Today, while flipping through the channels, I found pool on tv. Figuring I'd get to see some decent competition, I was surprised to find Speed Pool as the agenda of the day. Now, I've heard of Speed Pool, even competed in an event once but never actually saw it on TV. I call them "vanity" competitions because there is little or no emphasis on the actual game but on a particular aspect that spectators find amusing. "Vanity" can be defined as meaning "something worthless, trivial, or pointless." The ability to run a rack in one minute, make 4 balls in different pockets, hit 27 homeruns off a lame-arm or do a 360 and slam-dunk an unguarded basket is worthless, trivial and/or pointless.
Well, there it was, on TV with Luc Salvas winning $50,000 (so much for worthless) and Jeanette Lee in the background. It was an interesting sight, watching these professional players fumble around, trying to pocket 15 balls in 8-ball format in the fastest time possible. Scratches yielded a 10-second penalty and misses meant nothing. Anyone who knows how much talent these players possess can only laugh at the insanity of such a competition with so much at stake.
It isn't the only variety of vanity pool nor is pool the only instance where vanity competition is used. In the very next episode, one of the many trick-shot episodes played with a $30,0000 first-place prize on the line. Although, I have to admit, the shots are slightly more interesting since players will often go to bizarre measures to try and out-do the competition. However, they often will post unusual requirements for each shot ("must pocket the chalk" or "can't touch a rail") that even experienced pool-players must listen closely to understand exactly what is going-on.
This is not unlike baseball's Homerun Derby or Basketball's 3-Point competition and Slam-Dunk contest. The underlying difference between pool and these other sports is that Pool's vanity competitions are seen as the main-event, rarely associated with an actual competition whereas baseball and basketball will use these events as preludes to their respective all-star games. Also, the viewer knows exactly what is going-on. Baseball players must hit the ball over the wall, basketball players must put the ball in the hoop. Without a bit of audio, spectators can watch the television and root for their favorite professionals.
This is another interesting point. One would think that vanity pool would be exclusive to our elites. Baseball and basketball will often try to have all-star players or leaders in relevant catagories compete in the competitions. Vanity pool does have several professional players making the leap but for the most-part, the competitors are vanity pool specialists, having relatively little or no professional experience. Yet, each competition has greater prize-funds than most traditional events.
I have to wonder, is this the direction our game is going to take? It's been said that during a Mosconi Straight-Pool exhibition, a spectator said, "This is boring. All these shots are easy." Has this perspective won-out? Are we no longer interested in the subtle nuances of the game? Actually winning, under pressure, without the benefit of two-tries, is this not as exciting? More exciting?
I've been playing this game a long time. In the upcoming months, the Northeast has a series of rather exciting events that I always try to participate in. Needless to say, I'm really looking forward to it all. However, every time I watch a speed-pool or trick-shot competition with players equal in caliber to me, I have to wonder if I should pull-out Mike Masse's book and start doing double-jumpshots through paperbags. I don't because that little traditionalist inside me feels it's wrong. There's that part of me that can't help but view it as a bastardization of our great sport.
Perhaps there are a few things we can learn from it all but do we really need to tailor our entire presentation so that the non-pool audience can be entertained? Is there something to be gained from that? Might they start picking up pool-cues and running to their local rooms? Maybe it will improve ratings of "regular" pool?
I've said it before, there will come a point where we have to realize that there is nothing to gain from this strategy. We should forget about mainstream and focus on what WE want and nothing more. Yes, I would like to see slow-play diminished and I enjoy nine-ball because of the difficult shots it consistently presents but we should forget about trying to build-up our audience with non-poolplayers at the cost of throwing out the game in its entirety. We have sacraficed too much. At vanity pool, I draw the line. We owe it to ourselves and we owe it to our professional competitors.
Well, there it was, on TV with Luc Salvas winning $50,000 (so much for worthless) and Jeanette Lee in the background. It was an interesting sight, watching these professional players fumble around, trying to pocket 15 balls in 8-ball format in the fastest time possible. Scratches yielded a 10-second penalty and misses meant nothing. Anyone who knows how much talent these players possess can only laugh at the insanity of such a competition with so much at stake.
It isn't the only variety of vanity pool nor is pool the only instance where vanity competition is used. In the very next episode, one of the many trick-shot episodes played with a $30,0000 first-place prize on the line. Although, I have to admit, the shots are slightly more interesting since players will often go to bizarre measures to try and out-do the competition. However, they often will post unusual requirements for each shot ("must pocket the chalk" or "can't touch a rail") that even experienced pool-players must listen closely to understand exactly what is going-on.
This is not unlike baseball's Homerun Derby or Basketball's 3-Point competition and Slam-Dunk contest. The underlying difference between pool and these other sports is that Pool's vanity competitions are seen as the main-event, rarely associated with an actual competition whereas baseball and basketball will use these events as preludes to their respective all-star games. Also, the viewer knows exactly what is going-on. Baseball players must hit the ball over the wall, basketball players must put the ball in the hoop. Without a bit of audio, spectators can watch the television and root for their favorite professionals.
This is another interesting point. One would think that vanity pool would be exclusive to our elites. Baseball and basketball will often try to have all-star players or leaders in relevant catagories compete in the competitions. Vanity pool does have several professional players making the leap but for the most-part, the competitors are vanity pool specialists, having relatively little or no professional experience. Yet, each competition has greater prize-funds than most traditional events.
I have to wonder, is this the direction our game is going to take? It's been said that during a Mosconi Straight-Pool exhibition, a spectator said, "This is boring. All these shots are easy." Has this perspective won-out? Are we no longer interested in the subtle nuances of the game? Actually winning, under pressure, without the benefit of two-tries, is this not as exciting? More exciting?
I've been playing this game a long time. In the upcoming months, the Northeast has a series of rather exciting events that I always try to participate in. Needless to say, I'm really looking forward to it all. However, every time I watch a speed-pool or trick-shot competition with players equal in caliber to me, I have to wonder if I should pull-out Mike Masse's book and start doing double-jumpshots through paperbags. I don't because that little traditionalist inside me feels it's wrong. There's that part of me that can't help but view it as a bastardization of our great sport.
Perhaps there are a few things we can learn from it all but do we really need to tailor our entire presentation so that the non-pool audience can be entertained? Is there something to be gained from that? Might they start picking up pool-cues and running to their local rooms? Maybe it will improve ratings of "regular" pool?
I've said it before, there will come a point where we have to realize that there is nothing to gain from this strategy. We should forget about mainstream and focus on what WE want and nothing more. Yes, I would like to see slow-play diminished and I enjoy nine-ball because of the difficult shots it consistently presents but we should forget about trying to build-up our audience with non-poolplayers at the cost of throwing out the game in its entirety. We have sacraficed too much. At vanity pool, I draw the line. We owe it to ourselves and we owe it to our professional competitors.
