Thoughts on TAR 21

wincardona said:
Pool needs a shot in the arm and it's got to come from somewhere, there's something missing with pool to create the interest to put it over the top. This type of a format could possibly do that. I understand that with this format you would need an official at every table but there's nothing wrong with using it for the semi and final matches.

The average time it takes for a race to say eleven games is about 1-1/2 hrs. So that would put a race to 15 at 2 hrs. What's wrong with using this format using a two hr. match with a 25 second shot clock between shots? This would offer TV an exact time allotment. You can lengthen or shorten the time allotted to fit into whatever time allotment requested.Therefore the length of a match will never be mismanaged, which would make it more appealing for TV.

I really would like to see TAR do a match using this format. TAR would be a perfect vehicle to test this format.

How about the best two out of three 1 hr. sets using this format? With sets this short (1 hr.) we will be able to see the excitement that close finishes will create.

Has all the makings for success.:thumbup:

Billy I.
Click to expand...

I mentioned I worked with Ed Fugate producer from (TN) yrs ago, about a format, where weekly you have a king of the hill and each week another player steps up to play against the prior weeks winner. He envisioned it as a Nascar type seeding formant. Advertise it, American against the Russian, or China against Japan, Croation vs Frenchman etc. utilizing the country to instill interest worldwide to generate the viewership numbers needed to put advertising into the mix. I still think matches running an hour for the general public at the beginning are too long. Heck, seems like Speed Pool has a slight buzz, but it won't stand the test of time.
 
paksat said:
1. Pockets are to tight.. like I said in another thread, let the horses freaking run. I want packages man, big f'n ones. I want to see players hitting gears where you can't even looking away because he's in such a God mode.
Click to expand...

It is not "god mode" on buckets. IMO running a 7-pack on the table they used impressed me way more then if he had run a 12 or 15 pack on a 4.5 inch pocket table.

What people need to keep in mind is that cut of pocket is not the norm atm, but if the players got used to those, after already seeing Shane start putting out some serious packages on that thing, the pro's would get pretty friggin good on those things once they got used to them if they became the norm. And if they can get THAT good on equipment like that it makes no sense to want to keep them on easier equipment that if anything screws the top players over because now instead of 10 people in the world being able to run a 10-pack on the pro table 200 people can and the best players in a match get screwed by the ease of the equipment being easy enough to let a lesser player run a set out or take full advantage of one perfect break that happend to get kissed into a pocket.
 
JAM said:
If you don't have to depend on it for your income, it is truly a beautiful view from the outside looking in.
Click to expand...

Sorry JAM. Nobody HAS to depend on pool for their income. I would also say that nobody HAS to depend on table-tennis, badminton, checkers, or even poker for their income. If someone is unable to make a living at a certain endeavor they need to move on to something that can feed the family.

I ain't mad at you though. :)
 
BasementDweller said:
Sorry JAM. Nobody HAS to depend on pool for their income. I would also say that nobody HAS to depend on table-tennis, badminton, checkers, or even poker for their income. If someone is unable to make a living at a certain endeavor they need to move on to something that can feed the family.

I ain't mad at you though. :)
Click to expand...

No harm, no foul. I get what you're saying. My point was that the view is pretty from the outside looking in.

Those who may have to depend on pool for their income, e.g., professional pool players who attend two, three, and four tournaments every month, may have a different view than those of us on the outside. ;)
 
cleary said:
Billy, I very much agree with a lot of what you're saying. Thinking about it, I look at TAR like a heavyweight boxing match. I would love to see pool at the point where that is a new standard of "champion of the world". Tournaments are cool and Im taking nothing away from them, but a TAR match to me is much like a major boxing fight. I don't think your format would work for a tournament or for pool as a whole, but for a special event, it could.

At the same time, I think pool as is, is beautiful.
Click to expand...

That was the format used back in the "glory" days of pool or was it balkline? or 3 cushion? Hell I don't know for sure but the champion would be challenged by a contender and that was considered the world championship back in the early 1900's. Think Willie Hoppe, Jake Schaefer Jr and Sr, Alfred De Oro, etc.

How about a TAR tournament of champions? Each player puts up the $10,000 entry with a round robin of a races to 11 (or whatever race would work best) played over several days would be uber cool! Maybe the top 8 players in the world = each player playing 7 matches. Now that would be pool heaven!
 
Last edited:
Celtic said:
Golf also has black tee boxes, often builds special tee boxes JUST for the pros when they have a tournament, and tends to make the pros play on courses like Augustus which is a couse WAY harder then most amature golfers have ever attempted to play. I'm sure there's a good reason for it.

Tiger Woods was quoted as saying that he would bet most "scratch" amature golfers they could not break 100 on a US-Open coarse from the pro tees with the greens and rough cut the way they were for the pros. When you see actual well below scratch professional golfers going into the 80's on the course it becomes pretty believable.

The pros of golf play on a playing field that most amature golfers could not dream of attempting to play on.
Click to expand...

This puts in perspective the Diamond table this match was played on. Most good amateur players would have trouble running one rack on this table, let alone two. I would be glad to let a B level player break the balls and take BIH and see if they can run out from there. I'd bet on that all day!
 
Celtic said:
It is not "god mode" on buckets. IMO running a 7-pack on the table they used impressed me way more then if he had run a 12 or 15 pack on a 4.5 inch pocket table.

What people need to keep in mind is that cut of pocket is not the norm atm, but if the players got used to those, after already seeing Shane start putting out some serious packages on that thing, the pro's would get pretty friggin good on those things once they got used to them if they became the norm. And if they can get THAT good on equipment like that it makes no sense to want to keep them on easier equipment that if anything screws the top players over because now instead of 10 people in the world being able to run a 10-pack on the pro table 200 people can and the best players in a match get screwed by the ease of the equipment being easy enough to let a lesser player run a set out or take full advantage of one perfect break that happend to get kissed into a pocket.
Click to expand...
If tighter pockets favor the better player, one would think bigger pockets would too, as in even less of a chance for the better player to miss a shot, wouldn't you think? The problem you're talking about is the SHORT races, and alternating breaks, that is why a lesser player can win against a much better player, and the only reasons why.

Glen
 
wincardona said:
Pool needs a shot in the arm and it's got to come from somewhere, there's something missing with pool to create the interest to put it over the top. This type of a format could possibly do that. I understand that with this format you would need an official at every table but there's nothing wrong with using it for the semi and final matches.

The average time it takes for a race to say eleven games is about 1-1/2 hrs. So that would put a race to 15 at 2 hrs. What's wrong with using this format using a two hr. match with a 25 second shot clock between shots? This would offer TV an exact time allotment. You can lengthen or shorten the time allotted to fit into whatever time allotment requested.Therefore the length of a match will never be mismanaged, which would make it more appealing for TV.

I really would like to see TAR do a match using this format. TAR would be a perfect vehicle to test this format.

How about the best two out of three 1 hr. sets using this format? With sets this short (1 hr.) we will be able to see the excitement that close finishes will create.

Has all the makings for success.:thumbup:

Billy I.
Click to expand...

Billy, we talked about this very subject when I was installing your pool table. One of the biggest problems with pool tournaments and match-ups is that they don't won't fit into a TV time frame format. I told you then that the best way of playing one pocket would be to play a race to 50 balls to win, or win by 20 points ahead (early knockout)...or to be in the lead at the end of the 2 hour time frame for each match.

The second problem with pool is finding a sponsor that can actually make money promoting this sport, instead of just donating to it. If the sponsor made a profit from promoting this sport, then it would encourage them to continue to sponsor the sport world wide. But then of that happened, this sport would actually have someone in control if it, and you know as well as I do, there's plenty of people that wouldn't care to much for that, because it would cut them out of what they're already doing, which is not really to much anyway.

There isn't a single game of pool being played today, that can't be put into a 2 hour format in tournaments or otherwise, but someone has to step up to the plate and start it first. I think it would have been much more entertaining to watch Shane and Alex playing to what ever the score was at the end of one two hour match for the first session, then after a break start the score over again, and play for another 2 hours. If then, both players have won one session each, then a third 2 hour session, kind of like an "overtime" would be used to determine the winner.

Glen
 
cleary said:
You're amazing. A level of insane most people cannot understand.
Click to expand...

lol - stop trying....the guy is like Rainman apparently, yeah, counting cards (but in his case - fixing tables). His "WORK" may just be AMAZING (can't attest to that personally) but, his communication skills will always be FAR REMOVED from his shimming, band sawing, leveling, etc. table work skills.

Nevermind, keep trying...you two going back and forth is entertaining. :grin:
 
Tighter pocket just means you have to be more precise whit you cueball control. You hear many times commentator say you have to be close to object ball and be the right side on your next shot to get you out. It is the same way in snooker too. You see this top player make it look so easy when they make this big break because they are so close to object all the time. And thats why shane win this match. He was more precise whit his cue ball and he didnt need to take so many difficult shot on.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top