The future of pool / perfect tournament structure?

[TheOne]

I've played in Reno, too. The point of the tournament is to create a lot of room-nights for the hotel and to have a lot of pool players in the casino. From the point of view of the hotel, the tournament is efficient. I'm not saying that's bad, it's just business. The Sands gives great room rates and puts lots of added money in every six months and has for a long time. For relatively local players, the tournament is wonderful.

Hi Bob, I agree its a fine tounrmanet and I can see that the money comes from the hotel. I just think that its all wrong that the players should be funding these events. I asked Efren after he whooped me if he was off to the BCA open and he said its not worth it because of the prize money. I mentioned that other events such as Reno where around the same time but he didn't seem that bothered. Wouldn't it be better to get the BEST players in the country / world together in more events. I have to be honest I expected the Reno event to be much better quality but there where only a small number of players that where capable of winning it and from what I can tell not as many top pro's as there used to be.

BTW I'm not picking on Reno, I'm just using it as an example as it was a long tournament (about a week) with a top heavy payouts and little chance for more than a handful of players to break even let alone win money. I can't imagine how a pool player could afford to go to 12 events like this per year unless they where sponsored

 

[Jersey]

Actually the tournament I just played in Bangkok had 8 groups of 5 players and the group stage (race to 5's) where all played on one day. Each group got there own table and match times. Then the second day they play down from the last 16 single elim. It worked really well and there where lots of entries that had no hope to win and the entry was $20 which is fairly steep for Thai's.

For example the Reno event has around 200 entries. I think the Reno event has 16 tables (or maybe 15). If there where 32 groups of 6 players each table could handle two groups and they played round robing race to 5 matches everyone would be garuanteed 4 matches with a field of upto 192 runners.
You could eaither have the group winner or top 2 going onto a single elim last 32 or 64 on the weekend. Maybe you could even have 32 seeded players and put a "pro" in each group so everyone gets to play one

This might take just as long as the current event though but you would get more gamesa and maybe a better climax? Just some ideas

To:

The One,

?...are you a PRO/AM player?...or just an 'International Man of Leisure', with a love of Billiards & a lot of time on your hands?...

I find your stories of travel and play entertaining...

 

[Bob Jewett]

... top heavy payouts and little chance for more than a handful of players to break even let alone win money. I can't imagine how a pool player could afford to go to 12 events like this per year unless they where sponsored

It's not your imagination that's deficient.

For all but a small handful of players, pool is an expensive hobby. There's nothing wrong with interesting, expensive hobbies. If there were more money in the game, say like snooker was in the 1980's, it would be better for the top players, but something would be lost, as someone else has pointed out. At Derby City, I have a chance to play against the current and ten or 15 former World Champions (however you might define that). Maybe that's better than the current situation in golf or tennis, at least from the point of view of the hobby player.

 

[Jersey]

except for the APA..........i personally don't think there's all this money in the billiards industry that people keep talking about.

you have the APA, Cuetec, muecci.......etc........the larger companies, they make the most money in the billiards industry, but do you think they actually make all that much? i don't think they do.

even if they do, why would they put their money into tournaments? they are doing fine right now, why "throw away" money.

i'm all for more money and better tournaments, but for a company to put money up, they have to have a reason.

Hilton tried it, found out it wouldn't work.

if you were pitching the idea to a company, billiards related or not, what would you tell them to make giving thier money up worthwhile?

VAP

I agree, it wouldn't be an easy sell...but, for companies it would be about expansion, (isn't it always), there are people out there to be reached, who may after some exposure to the game in a form or personality that they can relate to, might purchase goods...let's face it, we, (AZB types), will die someday, the industry will live without us, but not without new customers, players and industry/business partners...to be successful in the long run business must continue to open markets...now Billiards couldn't do it like the addictive product makers, i.e. pharms, cigs and booze, but do it, it must...and to do it will take vision, partners and $$$...

 

[TheOne]

To:

The One,

?...are you a PRO/AM player?...or just an 'International Man of Leisure', with a love of Billiards & a lot of time on your hands?...

I find your stories of travel and play entertaining...

LOL, thanks I'm pleased you like some of my comments. I'm afraid I'm posting a bit more than usual at the moment as I'm "stuck" in a hotel room in Pattaya, Thailand with a free wireless connection and a crap tip on my cue! I'm trying to sort a flight back to the UK and squeeze a tournament in on the way. I can't stand flying somewhere long haul and not taking advantage of the "free" stopovers!

I played snooker / 8 ball full time in the early 90's but I all but gave it up for many years until I went to the BCA event in Vegas 2 years ago and fell in love with pool again. Incedently I gave up pool 10 years ago because there was little money in it and the tournaments in the UK where pretty small and dull, I quit my IT job in Australia in December to travel and play more pool. However I am still playing relatively little and I'm a million miles away from how I used to play

 

[sniper]

I like how the Euro Tour is ran and I think it is a possiblemodel for success. Play a group stage where each player gets in several matches and have a final 32 qualify for the Single elimination part of the tournament, I think it's an effective alternative to double elimination. It has certainly worked for the Euro tour just look at the participation levels, a couple years ago they were getting approximately 180 players a stop, now their pulling in around 220 players a stop including the newly formed womens tour.

 

[Williebetmore]

I love the idea of a prize for high run. If I ever
win the lottery for an obscene amount of money I
would hold a straight pool invitational for the 32
best players in the world. Single elimination, but
the games would be to something like 300 points with
a huge first prize and a big prize for high run of
the tournament. That ought to be incentive for these
guys to come up with some big runs.

I'd do something similiar for 9-ball. There's nothing
quite like watching Earl string 6 or 7 racks
together

Bobby,
I have the same fantasy, but since it seems unlikely I'm hoping to convince some rich businessmen in Indy to sponsor at least a one-time major straight pool event - a few nibbles so far. Could you possibly be the Bobby H. that I saw on my Sigel vs. Mizerak Accu-Stats straight pool tape (applauding Sigels 108 ball run at the next table)?

Now as far as 9-ball goes; its fun to watch but a damn poor way to differentiate the best players (unless we add judges to give "degree of difficulty" scores). This single elimination is a terrible idea for 9-ball - if we're going to single elimination then why not change it to 3- ball, or perhaps just paper/rock/scissors (I guess there is no market for professional coin toss tournaments, we have to make it slightly more complicated).

 

[TheOne]

I like how the Euro Tour is ran and I think it is a possiblemodel for success. Play a group stage where each player gets in several matches and have a final 32 qualify for the Single elimination part of the tournament, I think it's an effective alternative to double elimination. It has certainly worked for the Euro tour just look at the participation levels, a couple years ago they were getting approximately 180 players a stop, now their pulling in around 220 players a stop including the newly formed womens tour.

I agree sniper, this is one of the other places I have scene it apart from the world championships. I prefer the idea of smaller races round robin and then single elim in the last 16/32 depending on size. Its good for the spectators, its good for the players and it would also be good for TV. Snooker has always had tons of qualifying rounds for years but the "TV stage" has only ever started from the last 16/32.

I don't think this format will add length to a tournament as there races would be shorter even if there are more games.

With rergards to making single elim making 9ball even more of a lottery I'm not so sure. I hear what your saying and I agree to a certain extent, but tell me why do players like EFren always finish at the money end of the tournment playing 9 ball, surely because of his/there talent and not because they get "two" chances? After all he dominated the SM tour and that was single elim? Maybe making it single elim would propel the sport to a new level and make everyone up there game? For the short stops and field fillers, lets not forget about them and have a group stage

 

[Bobby]

Bobby,
I have the same fantasy, but since it seems unlikely I'm hoping to convince some rich businessmen in Indy to sponsor at least a one-time major straight pool event - a few nibbles so far. Could you possibly be the Bobby H. that I saw on my Sigel vs. Mizerak Accu-Stats straight pool tape (applauding Sigels 108 ball run at the next table)?

Now as far as 9-ball goes; its fun to watch but a damn poor way to differentiate the best players (unless we add judges to give "degree of difficulty" scores). This single elimination is a terrible idea for 9-ball - if we're going to single elimination then why not change it to 3- ball, or perhaps just paper/rock/scissors (I guess there is no market for professional coin toss tournaments, we have to make it slightly more complicated).

No, I'm not Bobby H.

Is that Bobby Hunter you're referring to?

 

[Williebetmore]

No, I'm not Bobby H.

Is that Bobby Hunter you're referring to?

Yes, damn!!! I was hoping you were he. In the next year or so I hope to make a pool playing trip to NYC, and it would have been cool to have a way to meet him (no offense, I just have heard a lot about him).

 

[Bob Jewett]

... With rergards to making single elim making 9ball even more of a lottery I'm not so sure. I hear what your saying and I agree to a certain extent, ...

It's easy enough to do the math. What is important is how effective the format is in separating the wheat from the chaff, nine-ball-wise. Clearly race-to-one single elimination is not good at getting the good players to the top, but it is good for the second- and third-level players. Race to 120 is a good test but too long for most situations, and in the only case I know of, it basically said that the two players were equal, within the margin of error.

If the single- and double-elimination tournaments are played to the same match lengths, then I think the double gives Efren a better chance to win. But if the single is played to 50% more games for each match, I suspect (without doing the tedious math) that the single elimination is actually more effective in finding the real champ.