each other at the top and gives lower people a chance to leap frog the people reaching the top if they lose a championship match.

Points would be viable on a rolling three year window (any result older then 3 years is wiped out) so that it is fairly current results that matter and someone does not build an insurmountable point cushion over decades of play.

I think something like this could work very well for TAR and add alot more excitement and importance to each match and make alot of players alot more keen on getting in the ring to climb the ladder and get up to the big payday positions. It would be extremely exciting for the fans and players alike and TAR could really market the whole thing with important matches having crucial implications for players shifting tiers or getting title shots.
Click to expand...

souqet a 2nd tier player wow dont think so.
2 in your first tier he would be a fav and the other its even.
 
Cool!

Dud, I like this. Dont know if you have reached out to the TAR guys, but you should..., these matches I would watch.
 
I could be wrong about this, but I don't think Celtic meant to imply that Ralph or Mika or anybody else on that list would necessarily be a 2nd tier player and/or start out there.

I think he was just using well known names as place holder's to make a point as to how the system would work.

It could just as easily have been the names of some well known short stops or whomever.

real bartram said:
souqet a 2nd tier player wow dont think so.
2 in your first tier he would be a fav and the other its even.
Click to expand...
 
I'd LOVE to see something like this.

Things you'd have to think about:

1. International logistics. From what I read on here, Busty, Orcullo, etc. isn't always in the country. So, what if it's time for a defense of the TAR title? Is he forced to travel here or does he relinquish the title? Is it worth his while to come halfway around the world? Do you just "play around" that player till he comes back to the U.S.?

I think the international flavor is great. I just wonder if it creates problems at some point.

2. How much pool will people pay for? This almost sounds like there would be a TAR match every weekend. Unless the fee was smaller or there was a one-time yearly fee, etc., I could see a problem with keeping the pay-per-stream numbers up.

A way around that might be to shorten the races. But, that would create griping about who's truly better.

Perhaps the lowest tier level plays a single race to 25 early on a Saturday? Then you have the "main event" that Friday to Sunday evening? But, again, who's going to pay to watch pool for 18 hours straight? And yea, we all say we would, but be realistic. We do have lives. Now, if the stream is looped and there's a log-in code to watch at our leisure, then that's doable.

3. What about a "play-in" set for unknowns? The guy might be a really strong local hero, but largely unknown across the pool world? How does he get in on the action if he wants to make a name for himself?

I'd say if someone wants in, THEY pay an entry fee for the play-in set. As in, they pay a set dollar amount that covers the minimum travel expenses for the lowest rated roster player to get to Vegas. Being realistic $1000. Add $1000 for pay-out. So, a new guy comes up with $2000 to try to join the TAR roster. They get to be streamed and get some great experience. If they win, they're a notch above the lowest rated player (the player that they just beat). Now, that roster player that was beaten.....if he/she loses 2 consecutive play-in matches.....they're out. Off the roster. They have to pay to play another play-in to get back on the roster.

Now, if that original newbie upstart loses their play-in match.....and has NEVER been on the roster before.....they can't come back for 3-6 months. Tell them to go work on their game. That might keep players out that shouldn't be there in the first place.

3. But, all of this begs the questions.....how much hassle does TAR want with the logistics of getting all of these players to come to Vegas to do this? I can't see someone participating in this that has any sort of job, unless you give them a couple of months notice. The hardcore pro's that do nothing BUT shoot pool. Maybe.

4. If, IF.....the premise took off and TAR could handle a small roster and they decide to expand it......advertise how many spots they have open and let players pay to enter a mini-play-in tournament. If 4 spots open up, the first 8 players to pay their entry hook it up in a weekend tournament. Those final 4 make the roster and the higher they finish, the higher they're rated entering the TAR rankings.

5. A whole boatload of crap that only Justin and the TAR crew know about. Egos. Money. Travel. Etc.

Again, I'd sweat something like this every chance I got. Especially if there was a yearly subscription fee that I could just pay and watch every weekend.

I think it's a great idea. I'd just love to hear Justin's thoughts on this or what changes he could make to have this sort of system work.
 
Last edited:
real bartram said:
souqet a 2nd tier player wow dont think so.
2 in your first tier he would be a fav and the other its even.
Click to expand...

Dude......

For the sake of an example lets make up a short imaginary ranking list.
Click to expand...

All made up, lets assume Souquet only just got into it and was still climbing the ranks to his rightful place.
 
Last edited:
King T said:
Dud, I like this. Dont know if you have reached out to the TAR guys, but you should..., these matches I would watch.
Click to expand...

This is as far as my reach extends. Hopefully JCIN reads it and likes it.
 
fathomblue said:
I'd LOVE to see something like this.

Things you'd have to think about:

1. International logistics. From what I read on here, Busty, Orcullo, etc. isn't always in the country. So, what if it's time for a defense of the TAR title? Is he forced to travel here or does he relinquish the title? Is it worth his while to come halfway around the world? Do you just "play around" that player till he comes back to the U.S.?

I think the international flavor is great. I just wonder if it creates problems at some point.
Click to expand...

Yep, it is alot like when the number 1 contender gets injured in the UFC, it goes down to the next highest ranked guy. For the champ I am guessing you would see maybe 3-4 title defenses a year and the rest of the TAR matches would be tier matches.

You have to kind of work with the schedual of the players, which TAR is already fairly good at. You plan matches when guys are coming in for major events such as Dennis having just been here for the last few weeks for the Hard Times and US Open 10-ball or Souquet coming in for the DCC.

fathomblue said:
2. How much pool will people pay for? This almost sounds like there would be a TAR match every weekend. Unless the fee was smaller or there was a one-time yearly fee, etc., I could see a problem with keeping the pay-per-stream numbers up.
Click to expand...

It is a viable concern and I think you nailed a possible solution with the one-time yearly fee or a monthly subscription fee. There would also be the PPV buyin option still there for people who did not want to commit to buying the whole season/year or sign up for the monthly fee.

fathomblue said:
3. What about a "play-in" set for unknowns? The guy might be a really strong local hero, but largely unknown across the pool world? How does he get in on the action if he wants to make a name for himself?
Click to expand...

He would start with 0 at the base of tier 2, everyone starts there, even Souquet if he joined starts there. In order to get ranking points and rise in the rankings you have to play TAR events.

For people getting that shot to even start to play it would likely still be in JCIN's hands on who he feels would draw in viewers and who has proven they have the game to have a shot.

fathomblue said:
I'd say if someone wants in, THEY pay an entry fee for the play-in set. As in, they pay a set dollar amount that covers the minimum travel expenses for the lowest rated roster player to get to Vegas. Being realistic $1000. Add $1000 for pay-out. So, a new guy comes up with $2000 to try to join the TAR roster. They get to be streamed and get some great experience. If they win, they're a notch above the lowest rated player (the player that they just beat). Now, that roster player that was beaten.....if he/she loses 2 consecutive play-in matches.....they're out. Off the roster. They have to pay to play another play-in to get back on the roster.
Click to expand...

That is a possibility, but you don't want players who are truly unqualified to be there simply buying their way into a TAR match, you need to think of the viewers and ask if they really want to watch someone who is truly out of their league play a match like this. I don't mind it still being JCIN calling the shots as to who has earned the right to play.

fathomblue said:
3. But, all of this begs the questions.....how much hassle does TAR want with the logistics of getting all of these players to come to Vegas to do this? I can't see someone participating in this that has any sort of job, unless you give them a couple of months notice. The hardcore pro's that do nothing BUT shoot pool.
Click to expand...

This would in effect BE pro pool if it really took off. It would not be a part time amature sort of venture, this would be the place the best of the best in the sport compete to become the King of the Hill. Those hardcore pros who do nothing but shoot pool is who would and should be playing in this.

fathomblue said:
5. A whole boatload of crap that only Justin and the TAR crew know about. Egos. Money. Travel. Etc.
Click to expand...

On that front I am sure it is business as usual for TAR.

fathomblue said:
Again, I'd sweat something like this every chance I got. Especially if there was a yearly subscription fee that I could just pay and watch every weekend.

I think it's a great idea. I'd just love to hear Justin's thoughts on this or what changes he could make to have this sort of system work.
Click to expand...

Yeah, I hope he sees some merit in it, I too would sign up for my yearly membership instantly.
 
I'm already loving this idea, TAR should start something like this NOW! this adds more excitement and intriguing matchups, the pressure to maintain at the top would be immense!
 
One thought I have is that not all these matches need to be streamed or paid for that matter. We are going to want to have a lot of players involved and paying and streaming them all would take forever.

My high school tennis team had a ladder system and you scheduled a match with a guy ranked higher and you reported who won to the coach.
 
Awesome idea!

I got two words for ya'll:

Championship belt

or

Trophy cue

Some of those antique trophy cues were awesome and I think a modern cuemaker would be honored to put his name and design on one.

Eric
 
The player with the belt should have it resting on his shoulder in interviews like wrestlers then talk smack about their upcoming opponent in wwf fashion.

Also when an up n comer wins a tier match to move up the ladder he could make that hand gesture across his waist to show that a belt should be there.
:)
 
Let's not get out of hand.

At this point, you're making the idea already jump the shark before it's ever even been presented to TAR.

I'm going to hope you're teasing.
 
Great Idea, and hope it turns out and someone makes a run at it...


There could actually be three titles,

One being considered a world title that is open to anyone to hold and win as long as they qualify as per the ranking system used.

The other two would be an East Coast Title and a West Coast Title that is held by a US Citizen.

There can also be an East Coast VRS the West Coast Royal Rumble, like a Mosconi Cup...
 
Good idea and would be very cool to see implemented. Viewers need to support TAR for any of that to even happen. As it is now their plan was one match per month. So 12 matches of expenses they have to cover/get some profit for themselves. Adding in a bunch of match would rapidly increase their out of pocket costs. I had thought about that before thinking it would be nice to see a shortened prematch the weekend of the main event or something to determine who gets winner.

I dont have a clue how many viewers actually pay regularly, but I had an idea of trying to get pool rooms to stream along with individuals. Set a target of getting 10-20 rooms/bars per state to commit to a membership which includes 12 matches per year. Their membership could include some perk to give away--maybe a T-Shirt per event or something. 10 locations per state would be 500 locations which could potentially cover the cost of the match/player expenses. Someone noted that this might hamper individual sales. But at 10 locations per state, how many of those individuals really are getting there? I really feel like this could work or start a good baseline. A $500 membership is not a huge expense for a bar/poolroom. Places like that pay quite a bit more for their entertainment cable packages that they are promoting/showing.

Anyways, I love TAR and look forward to the monthly matches but also see it will be hard to add the sidecar matches to build a true contender system.
 
Perk said:
Good idea and would be very cool to see implemented. Viewers need to support TAR for any of that to even happen. As it is now their plan was one match per month. So 12 matches of expenses they have to cover/get some profit for themselves. Adding in a bunch of match would rapidly increase their out of pocket costs. I had thought about that before thinking it would be nice to see a shortened prematch the weekend of the main event or something to determine who gets winner.

I dont have a clue how many viewers actually pay regularly, but I had an idea of trying to get pool rooms to stream along with individuals. Set a target of getting 10-20 rooms/bars per state to commit to a membership which includes 12 matches per year. Their membership could include some perk to give away--maybe a T-Shirt per event or something. 10 locations per state would be 500 locations which could potentially cover the cost of the match/player expenses. Someone noted that this might hamper individual sales. But at 10 locations per state, how many of those individuals really are getting there? I really feel like this could work or start a good baseline. A $500 membership is not a huge expense for a bar/poolroom. Places like that pay quite a bit more for their entertainment cable packages that they are promoting/showing.

Anyways, I love TAR and look forward to the monthly matches but also see it will be hard to add the sidecar matches to build a true contender system.
Click to expand...

I had thought of something like that as well, Perk. My particular area of the country doesn't have any big pool rooms, however. But, in urban areas, I gotta think this COULD work.

However, what would prevent a pool hall from buying a stream, just like an individual, and then wiring it up to multiple TV's for the whole place to see?

So, how could you force a business to spend a bigger sum than an individual? Maybe there's a way, but I'm just not wrapping my head around it right now.


Justin, if you're reading along.......I hope you realize that any and all of these ideas, from the rock solid to the ridiculous and everything in-between.....are because we DESPERATELY want your promotion to succeed!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top