Thoughts on TAR 21

Island Drive said:
So true, but ESPN's prduction of pool is ''boiler plate'' and hasn't changed much/evolved to make our sport more sellable. Maybe TAR can produce a great product like Matchroom sports and then let ESPN show it, get dollars in perpetuity for the TAR programming and continually make money after the fact.
Click to expand...

Yes I agree,

the most exciting thing to me is the mosconi cup, short races, shot clock, and the crowd is involved. Ohh and partner play which adds to the drama!

back on topic... I consider myself a die hard pool fan. I even PAY to watch streaming online. But a three day race to 100 can get boring, never mind trying to stay up till 4am on the east coast and sweat the match.

IMO we need scotch doubles or a high profile ring games in the future. Fast paced action keeps my interest. Although Alex's kicking and banking game was unbelievable, I would rather watch run outs and packages.
 
lfigueroa said:
They are marketing TAR matches to... wait for it: The Rail Birds. The guys shelling out the money for the PPV have every right to voice their opinion.

Lou Figueroa
Click to expand...

They sure do Lou, all 100 or so of them, but what does that do for pool as a sport, and it's future? If pool was so important to people as a whole, how come the APA & BCAPL members, which totals close to 400,000 members didn't tune in to watch it as well?...maybe it's because they're not "rail birds" like a few of us are, or maybe they just don't care, what do you think? And of those that did watch it, I wonder how many of them set back and said, "I could have made THAT shot", and "why aren't they drawing the cue ball or force following it all over the table to get position, all they're doing is just shooting the balls in, nothing fancy that looks impresive to me"

Well now, maybe that's because they were playing pool the right way by, not taking any chances, not showing off, not taking two rail banks when one rail will do, not spinning the cue ball all over the place because that's a sign of how an amature plays, a Professional gets in line for the next shot so that they DON'T have to run the cue ball all over the place for the next shot. So, how boring IS pool really, to those that are NOT rail birds, to the point that they didn't pay to see the same thing everyone else got to watch?

Now, tell me again how these types of events are going to bring major sponsors and viewers to the table?

Bobby Fisher playing Boris Spasky had more viewers watching him play CHESS that pool has ever had, how come?

Glen
 
lfigueroa said:
My point was that at the level of play exhibited in this match, if the pockets had been more normal, there could have been a 10, 12, 14 pack. And *that* would have had people talking for years.

Lou Figueroa
Click to expand...

the only reason why any of these top players have not yet run 10,12,14 racks it is because of the luck on the break. They are good enough to do that but they can't because of the break. This means the tables where they play on are ridicously easy for them.

I think, if you put SVB with a wide open table and ball in hand he could run more than that.
 
JB Cases said:
The fact is that Shane Van Boeing just came with a great set at the right time on tough equipment. It all gelled. He got in the zone and the pocket size didn't matter.
Click to expand...


Pocket size matters. It's just the guys with small pockets that say otherwise.

Lou Figueroa
have at it :-)
 
realkingcobra said:
They sure do Lou, all 100 or so of them, but what does that do for pool as a sport, and it's future? If pool was so important to people as a whole, how come the APA & BCAPL members, which totals close to 400,000 members didn't tune in to watch it as well?...maybe it's because they're not "rail birds" like a few of us are, or maybe they just don't care, what do you think? And of those that did watch it, I wonder how many of them set back and said, "I could have made THAT shot", and "why aren't they drawing the cue ball or force following it all over the table to get position, all they're doing is just shooting the balls in, nothing fancy that looks impresive to me"

Well now, maybe that's because they were playing pool the right way by, not taking any chances, not showing off, not taking two rail banks when one rail will do, not spinning the cue ball all over the place because that's a sign of how an amature plays, a Professional gets in line for the next shot so that they DON'T have to run the cue ball all over the place for the next shot. So, how boring IS pool really, to those that are NOT rail birds, to the point that they didn't pay to see the same thing everyone else got to watch?

Now, tell me again how these types of events are going to bring major sponsors and viewers to the table?

Bobby Fisher playing Boris Spasky had more viewers watching him play CHESS that pool has ever had, how come?

Glen
Click to expand...


Glen, I didn't know selling TAR to the masses was the issue. I thought we were talking about the rail birds -- the hardcore guys -- that would sign up for this kind of programming. I mean, it seems that even amongst them, many reported falling asleep. So what I was trying to say is that for this demographic, their preferences should be kept in mind if keeping TAR viable is at all a goal. You're never going to get 1,000s signing up for a TAR PPV. You can maybe grow the 100 to 150 or 200, or maybe more, but if you ignore the preferences of the core 100 and start loosing them guys, what are you left with?

Lou Figueroa
if a TAR match happens in the woods
and no one watches it...
 
Slh said:
the only reason why any of these top players have not yet run 10,12,14 racks it is because of the luck on the break. They are good enough to do that but they can't because of the break. This means the tables where they play on are ridicously easy for them.

I think, if you put SVB with a wide open table and ball in hand he could run more than that.
Click to expand...


Fair enough. But the way Shane is developing his break, the luck factor is goin' way down. Shane is doing to the break what Efren did for the kick shot, IMO.

Lou Figueroa
 
We dont put money for the guys to play. They each post an entry and the winner gets all of that money. We do pay for travel expenses and pay both players a fee for the video rights. That model is probably going to die because its just too hard to put the matches together anymore.

We will probably start adding money directly to the middle. Say a $3000 entry from each side with us adding $3000 to the middle. This would give the players a 2-1 shot on their money and give us some input on the format of the matches.

I have been over the reasons behind the race to 100 plenty of times so I wont rehash it here. The race to 100 could die and I wouldn't miss it a bit. I agree with what everyone is saying pretty much about shorter races. My preference is for one day matches with a tennis type scoring system of multiple sets making up a match. Say race to 7 games best three out of five sets. Its better than a race to 21 IMO and no player is ever really out of the set like in a long race. The players however seem to think that idea is right up there with paying taxes. We'll see how it goes.
 
JCIN said:
We dont put money for the guys to play. They each post an entry and the winner gets all of that money. We do pay for travel expenses and pay both players a fee for the video rights. That model is probably going to die because its just too hard to put the matches together anymore.

We will probably start adding money directly to the middle. Say a $3000 entry from each side with us adding $3000 to the middle. This would give the players a 2-1 shot on their money and give us some input on the format of the matches.

I have been over the reasons behind the race to 100 plenty of times so I wont rehash it here. The race to 100 could die and I wouldn't miss it a bit. I agree with what everyone is saying pretty much about shorter races. My preference is for one day matches with a tennis type scoring system of multiple sets making up a match. Say race to 7 games best three out of five sets. Its better than a race to 21 IMO and no player is ever really out of the set like in a long race. The players however seem to think that idea is right up there with paying taxes. We'll see how it goes.
Click to expand...

Perfect......................:thumbup:
 
lfigueroa said:
They are marketing TAR matches to... wait for it: The Rail Birds. The guys shelling out the money for the PPV have every right to voice their opinion.

Lou Figueroa
Click to expand...

You are exactly right Lou. We want to know what people want to see. The pickle we are in is that we do real action matches. That means you have to get a whole bunch of people to agree on a whole bunch of things knowing one side is gonna come out loser when its all said and done.

Its kind like the old joke about a giraffe being a horse designed by committee. We dont always get what we want when the talking is over. We could put up some money for guys to play for and have them play just about any format within reason but it would be something different then. If we knew for sure we could get the same response on a ppv doing that then believe me my life would get much much easier and there would be a whole lot more matches.

I'll think about it awhile and maybe start a thread to get some response about watching a true action match vs two guys playing for a purse put up by a promoter.
 
JCIN said:
I'll think about it awhile and maybe start a thread to get some response about watching a true action match vs two guys playing for a purse put up by a promoter.
Click to expand...

Noooooooo!

Savers suck and exhibitions suck. You guys have the most competitive, exciting live-action pool on the net. Once players start chopping and playing funsies, it no longer is what it is. It's then garbage just like the Gabe/Scott match
 
Bigjohn said:
The players could care less about streaming
Click to expand...


So then the players can go to Hard Times, or any other room, and play on the back table all by their lonesomes. No lights, cameras, commentators, or chat.

No stream or PPV either, which of course their egos could care not one wit about.

Maybe someone will Tweet or text about it afterwards ;-)

Lou Figueroa
 
Last edited:
JCIN said:
You are exactly right Lou. We want to know what people want to see. The pickle we are in is that we do real action matches. That means you have to get a whole bunch of people to agree on a whole bunch of things knowing one side is gonna come out loser when its all said and done.

Its kind like the old joke about a giraffe being a horse designed by committee. We dont always get what we want when the talking is over. We could put up some money for guys to play for and have them play just about any format within reason but it would be something different then. If we knew for sure we could get the same response on a ppv doing that then believe me my life would get much much easier and there would be a whole lot more matches.

I'll think about it awhile and maybe start a thread to get some response about watching a true action match vs two guys playing for a purse put up by a promoter.
Click to expand...

I worked with a guy on doing a program like Nascar, yet with pool players and had it pretty much set up on my player side till the money to put the complete production together fell thru. Weekly show, king of the hill, I can't remember much more about it, tho Johnny Archer was one the players in the group I formed that was on board. It might be worth your while to contact him. I did a production with him in La and I'll never forget, he hired Tony Annagoni to do the color, and all he could say was Tony has ''dirreaha of the mouth''. :D His name slips me, but Jay Helfert too may remember his name, I think now that I'm writing Ed something comes to mind. I know his name is somewhere in my memory, but it was a long time ago, Carter was on the list, also, Parica hummmm. Just haven't thought about it for over 30 yrs it may pop up, he's probably dead by now. Slender man, wore light colored grey suits.

Fugate, ED, just came to mind, Thur AM 5:40
 
Last edited:
JCIN said:
You are exactly right Lou. We want to know what people want to see. The pickle we are in is that we do real action matches. That means you have to get a whole bunch of people to agree on a whole bunch of things knowing one side is gonna come out loser when its all said and done.

Its kind like the old joke about a giraffe being a horse designed by committee. We dont always get what we want when the talking is over. We could put up some money for guys to play for and have them play just about any format within reason but it would be something different then. If we knew for sure we could get the same response on a ppv doing that then believe me my life would get much much easier and there would be a whole lot more matches.

I'll think about it awhile and maybe start a thread to get some response about watching a true action match vs two guys playing for a purse put up by a promoter.
Click to expand...


It is a tough spot, not doubt, Justin. I sometimes think the players have too much leverage or say so. They need to take into consideration your requirements for a successful feed too. You've got a great product. Things need to fall into a more equitable line.

Lou Figueroa
 
realkingcobra said:
They sure do Lou, all 100 or so of them, but what does that do for pool as a sport, and it's future? If pool was so important to people as a whole, how come the APA & BCAPL members, which totals close to 400,000 members didn't tune in to watch it as well?...maybe it's because they're not "rail birds" like a few of us are, or maybe they just don't care, what do you think? And of those that did watch it, I wonder how many of them set back and said, "I could have made THAT shot", and "why aren't they drawing the cue ball or force following it all over the table to get position, all they're doing is just shooting the balls in, nothing fancy that looks impresive to me"

Well now, maybe that's because they were playing pool the right way by, not taking any chances, not showing off, not taking two rail banks when one rail will do, not spinning the cue ball all over the place because that's a sign of how an amature plays, a Professional gets in line for the next shot so that they DON'T have to run the cue ball all over the place for the next shot. So, how boring IS pool really, to those that are NOT rail birds, to the point that they didn't pay to see the same thing everyone else got to watch?

Now, tell me again how these types of events are going to bring major sponsors and viewers to the table?

Bobby Fisher playing Boris Spasky had more viewers watching him play CHESS that pool has ever had, how come?

Glen
Click to expand...

#1 these events are not pretending to be about bringing major sponsors to the table.

#2 watching pool is on the same level as watching paint dry even for most pool players. Only die hard fans really get into it and can appreciate what they are watching.

#3 The reason chess was broadcast around the world is because the networks saw potential in the USA/Russia cold war conflict played out on the chessboard and back then chess was seen as the ultimate test of mental prowess. Basically anytime the networks thinks that they can sell ads by promoting a conflict then they put that conflict on TV. Mosconi-Fats????

Now there are 1000 channels and all the content every produced available on-demand all the time. Pool is a niche of a niche of a niche in today's world. For you it's your whole world because you happen to be the only table mechanic who spends weeks making tables into microcosms of perfection. For the world at large pool is something that exists on the fringe of their consciousness. They appreciate it when they see someone who can play half-decent and then turn back to their conversations about football and the economy.

TAR rocks balls pure and simple because they are not TRYING to be pool's savior. They are trying to put together heads-up matches on video professionally. To that end they have 21 such matches in the can and hundreds of hours more of informal "action" that just happened.

Celebrate that because it's ****ing truly something great.
 
realkingcobra said:
You really can't help yourself can you, as some people like you have such a big mouth behind a computer screen, in person it's always a different story:cool:
Click to expand...

Have you ever met me? If I have something to say, I'll say it. I'm a lot of things, but scared is not one of them.
 
lfigueroa said:
So then the players can go to Hard Times, or any other room, and play on the back table all by their lonesomes. No lights, cameras, commentators, or chat.

No stream or PPV either, which of course their egos could care not one wit about.

Maybe someone will Tweet or text about it afterwards ;-)

Lou Figueroa
Click to expand...

Bingo!... when the players are putting up all the cash... they don't give a rats ass about streaming
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top