Tourney Payouts in the 70's versus Now

[shanesinnott]

JAM made a post in another thread recently about the fact that winning $15,000 now is very different to winning $15,000 in the 70's, and the reasons for this is obvious due to cost of living increases etc.

My question is, how did tournies in the 1970's and 1980's afford to payout such a substantial first place prize of $15k for example? Were the fields massive? Were the entry fees on par with today? Was there much higher added money relative to the entry fees?

IOW, if the entry fees in the 1970s were on par with today, why are the entry fees today not significantly higher? If the $$$ added relative to the entry fees was so much higher, why is it not that way today? If the fields were that much larger, why are they not that way today?

I am just having a hard time getting my head around how the Pro payouts in the 70's and 80's were so much better relative to the cost of living than they are now. Did tournament promoters in the 70's and 80's use some magic formula to put on these events that allowed them to make these big payouts and still be profitable? Did the promoters in the 70's and 80's make money and still afford these large payouts and if so how?

What am I missing here?

 

[Fatboy]

Paging Jay Helfert....

 

[JAM]

I don't get it either, but this is what I am to believe from what I read in the older pool periodicals.

As an example, in 1985, I think it was, the Binghamton Open paid $25,000 for first place. Interestingly, I read about a few tournaments occurring in Atlantic City and Lake Tahoe with large payouts. Subject to check, Lake Tahoe was about 20- to 25,000 as well, and the venue was supposedly first class, the best ever.

Richmond, Kentucky, was a favorite place for tournament soldiers in the '80s because of the calcuttas in addition to the tournament winnings. It was lucrative for the players to participate in tournaments with calcuttas.

What strikes me the most, though, is that the U.S. Open, as one example, had mostly American competitors, not very many international players in the '70s and '80s. A nice hotel room would cost about 20 or 30 bucks a night, compared to $125 plus tax today.

The U.S. Open, however, is one tournament where I would say the payouts have increased over time. It's still expensive as hell to go to the week-long event -- at least a couple to three dimes for me, and I live three hours from there. This year, they have raised the entry fee to $600 as opposed to $500.

I read a lot of older pool magazines, newsletters, newspapers, et cetera. The payouts in the '70s and '80s are no different than today at the majority of tournaments on American soil.

Maybe it is a sign of tough economic times in the United States that prevents industry members from sponsoring more events or investing larger amounts of monies into professional tournaments. Not many pro players have sponsors in the States.

Elsewhere, it is quite a different story. With more and more pool events being held overseas, with more and more young aspiring pros in other countries practicing every single day to get to a professional level, it speaks for itself. These overseas players see a future in pool. The payouts may look attractive to them, giving them incentives.

I would be interested in reading the thoughts of others about why pool payouts are the same today as yesteryear. I personally believe that pool is dying a slow death in America. There is just not as much interest in it as there used to be. I hope I am wrong, but I kind of doubt it.

JAM

 

[shanesinnott]

.......As an example, in 1985, I think it was, the Binghamton Open paid $25,000 for first place. Interestingly, I read about a few tournaments occurring in Atlantic City and Lake Tahoe with large payouts. Subject to check, Lake Tahoe was about 20- to 25,000 as well, and the venue was supposedly first class, the best ever.........

This I understand to be true. What I don't understand is how? Events like this in the 80's and 70's happened because of what? What would have been the entry fees, added money, number of players, to pay 25K for 1st place in 1985 or 15K in the 70's?

 

[Poolhalljunkie]

payouts

The biggest thing that i can recall from that time is that the tournaments then had alcohol and tobacco sponsors to foot the bill, also in Nevada the casino added the money. Economy was better and money was more free flowing.

 

[JAM]

This I understand to be true. What I don't understand is how? Events like this in the 80's and 70's happened because of what? What would have been the entry fees, added money, number of players, to pay 25K for 1st place in 1985 or 15K in the 70's?

I personally think it is a matter of economic downturn in the case of the United States, thinking globally here for a minute.

The escalating future reliance on the energy supplies of the world raise into serious question the ability of the world to provide that energy with terms and prices that can be absorbed comfortably.

I think we all face a future that is quite different than the one we thought we were all trying to accomplish. There will always be the DCC, BCA Invitational, U.S. Open, Joss $25,000-added Turning Stone Casino, Florida Pro Tour events, but look at how much it costs to get to them. If these events were happening back in the '70s and '80s, there could be some pool players who just might be fat and happy.

I just remember speaking with one American champion's lady one bright and sunny day at my very first U.S. Open. I was full of happiness being there. She commented to me that she envied my enthusiasm, seeing how happy I was. Her significant other's entire life was devoted to this sport. Yet, she seemed to hint that they had nothing to show for it.

Now comes along the pool player bashers who say, well, then he should have gotten a job, he should have gotten out of the pool racket, nobody forced him to stay in. When pool is in your blood, when you are a true thoroughbred pool champion, that is easier said than done. It is difficult for some to understand this, and I don't know how to explain it any simpler to the pool player bashers.

I almost let the pool lifestyle harm my way of life, but I soon recognized it for what it is. Though my opinion may differ from Fatboy's, I still believe pool is a rich man's high. There is no reward, other than saying I'm the best. It is a high that doesn't pay the bills, unfortunately. Being the best at pool doesn't garner a champion any respect from much of the American pool culture. Go to Philippines, it's quite a different story.

JAM

 

[Johnnyt]

The biggest thing that i can recall from that time is that the tournaments then had alcohol and tobacco sponsors to foot the bill, also in Nevada the casino added the money. Economy was better and money was more free flowing.

I agree with you. What you said is a very big part of it. The booze and cigarette sponsors lose is a real biggy IMO. Johnnyt

 

[shanesinnott]

The biggest thing that i can recall from that time is that the tournaments then had alcohol and tobacco sponsors to foot the bill, also in Nevada the casino added the money. Economy was better and money was more free flowing.

So what you are saying is that the added money in the 70's and 80's was significantly higher than it is now?

If this is the case, I am curious how much money was added to a tourney in the 1980's for example to pay a first place prize of $25K and what would have been the typical number of players competing and the entry fees?

 

[JAM]

So what you are saying is that the added money in the 70's and 80's was significantly higher than it is now?

If this is the case, I am curious how much money was added to a tourney in the 1980's for example to pay a first place prize of $25K and what would have been the typical number of players competing and the entry fees?

KM said he thinks about a hundred for the BC Open (Binghamton Open). The entry fee was $300.

JAM

P.S. I know that the year Keith won it, the first place was $25,000, but second place, which was won by Spanish Mike LeBron, was only $10,000.

Grady Mathews wrote an article about it. I have it bookmarked and will try to dig it up.

 

[Fatboy]

i wonder if the operating costs are higher now-meaning the venue costing more to rent is taking $$$ out of the prize fund. the hotel rooms cost more so why wouldnt the banquet/tournment rooms???

 

[shanesinnott]

KM said he thinks about a hundred for the BC Open (Binghamton Open). The entry fee was $300.

JAM

P.S. I know that the year Keith won it, the first place was $25,000, but second place, which was won by Spanish Mike LeBron, was only $10,000.

Grady Mathews wrote an article about it. I have it bookmarked and will try to dig it up.

So in 1985ish first place was $25,000, entry fees were $300 and 100 players showed up. So adjusting for inflation to 2007, that would a first place prize of about $50K and entry fees of about $590.

So if I put on a tournament today and 100 players show up and pay $590 entry, how do I pay $50K for first? The added money in 1985 relative to the entry fee had to be much higher than it is today. Is that right?

 

[JAM]

So in 1985ish first place was $25,000, entry fees were $300 and 100 players showed up. So adjusting for inflation to 2007, that would a first place prize of about $50K and entry fees of about $590.

So if I put on a tournament today and 100 players show up and pay $590 entry, how do I pay $50K for first? The added money in 1985 relative to the entry fee had to be much higher than it is today. Is that right?

That is a good comparison. A man named Gary Pintowski (sp) -- I have to look up the article for the spelling -- ran the BC Open. He received some heat, much like Charlie Williams is today, for some of his practices I think, but he sure did create a venue that all the players enjoyed.

Somehow, though, I am not sure that money is the survival mechanism for pool. I hasten to bring up the IPT, but look at how many players crawled out of the woodwork to attend these tournaments with record-breaking payouts. The players themselves, those who desired to go pro, were all gung ho for the IPT. They could envision a future in pool.

What happened to the fall of the IPT is kind of what is happening to pool as we know it today in the States. There is no interest in it by mainstream Americans. What sponsor is going to pour in good money after bad?

Even pool's diehard supporters have to make choices whether they can afford to go to the U.S. Open, as an example. This Memorial Day weekend, the traffic is predicted to be light because it is thought that many folks can't afford to travel due to gas prices.

With the economy the way it is here in the States, I can't see pool making a comeback, the way it was in the '70s, '80s, and '90s. Remember the Filipino Invasion? They're not invading anymore. The Americans are having to travel to Korea, China, Philippines, Fajairah, Qatar, and elsewhere to follow the professional tournament trail.

I wish I could write what a change agent would be for pool in the U.S., but at this juncture, I don't know if it's all about money. My question would be how many American players are there today compared to the '70s, '80s, and '90s? Have they grown in size, or are they dwindling in numbers? I am talking about professional players and not lobsters, longshoremen, and shortstops.

JAM

 

[shanesinnott]

That is a good comparison. A man named Gary Pintowski (sp) -- I have to look up the article for the spelling -- ran the BC Open. He received some heat, much like Charlie Williams is today, for some of his practices I think, but he sure did create a venue that all the players enjoyed.

Somehow, though, I am not sure that money is the survival mechanism for pool. I hasten to bring up the IPT, but look at how many players crawled out of the woodwork to attend these tournaments with record-breaking payouts. The players themselves, those who desired to go pro, were all gung ho for the IPT. They could envision a future in pool.

What happened to the fall of the IPT is kind of what is happening to pool as we know it today in the States. There is no interest in it by mainstream Americans. What sponsor is going to pour in good money after bad?

Even pool's diehard supporters have to make choices whether they can afford to go to the U.S. Open, as an example. This Memorial Day weekend, the traffic is predicted to be light because it is thought that many folks can't afford to travel due to gas prices.

With the economy the way it is here in the States, I can't see pool making a comeback, the way it was in the '70s, '80s, and '90s. Remember the Filipino Invasion? They're not invading anymore. The Americans are having to travel to Korea, China, Philippines, Fajairah, Qatar, and elsewhere to follow the professional tournament trail.

I wish I could write what a change agent would be for pool in the U.S., but at this juncture, I don't know if it's all about money. My question would be how many American players are there today compared to the '70s, '80s, and '90s? Have they grown in size, or are they dwindling in numbers? I am talking about professional players and not lobsters, longshoremen, and shortstops.

JAM

But did the BC Open generate that much more significant interest by mainstream Americans that allowed such a tournament to take place?

The IPT premise was good for players that it gave them an opportunity to make some real money, however, as we all know, the money was not really there.

Hopefully Jay can chime in and explain if in fact the tournies of the 70's and 80's with 15K+ first place prize funds were money makers for the promoters and yet still providing very good prize funds for the players relative to the entry fees at the cost of living at that time. Maybe all of these events ended in the red and the promoters lost their shirts?

I am pretty sure Jay has thought about this and can answer all my questions and maybe doing so will make it a little clearer as to whether we can actually have $50K first prize events with $500/$600 entry fees that don't end up as one off tourneys cause the promoter lost money (this would also require that whomever puts up the added $$$ gets what they expected out of the event and is prepared to do it over and over)

 

[jay helfert]

Okay, let me chime in here. It is true what Jam says. In the 1980's we would always have at least one or two events a year with a first prize of $25,000 or more. Sometimes as many as three. And the typical pro tournament, like the Sands for instance paid $10,000 for first. That was when 10K was real money!

At the Sands, the entry fee was $300 with $20,000 in added money. With 100 players (about average back then), the total purse was $50,000 in the 1980's thru 1990's. It was a major event back then.

The larger events like the ones in Atlantic City at Resorts would have huge fields of players, as many as 357 one year. And with added money of thirty to fifty thousand, we could pay out as much as 35K first prize. At the Caesars events during the 1980's we had larger entry fees, as much as $1,500. But every player was guaranteed $500 back when they arrived. This way they would have money in their pocket.

With 128 players (which we got) plus $30,000 in added money, the purse was over 150K. First place was as much as $33,000, the first year Earl won. He also won a car worth over $10,000. In the last Caesar's tourney at Caesar's Palace, Earl won $25,000 in 1984. The players who played in the televised matches refused to sign the required releases, and the shows never aired. That was the end of the big Caesars events.

Keith did win $25,000 at the B.C. Open in 1985. I know because I staked him, and we split the money 50-50. The entry fee was $300 with 128 players and 30K in added money. Gary Pinkowski put this one on several times in the 1980's.

Even the World Series of Tavern Pool paid out $25,000 first prize to the winners of the 9-Ball and Eight Ball divisions in the early 80's. Yes, those were huge prizes back then. And here we are today. Only the World 9-Ball and the U.S. Open are paying big money. And maybe the World Ten Ball this year too.

And even in the 1970's and 1980's, there were a multitude of smaller added money events, like four and five thousand. They were held in bars and poolrooms across the Midwest and South for the most part. Players like Buddy could play in events like these nearly every week. First prize might have been anywhere from 1K to 2.5K. But gas was forty to fifty cents a gallon, and motel rooms were under $30. So if you went to a two or three day event and won $1,000 you were doing great.

Buddy made his living crisscrossing the Eastern USA for many years, and won more tournaments than anyone past or present, well over 200 total. It seemed like he was first or second in every one he played, with strong fields too, usually 64 players or more.

 

[JAM]

....(this would also require that whomever puts up the added $$$ gets what they expected out of the event and is prepared to do it over and over)

Therein lies the rub. Venture capital will never go into the most promising tournaments in pool, unless and until somebody can show they will operate on a profitable basis.

That somebody should have been the BCA organization, many years ago, but I can't figure out the BCA. Why do the presidents keep changing? Who's on first, and who's on second?

The BCA organization was at one time positioned quite nicely to effect a change for professional pocket billiards in the United States, but they fouled and scratched the ball.

Though pool in the States seems to be popular for recreational shooters, it is not so in the professional realm. Through intelligent leadership, a professional organization could help the male players, but geezy peezy, history keeps repeating itself for the American male pros. If it ain't greed, it's lack of funding.

Americans are whetted to an extravagant use of resources in our standard of living here. Playing pool on the professional tournament trail is expensive in the year 2008, much more so than in the '70s, '80s, and '90s.

Today, sadly, professional pool offers a player to break even only if they win, place, or show. It's just so brutal.

JAM

 

[shanesinnott]

Okay, let me chime in here. It is true what Jam says. In the 1980's we would always have at least one or two events a year with a first prize of $25,000 or more. Sometimes as many as three. And the typical pro tournament, like the Sands for instance paid $10,000 for first. That was when 10K was real money!

At the Sands, the entry fee was $300 with $20,000 in added money. With 100 players (about average back then), the total purse was $50,000 in the 1980's thru 1990's. It was a major event back then.

The larger events like the ones in Atlantic City at Resorts would have huge fields of players, as many as 357 one year. And with added money of thirty to fifty thousand, we could pay out as much as 35K first prize. At the Caesars events during the 1980's we had larger entry fees, as much as $1,500. But every player was guaranteed $500 back when they arrived. This way they would have money in their pocket.

With 128 players (which we got) plus $30,000 in added money, the purse was over 150K. First place was as much as $33,000, the first year Earl won. He also won a car worth over $10,000. In the last Caesar's tourney at Caesar's Palace, Earl won $25,000 in 1984. The players who played in the televised matches refused to sign the required releases, and the shows never aired. That was the end of the big Caesars events.

Keith did win $25,000 at the B.C. Open in 1985. I know because I staked him, and we split the money 50-50. The entry fee was $300 with 128 players and 30K in added money. Gary Pinkowski put this one on several times in the 1980's.

Even the World Series of Tavern Pool paid out $25,000 first prize to the winners of the 9-Ball and Eight Ball divisions in the early 80's. Yes, those were huge prizes back then. And here we are today. Only the World 9-Ball and the U.S. Open are paying big money. And maybe the World Ten Ball this year too.

And even in the 1970's and 1980's, there were a multitude of smaller added money events, like four and five thousand. They were held in bars and poolrooms across the Midwest and South for the most part. Players like Buddy could play in events like these nearly every week. First prize might have been anywhere from 1K to 2.5K. But gas was forty to fifty cents a gallon, and motel rooms were under $30. So if you went to a two or three day event and won $1,000 you were doing great.

Buddy made his living crisscrossing the Eastern USA for many years, and won more tournaments than anyone past or present, well over 200 total. It seemed like he was first or second in every one he played, with strong fields too, usually 64 players or more.

Jay, From what you have said, the added money WAS signifcantly higher relative to the cost of living than it is today. Was this money mostly put up by Casinos? Why then and not now? Did the promoters make money? If so, why does this model not work today. 50K added in Atlantic city in the 80's is the same as about $100K added today, but there doesn't seem to be too many 100K added events these days, why is that?

 

[Scott Lee]

Shane...I don't think your comparison of prices of things 20 yrs ago to now is anywhere near comparable. I was "on the road" then, much the same as I spend 40 weeks a year on the road now. Gas cost under fifty cents a gallon then...now four dollars (8x as much). Hotel rooms cost $20-$30 then...now $100-$150 (5x as much). A nice dinner out was $15 then...now it's $75+ (5x as much). Look at rent...20 yrs ago you could rent a nice apt. for under $200/month...now it's $800-$1000, and lots more in some metro areas! So, while there are some comparative values, most things cost WAY more than double what they cost 20 years ago.

Scott Lee
www.poolknowledge.com

So in 1985ish first place was $25,000, entry fees were $300 and 100 players showed up. So adjusting for inflation to 2007, that would a first place prize of about $50K and entry fees of about $590.

So if I put on a tournament today and 100 players show up and pay $590 entry, how do I pay $50K for first? The added money in 1985 relative to the entry fee had to be much higher than it is today. Is that right?

 

[JAM]

Shane...I don't think your comparison of prices of things 20 yrs ago to now is anywhere near comparable. I was "on the road" then, much the same as I spend 40 weeks a year on the road now. Gas cost under fifty cents a gallon then...now four dollars (8x as much). Hotel rooms cost $20-$30 then...now $100-$150 (5x as much). A nice dinner out was $15 then...now it's $75+ (5x as much). Look at rent...20 yrs ago you could rent a nice apt. for under $200/month...now it's $800-$1000, and lots more in some metro areas! So, while there are some comparative values, most things cost WAY more than double what they cost 20 years ago.

Scott Lee
www.poolknowledge.com

Meanwhile, the pool tournament payouts are exactly the same, and in some cases even less.

With the current crisis on the cost of a barrel of oil, things are going to get worse before they get better, and not just in the pool world.

JAM

 

[shanesinnott]

Shane...I don't think your comparison of prices of things 20 yrs ago to now is anywhere near comparable. I was "on the road" then, much the same as I spend 40 weeks a year on the road now. Gas cost under fifty cents a gallon then...now four dollars (8x as much). Hotel rooms cost $20-$30 then...now $100-$150 (5x as much). A nice dinner out was $15 then...now it's $75+ (5x as much). Look at rent...20 yrs ago you could rent a nice apt. for under $200/month...now it's $800-$1000, and lots more in some metro areas! So, while there are some comparative values, most things cost WAY more than double what they cost 20 years ago.

Scott Lee
www.poolknowledge.com

Scott, I understand that and I am only quoting figures from a generic inflation calculator online. My point is that even with a 4x cost of living increase, many tournies in the 80's paid $25k+ for first place so that would need to be $100k+ today, so how did they pay so much relative to the cost of living then and how do we pay so little relative to the cost of living now.

 

[smashmouth]

I personally believe that pool is dying a slow death in America. There is just not as much interest in it as there used to be. I hope I am wrong, but I kind of doubt it.

JAM

that's it in a nutshell, less general interest from the public