Why pool is a tough sell in today's climate.
- Thread starter Roadie
- Start date
Wow! Nice thoughts here! I tend to agree with the school that advocates showing the high stakes world of pool. It's time we freed ourselves of the outdated puritanical views on gambling and just accept that it is something that people like to do with their money. A highlight in people's lives is winning anything, knowing someone who won something, or talking/dreaming about winning and winners of chance games and sports. I amnot talking about being a winner in the sense of being a hard worker who produces and makes the right moves to be successful. I am talking about the type of winner that gets lucky, gets the big payday. Hits the lottery.
I think that pool could be spurred by some of that aspect of it. Embrace the high stakes part of pool and treat it like boxing.
An excerpt from the web.
"The night of January 15, 1906, some 3,000 Frenchmen crowded into the lavish ballroom of the Grand Hotel to watch the old Lion defeat this challenger who looked like a lad at his 1st formal dance. The white-maned Vignaux had majestic bearing and a gift for dramatic flourish. He seemed like an eminent professor about to squelch a college freshman. But plump, round-faced Willie, his hair plastered and parted in the middle, was quite calm. He bent over the table like a laboratory scientist, prepared to capitalize on every error Vignaux made. Whenever Vignaux missed, he yielded the table with an elaborately sardonic bow. Willie, not realizing its effect on the Lion's blood pressure, would give him a moonfaced grin and return to work. While the audience booed his cold efficiency, Hoppe scored repeated high runs and won the title, 500-323. He returned to New York to be met by a great crowd and a brass band playing "The Yankee Doodle Boy"; he was the champion of the world--and still only 18 years old."
This paragraph doesn't fully capture the essence of what happened. The match was played in blocks to a full house of partisan fans. Two nations were engrossed in the outcome, France and America. Something like $50,000 was bet on Willie with great odds. The point being that heroes are heroes when they have the oportunity to be heroic. Efren is a hero to the Phillipine people because he represents Phillipines against the world.
It's not how great a pool player Efren is that makes him endearing it's what he accomplishes. People love winners and especially if that winner comes from a tough background, if he or she has a "story".
Pool in the USA has become a fringe sport. In order for it to grow it has to offer some characters for people to identify with.
Here is another excerpt showing a harder path, same person;
"The boys barnstormed through the small towns of the country. Pool hall proprietors paid from $1 to $25 for an exhibition. Their fortunes were uncertain. Sometimes Mama had to pawn her diamond to get the family out of town. When Willie was 12, Frank quit the act, determined to study stenography. (He returned to Cornwall and died there in the late '30s after teaching billiards in Chicago.) But Willie stuck with it. He soon became enough of an attraction in himself. He improved his situation by mastering the more difficult balkline billiards, at which Americans Jake Schaefer and George Slosson, and Frenchman Maurice (The Lion) Vignaux, were making handsome incomes. After his balkline victory over Taylor, Willie prospered."
Do any of the pros really "prosper" much after major tournament victories? Some do to a degree I suppose with small endorement deals but none to extent of Willie Hoppe. Hoppe was signed advertise for many national brands of products, he was paid handsomely to do exhibitions and he ran in celebrity circles.
Why? Because people were excited to see him defeat the other characters, they were excited to be around him and advertisers loved to have a hero to pin their placards on.
Okay, enough of that.
I am ambivalent about the suggested bigger pockets. On one hand I can see the point of allowing for more flourish with the cueball. On the other I see no point in rewarding those with less precision. Also, I have seen plenty of cueball flourish this week and plenty of balls dropping after contacting the rail on the way in. I think that the equipment is fine actually.
I think that pool could be spurred by some of that aspect of it. Embrace the high stakes part of pool and treat it like boxing.
An excerpt from the web.
"The night of January 15, 1906, some 3,000 Frenchmen crowded into the lavish ballroom of the Grand Hotel to watch the old Lion defeat this challenger who looked like a lad at his 1st formal dance. The white-maned Vignaux had majestic bearing and a gift for dramatic flourish. He seemed like an eminent professor about to squelch a college freshman. But plump, round-faced Willie, his hair plastered and parted in the middle, was quite calm. He bent over the table like a laboratory scientist, prepared to capitalize on every error Vignaux made. Whenever Vignaux missed, he yielded the table with an elaborately sardonic bow. Willie, not realizing its effect on the Lion's blood pressure, would give him a moonfaced grin and return to work. While the audience booed his cold efficiency, Hoppe scored repeated high runs and won the title, 500-323. He returned to New York to be met by a great crowd and a brass band playing "The Yankee Doodle Boy"; he was the champion of the world--and still only 18 years old."
This paragraph doesn't fully capture the essence of what happened. The match was played in blocks to a full house of partisan fans. Two nations were engrossed in the outcome, France and America. Something like $50,000 was bet on Willie with great odds. The point being that heroes are heroes when they have the oportunity to be heroic. Efren is a hero to the Phillipine people because he represents Phillipines against the world.
It's not how great a pool player Efren is that makes him endearing it's what he accomplishes. People love winners and especially if that winner comes from a tough background, if he or she has a "story".
Pool in the USA has become a fringe sport. In order for it to grow it has to offer some characters for people to identify with.
Here is another excerpt showing a harder path, same person;
"The boys barnstormed through the small towns of the country. Pool hall proprietors paid from $1 to $25 for an exhibition. Their fortunes were uncertain. Sometimes Mama had to pawn her diamond to get the family out of town. When Willie was 12, Frank quit the act, determined to study stenography. (He returned to Cornwall and died there in the late '30s after teaching billiards in Chicago.) But Willie stuck with it. He soon became enough of an attraction in himself. He improved his situation by mastering the more difficult balkline billiards, at which Americans Jake Schaefer and George Slosson, and Frenchman Maurice (The Lion) Vignaux, were making handsome incomes. After his balkline victory over Taylor, Willie prospered."
Do any of the pros really "prosper" much after major tournament victories? Some do to a degree I suppose with small endorement deals but none to extent of Willie Hoppe. Hoppe was signed advertise for many national brands of products, he was paid handsomely to do exhibitions and he ran in celebrity circles.
Why? Because people were excited to see him defeat the other characters, they were excited to be around him and advertisers loved to have a hero to pin their placards on.
Okay, enough of that.
I am ambivalent about the suggested bigger pockets. On one hand I can see the point of allowing for more flourish with the cueball. On the other I see no point in rewarding those with less precision. Also, I have seen plenty of cueball flourish this week and plenty of balls dropping after contacting the rail on the way in. I think that the equipment is fine actually.
Colin...<<Regarding your other opinions that pool will never be popular,\>>
I didn't mean that it will never be popular...because it already is. Everything is relative. I was just saying that it has found ROUGHLY its level of popularity.
Yes, The Hustler and Color caused a burst of widespread national "extreme popularity" but the bloom came off those roses as far as TV is concerned. I am fairly sure that the stats re: people PLAYING pool and buying pool equipment has been steadily on the rise for many years.
But those are participants...not viewers. You have been to as many major pro tournaments as I have...including the BCA where there are THOUSANDS of dedicated league players within a few hundred yards of matches between world champions...and have seen half-emply audience seating. So, clearly...even died-in-the-wool pool PLAYERS don't care much about WATCHING.
So, how can the "general public" be expected to get all wrapped up in it??
Yes, Hold 'Em has gone ballistic...for reasons that escape me entirely except that EVERYONE knows what beats a pair and they can RELATE.
Other than that...it beats me.
Regards,
Jim
I didn't mean that it will never be popular...because it already is. Everything is relative. I was just saying that it has found ROUGHLY its level of popularity.
Yes, The Hustler and Color caused a burst of widespread national "extreme popularity" but the bloom came off those roses as far as TV is concerned. I am fairly sure that the stats re: people PLAYING pool and buying pool equipment has been steadily on the rise for many years.
But those are participants...not viewers. You have been to as many major pro tournaments as I have...including the BCA where there are THOUSANDS of dedicated league players within a few hundred yards of matches between world champions...and have seen half-emply audience seating. So, clearly...even died-in-the-wool pool PLAYERS don't care much about WATCHING.
So, how can the "general public" be expected to get all wrapped up in it??
Yes, Hold 'Em has gone ballistic...for reasons that escape me entirely except that EVERYONE knows what beats a pair and they can RELATE.
Other than that...it beats me.
Regards,
Jim
This is much more about how pool can capture the viewership that accords it a place among the sports that can command attention wherever and whenever it is played professionally. That viewership is what will attract major advertisers and sponsors. It can't be far from the truth that the vast majority of tennis, golf, basketball, football, baseball and autoracing fans are not practicioners of those sports. I don't even know that marketers even really look towards the participants of sports when considering the demographics and where to spend their advertising budget.
Watching this WPC I don't see it being captivating enough to get that mass of viewers. Golf would be the obvious comparison of individuals having to control balls in a controlled enviroment. Golf has a long history of consistently building up the tour and it's fans. And as mentioned earlier golf has the bourgeouise associations that have kept a good segment of the population attracted to it. So what does golf have that pool doesn't? I guess it's the things already listed, perceived difficulty a better reputation and is played in beautiful venues.
Pool seems caught in between being a game and a sport. It has the familiarity bourne by the fact that some form of it is played in every corner of the world and yet that seems to be it's curse as well because either people just can't get into the drama of professional competition or no one has come with the right formula to get them into it.
Well, Colin, I hope your thing pans out and you can be the guy who makes pool into a phenomenon.
Watching this WPC I don't see it being captivating enough to get that mass of viewers. Golf would be the obvious comparison of individuals having to control balls in a controlled enviroment. Golf has a long history of consistently building up the tour and it's fans. And as mentioned earlier golf has the bourgeouise associations that have kept a good segment of the population attracted to it. So what does golf have that pool doesn't? I guess it's the things already listed, perceived difficulty a better reputation and is played in beautiful venues.
Pool seems caught in between being a game and a sport. It has the familiarity bourne by the fact that some form of it is played in every corner of the world and yet that seems to be it's curse as well because either people just can't get into the drama of professional competition or no one has come with the right formula to get them into it.
Well, Colin, I hope your thing pans out and you can be the guy who makes pool into a phenomenon.
I must admit I have only skimmed this thread but this topic is my pet peeve!
I actually thought the matchroom end product (for TV) was a mile ahead of what the IPT produced. I thought the commentators where on the whole excellent, I didn't get to hear Jay but I was suprised by how much knowledge Jerry had. I thought certain players like Davis, Archer and Duel were very good also. I have argued this point before but I just don't get it why people think billiards isn't this or that and won't work on TV. IMO 9 ball is too FAST, often its 6 ball runouts tit for tat 1 guy shooting per rack. Its very much like watching a tennis match full of aces.
HOWEVER pool is on all day long on star sports, its on Euro Sport alot in Europe (WPC,Euro Tour, IPT, World Pool League, World Masters, Mosconi Cup), and I know ESPN shows quite a bit in the states although it does seem to be more of the womens tour there. Some quotes for you...
"It may not have been a classic encounter, but Monday night’s World Snooker Championship proved it still has pulling power.
Viewing figures revealed close to 3m UK viewers stayed tuned in until 1am to watch the final on the BBC – with viewing peaking at 4.9m as eventual winner Graeme Dott and Peter Ebdon battled it out in the longest frame ever played in the finals between 10.30am and 11pm.
The average UK audience was 3.7m.
It is all a far cry from the sport’s hey-day in the Eighties, however. When Steve Davis and Dennis Taylor clashed in the 1985 final, an incredible 19m viewers stayed glued to their screens past midnight to watch Taylor finally emerge triumphant."
"The World Professional Pool Championships was the most watched sports programme on cable networks across Chinese Taipei during July according to host broadcaster ESPN.
More than 3.6 million Taiwanese viewers tuned into the coverage over the course of the tournament – a 38 percent increase in audience on the previous year. The figures reveal that viewers in the region spent at least 40 percent more time watching ESPN than any other cable channel. The coverage was doubtless boosted by a number of Taiwanese players competing in the tournament."
"And it has the potential to turn Ding into a one of China's few true sporting superstars, alongside the likes of NBA star Yao Ming and 2004 Olympic 110m hurdles champion Liu Xiang.
When he won his home tournament last season, he was watched by a staggering 100 million TV viewers across China. Wily companies want to build on his success and are queuing up to use his name and image.
"We've been contacted by over 20 companies, Chinese and foreign, from cars to sports clothes," Wu Shaoqing, a manager from Ding's agent, Beijing Zhonghui International Sports Management Company, told AFP.
"They all want Ding Junhui, and we are still thinking and making our choices."
He refused to say how much money was involved but the Oriental Morning Post said seven-figure sums were being bandied around, which is close to what sponsors pay Liu."
If 18million people (out of a nation of 55m at the time) can stay up until 1am on a sunday night, and 100m can watch a young kid play in China then most of the reasons I read can't be true. Snooker is infinately more complex, slower, tactical than 9 ball will ever be so IMO this is not the problem. Personally I think the problem is that the current structure of pool is a mess and there is no heavyweight person or organisation driving it to pull it all together.
I actually thought the matchroom end product (for TV) was a mile ahead of what the IPT produced. I thought the commentators where on the whole excellent, I didn't get to hear Jay but I was suprised by how much knowledge Jerry had. I thought certain players like Davis, Archer and Duel were very good also. I have argued this point before but I just don't get it why people think billiards isn't this or that and won't work on TV. IMO 9 ball is too FAST, often its 6 ball runouts tit for tat 1 guy shooting per rack. Its very much like watching a tennis match full of aces.
HOWEVER pool is on all day long on star sports, its on Euro Sport alot in Europe (WPC,Euro Tour, IPT, World Pool League, World Masters, Mosconi Cup), and I know ESPN shows quite a bit in the states although it does seem to be more of the womens tour there. Some quotes for you...
"It may not have been a classic encounter, but Monday night’s World Snooker Championship proved it still has pulling power.
Viewing figures revealed close to 3m UK viewers stayed tuned in until 1am to watch the final on the BBC – with viewing peaking at 4.9m as eventual winner Graeme Dott and Peter Ebdon battled it out in the longest frame ever played in the finals between 10.30am and 11pm.
The average UK audience was 3.7m.
It is all a far cry from the sport’s hey-day in the Eighties, however. When Steve Davis and Dennis Taylor clashed in the 1985 final, an incredible 19m viewers stayed glued to their screens past midnight to watch Taylor finally emerge triumphant."
"The World Professional Pool Championships was the most watched sports programme on cable networks across Chinese Taipei during July according to host broadcaster ESPN.
More than 3.6 million Taiwanese viewers tuned into the coverage over the course of the tournament – a 38 percent increase in audience on the previous year. The figures reveal that viewers in the region spent at least 40 percent more time watching ESPN than any other cable channel. The coverage was doubtless boosted by a number of Taiwanese players competing in the tournament."
"And it has the potential to turn Ding into a one of China's few true sporting superstars, alongside the likes of NBA star Yao Ming and 2004 Olympic 110m hurdles champion Liu Xiang.
When he won his home tournament last season, he was watched by a staggering 100 million TV viewers across China. Wily companies want to build on his success and are queuing up to use his name and image.
"We've been contacted by over 20 companies, Chinese and foreign, from cars to sports clothes," Wu Shaoqing, a manager from Ding's agent, Beijing Zhonghui International Sports Management Company, told AFP.
"They all want Ding Junhui, and we are still thinking and making our choices."
He refused to say how much money was involved but the Oriental Morning Post said seven-figure sums were being bandied around, which is close to what sponsors pay Liu."
If 18million people (out of a nation of 55m at the time) can stay up until 1am on a sunday night, and 100m can watch a young kid play in China then most of the reasons I read can't be true. Snooker is infinately more complex, slower, tactical than 9 ball will ever be so IMO this is not the problem. Personally I think the problem is that the current structure of pool is a mess and there is no heavyweight person or organisation driving it to pull it all together.
Last edited:
TheOne said:
Craig,
I couldn't agree more. This is getting tired. The WPC was great. The production was good and the commentating was insightful and interesting. You got guys that just got bumped out of the tourney...real players with real chances to go all the way stepping in to provide color.
I personally think things will take care of themselves. Here is my theory.
Question:
Do you know why the networks love shows like Deal/No Deal, 100 vs. 1 and all the reality TV dribble? It's CHEAP to produce and gets good ratings.
Now Pool is growing quickly in a huge growth market. Asia. When they become dominant (some would argue they already are) they will become national heroes and tonnes more good pool will be produced for ESPN Asia etc. Now how much more is it going to cost to have a couple of guys in a booth doing their bit in English (or Spanish, German etc)? Peanuts. ESPN broadcasts and bing bang boom it takes off. Prize funds go up. Critical mass is achieved and all is good.
I'm wrong. Maybe? Why does ESPN show? Strongman, Cheerleader,Fitness and Firefighter competitions? Because it's already being done and they capture the event and televise it as filler. Who is the World Strongest Man? I don't know it some Viking guy with wrists as big as my head. It don't matter we've all watched it.
Pool is a sport that few can really play at a high level,so for some its not that enjoyable.I mean look at poker,its popular because anyone can play it and win,i could play a tournament and have a shot to beat pokers best guys but in a pool tournament,a guy who just started months ago isnt going to best the field.I play both and have to say that poker is about 50% skill and 50% luck,as for pool it is 99% skill,so it really doesnt appeal to the masses.
A guy says hey if i put table time in poker and put up the cash i can win just like these guys,for pool you have to put in so much time and may never win a tournament of any kind,its disheartening to most people,so they dont bother, its a game and not a sport to them.I mean i was in the book store and its always the same thing,no pool magazines for sale,about 5 or 6 books under the game section right next to 100s of poker books,sad really,but it is what it is.
Now a big thing is its coverage,i mean its a joke,the reason people dont care to watch it because its not live,the IPT has done a better job producing a better show with character and flash but its still not live.I mean i want to sit on the edge of my seat like in all the sports not knowing the outcome,but in pool we are watching matches months old that we hvae already found out the outcome online or in magazines.Even if its not live they could atleast put it out the next day or on a few hour delay for editing purposes.
A guy says hey if i put table time in poker and put up the cash i can win just like these guys,for pool you have to put in so much time and may never win a tournament of any kind,its disheartening to most people,so they dont bother, its a game and not a sport to them.I mean i was in the book store and its always the same thing,no pool magazines for sale,about 5 or 6 books under the game section right next to 100s of poker books,sad really,but it is what it is.
Now a big thing is its coverage,i mean its a joke,the reason people dont care to watch it because its not live,the IPT has done a better job producing a better show with character and flash but its still not live.I mean i want to sit on the edge of my seat like in all the sports not knowing the outcome,but in pool we are watching matches months old that we hvae already found out the outcome online or in magazines.Even if its not live they could atleast put it out the next day or on a few hour delay for editing purposes.
Yeah, I agree. This thread asks "why pool is a tough sell?" The question itself implies that pool in it's current state hasn't broken through in notoriety. Thus, doing more of the same, shouldn't be surprising to expects results that are more of the same. Would be kinda dumb to keep doing status quo, and expect something other than what it's currently getting. Not a very smart bet to take.Roadie said:
Especially, given the fact that other obscure sports/games have gained in popularity and passed pool amongst the general public. Golf is a good example, because before 15 years ago, it was a game trying to break through. Primarily, it was limited to a relatively elitist group. It was broadcast on TV, but really had no respect. What happened??? Golf, with the inclusion of Tiger Woods, was transformed when it became accessible to the relatively common joe; when it was no longer just limited to that elite group. It developed an image captured by Tiger Woods, who has become the Michael Jordan of golf. Now golf has much more respect, and can now overcome its previous image, and now much easily be justified as a sport.
Likewise, poker has broken through and passed pool. 15 years ago, although popular, it was a much more obscure activity than pool. It had it's rootings in a relatively seedy smoke filled environment. Now, with the World Series of Poker, it has broken through as an activity for not only those limited few experts, but for the common joe. They all have the Chris Moneymaker image in their eyes, that if he could win, so can I.
Nascar would be another example of something that has broken through. Pool may not be too far away, but Nascar would still be ahead.
Even some extremely obscure activities have broken through, like X-games. It is having it's 15 minutes of fame. Their only question is how long will it sustain?
Note: Adding appeal to a broader group, does not mean it has to eliminate the groups that it already has. Golf didn't give up the elite to get the commoners. Poker didn't give up the experts to gain the internet amateurs. Instead it maintained its roots, and added appeal to groups that it was previously missing.
Thus pool in no way should eliminate it's gambling element. The gambling and money element of pool is great and should definitely be embraced. That's the stuff that legends are made of. That's where the heroes come from. The person that the not-so-skilled pool player looks at and wishes to emulate.
The question becomes how do you keep that element and broaden the pool community to be more inclusive of others? With the right vision and direction
it will be possible to have both worlds.
Its not the "gambling" image that is a problem. When outsiders think about pool, they dont think about 2 guys gambling on a game..... or even people placing side bets...... thats not an issue.FLICKit said:
The problem.... is not people thinking pool in a gambling way, theyre thinking its full of "hustlers". And in public speak, hustler = liar, cheat, con man, thief etc. With that, brings a sleazy image of drugs, crime etc etc etc.
If the image of pool in the general eye of the public was Rudolf Wanderone playing Zsa Zsa Gabor for $100 a ball with "The Entertainer" playing in the background, there would be no argument on anyones part..... but its not. The common image is a skeazy guy cheating some honest folks out of their hardearned money at the local tavern, and taking it down the block to buy dope. Sad but pretty much true.
Chuck
Craig, I agree with you. I also thought the production was well done. I liked the commentary. But I am also a hardcore pool fan.
Do you foresee any 7 figure sums being offered to Ronnie Alcano for being the World Champion in pool?
Snooker is the perfect example. It is slow, but it is engaging as well. The pace is maintained the setting is always the same, allowing the characters to emerge. You don't see the set overshadowing the players or the production vying for more attention than the players and the game gets. Snooker also has a fairly long history of consistentcy in it's rules and play. Pool is all over the board with rule changes from tournament to tournament, different games being played, games being invented, pool is seemeingly the promoter's silly putty. I agree with you, if snooker can get command signifigant viewership even through declining popularity why can't pool have the same things?
My answer is consistentcy. No one is putting the same product on week after week for the fans to get to know the players and the game and build those love/hate relationships. Trudeau had this vision which isn't hard to have as it is apparently a formula that works. But why hasn't someone with less dubiousness stepped up to do it.
Why don't millions of fans worldwide look forward to the Japan Open, the US Open, the Coca Cola Classic, The San Miguel Phillipines Open, and finally the World Championships with live updates provided by Nokia? Why isn't Mika Immonen the poster boy for Nokia? "I keep in touch with all my Filapina Lovelies using my Nokia 7654 Worldphone when I am on the road winning tournaments" - Nokia, the winning shot!
This is why I called pool a tough sell. Pool has the characters. It has the stage. It has a grand history with a worldwide following. It requires the cleverness of a chess player combined with the accuracy of an archer and the nerves of a Nascar driver - so why can't it be more rewarding for the players. Why isn't Ronnie Alcano's picture plastered on the front page of newspapers around the world?
Speaking about the production and being critical for just a moment. I watched the lead up, the highlights and so on. Woudn't it have been great to showcase the players in biographies before the final?
There was plenty of time to have had the production crew get some footage of the Phillipine pool enviroment, from One Side Billiard cafe, the grittiness, the action, the real life dreams of hundreds of young Filipino sharpshooters to play on the world stage, to show what forged a Ronnie Alcano, to mention his seasoning on the Joss Tour in the USA. Contrasted with Ralf Souquet, the consumate professional, with his classic German stoicism, his regimented training, his club and league eperience, Germany's tiered league system, Ralf's stint in the military being paid by the goverment to train and compete as part of their special sports division, his eschewing of the gambling side of pool. You couldn't have had two more disparate characters in the finals and yet there was NOTHING about them other than snippets of commentary which barely alluded to the things I mentioned. Sell the characters to those who aren't already in the know. There was nothing about Ronnie or Ralf that had to be made up just a lot that could have been shown and said that wasn't. Do that and maybe pool will someday have millions staying up well past bedtime sweating the rolls with their favorite player and those players will deservedly have millions coming to them for it.
Do you foresee any 7 figure sums being offered to Ronnie Alcano for being the World Champion in pool?
Snooker is the perfect example. It is slow, but it is engaging as well. The pace is maintained the setting is always the same, allowing the characters to emerge. You don't see the set overshadowing the players or the production vying for more attention than the players and the game gets. Snooker also has a fairly long history of consistentcy in it's rules and play. Pool is all over the board with rule changes from tournament to tournament, different games being played, games being invented, pool is seemeingly the promoter's silly putty. I agree with you, if snooker can get command signifigant viewership even through declining popularity why can't pool have the same things?
My answer is consistentcy. No one is putting the same product on week after week for the fans to get to know the players and the game and build those love/hate relationships. Trudeau had this vision which isn't hard to have as it is apparently a formula that works. But why hasn't someone with less dubiousness stepped up to do it.
Why don't millions of fans worldwide look forward to the Japan Open, the US Open, the Coca Cola Classic, The San Miguel Phillipines Open, and finally the World Championships with live updates provided by Nokia? Why isn't Mika Immonen the poster boy for Nokia? "I keep in touch with all my Filapina Lovelies using my Nokia 7654 Worldphone when I am on the road winning tournaments" - Nokia, the winning shot!
This is why I called pool a tough sell. Pool has the characters. It has the stage. It has a grand history with a worldwide following. It requires the cleverness of a chess player combined with the accuracy of an archer and the nerves of a Nascar driver - so why can't it be more rewarding for the players. Why isn't Ronnie Alcano's picture plastered on the front page of newspapers around the world?
Speaking about the production and being critical for just a moment. I watched the lead up, the highlights and so on. Woudn't it have been great to showcase the players in biographies before the final?
There was plenty of time to have had the production crew get some footage of the Phillipine pool enviroment, from One Side Billiard cafe, the grittiness, the action, the real life dreams of hundreds of young Filipino sharpshooters to play on the world stage, to show what forged a Ronnie Alcano, to mention his seasoning on the Joss Tour in the USA. Contrasted with Ralf Souquet, the consumate professional, with his classic German stoicism, his regimented training, his club and league eperience, Germany's tiered league system, Ralf's stint in the military being paid by the goverment to train and compete as part of their special sports division, his eschewing of the gambling side of pool. You couldn't have had two more disparate characters in the finals and yet there was NOTHING about them other than snippets of commentary which barely alluded to the things I mentioned. Sell the characters to those who aren't already in the know. There was nothing about Ronnie or Ralf that had to be made up just a lot that could have been shown and said that wasn't. Do that and maybe pool will someday have millions staying up well past bedtime sweating the rolls with their favorite player and those players will deservedly have millions coming to them for it.
"Snooker is infinately more complex, slower, tactical than 9 ball will ever be"
Oh, another Snooker vs. Pool debate, yay!
Infinitely more complex - no, and even Steve Davis mentioned that it's not.
9-Ball has many subtleties just as snooker does. As Steve Davis mentioned, although the pockets are bigger in pool, control of the white is paramount as very often a one inch difference in position trasforms an easy out into a difficult one. Both disciplines have complexities that are intrinsic to the equipment and rules. Neither is more or less than the other, just different.
Infinitely more tactical - no it's not. Both games require a fair amount of tactics and both games have standard "moves" which all have varying degrees of difficulty.
Slower? Yes Snooker is slower. Infiinitely slower, no but that obvious isn't it. Ronnie O doesn't think snooker is slower than nine ball with his 5 minute 147. Actually, Snooker might be a little faster than because it's pretty much punch-counterpunch. There are just a lot more shots being taken to complete a frame of snooker than in nine ball. In pro 9 ball the player has to make the right moves within 1 or 2 shots or the frame is over.
On this point and back to the complexity - it is far more complex for two players to have a safety battle on a pool table with just a few balls left with both players playing for the same ball than it is for the same situation on a snooker table. Surely we could agree that the exact same situation can occur on a pool table asn on a snooker table with both players needing to pocket the remaining balls to win, or another way whoever pockets the next ball will probably win the frame. Thus it is clear that it is far easier to play safe on a snooker table than it is on a pool table given that it is easier on a pool table to bank and kick balls into pockets. So it is far trickier to play a safe that takes away the positive options.
So while snooker takes longer to play a frame, it actually might have a faster pace than nine ball - blasphemy I know. But perhaps more analysis will bear this out. I equate it to one pocket. One pocket seems like a much slower game than nine ball but in fact it's faster because the players are taking more shots at each other in each frame. There is no sitting down while your opponent runs thirty balls. It's punch,counter punch, punch, punch, counter punch, for many shots until someone lands one that let's them run balls and win the game. There is a lot more back and forth in one pocket than there is in nine ball.
Oh, another Snooker vs. Pool debate, yay!
Infinitely more complex - no, and even Steve Davis mentioned that it's not.
9-Ball has many subtleties just as snooker does. As Steve Davis mentioned, although the pockets are bigger in pool, control of the white is paramount as very often a one inch difference in position trasforms an easy out into a difficult one. Both disciplines have complexities that are intrinsic to the equipment and rules. Neither is more or less than the other, just different.
Infinitely more tactical - no it's not. Both games require a fair amount of tactics and both games have standard "moves" which all have varying degrees of difficulty.
Slower? Yes Snooker is slower. Infiinitely slower, no but that obvious isn't it. Ronnie O doesn't think snooker is slower than nine ball with his 5 minute 147. Actually, Snooker might be a little faster than because it's pretty much punch-counterpunch. There are just a lot more shots being taken to complete a frame of snooker than in nine ball. In pro 9 ball the player has to make the right moves within 1 or 2 shots or the frame is over.
On this point and back to the complexity - it is far more complex for two players to have a safety battle on a pool table with just a few balls left with both players playing for the same ball than it is for the same situation on a snooker table. Surely we could agree that the exact same situation can occur on a pool table asn on a snooker table with both players needing to pocket the remaining balls to win, or another way whoever pockets the next ball will probably win the frame. Thus it is clear that it is far easier to play safe on a snooker table than it is on a pool table given that it is easier on a pool table to bank and kick balls into pockets. So it is far trickier to play a safe that takes away the positive options.
So while snooker takes longer to play a frame, it actually might have a faster pace than nine ball - blasphemy I know. But perhaps more analysis will bear this out. I equate it to one pocket. One pocket seems like a much slower game than nine ball but in fact it's faster because the players are taking more shots at each other in each frame. There is no sitting down while your opponent runs thirty balls. It's punch,counter punch, punch, punch, counter punch, for many shots until someone lands one that let's them run balls and win the game. There is a lot more back and forth in one pocket than there is in nine ball.
Roadie said:
Hi Roadie, I agree with you that the Bio's and other stuff you mentioned would have been a great addition, but do you really think it would have added millions of fans? Do you think if every suggestion you have made was implemented a significant amount of more viewers would watch?
Yes the product (pool) can be refined and improved, as you mentioned most sports do this. The problem is for the most part pool is run by amateurs, ex players and anyone that decided to buy a piece of the pie (World Champs, US Open etc..) and do there own thing. The WPA I'm sure do a decent job BUT they certainly don't have the drive that the KT and the IPT had. Personally I think its the responsibility of the WPA to created a global professional tour with guaranteed money for the elite players, this is were they have and are failing badly.
Snooker debate --> Aghhhh!!!!
I certainly didn't mean to turn this into another dreaded debate, if I knew my flippant comparison would prompt you to defend pool so much I would have reworded it
The point I was trying to make, the point I have tried to make unsuccessfully many times on this forum is this. 9 ball pool is extremely quick, probably 90% of the games I watched in the WPC were connect the dots break and runs or a run out after a single safety exchange. Even this format seems to be too slow for some peoples attention spans. The rules in 9 ball couldn't be more simple, the rules are not well known in some parts of the UK and it doesn't normally take more than a minute to explain them to a "newbie". The game is quick and simple to understand to the uneducated viewer in comparison to Snooker, I am not comparing skill or which game is tougher.
To the average viewer snooker by comparison is much more complex, its based on points and often requires good maths and a lot of knowledge to understand the game. If you watch Snooker you might be surprised at how much knowledge a 70 year old women that's never hit a ball in her life has of snooker in the UK. Snooker probably has on average about 20 safety shots per frame, a frame probably takes about 15-20mins on average with some frames lasting over an hour. A single match is played over multiple sessions often over several days!
Therefore this strongly suggests, that the problem with pool isn't that the game is "boring", or "to slow", or "not interesting to the average viewer" etc etc IMO Snooker's success blows these theories out of the water! There simple is no compelling reason why 9 ball pool in its current format can not be atleast as successful as Snooker on TV, it just isn't being marketed properly or aggressively enough.
Last edited:
av84fun said:
That's it! Audience participation! Get a Phil Donohue or Gerry Springer type to rove the audience with a microphone, asking for comments. If a player really dogs a shot, everything stops for a moment while the announcer gets the crowd into the act. A vote is taken: Does he get a pie in the face or not?? If yes, some fat lady from the audience waddles down to the table and plasters the guy!! Now that will put players on notice not to dog them shots!
Instant viewership guaranteed....
LOL
Flex
Last edited:
Something similar was mentioned before, but one thing you don't see in Pool is big name sponsorship. Not just Nokia and Cadillac, but what about Nike? Almost any sport on ESPN is going to have the involvement of Nike or Reebok or the other big names in sports equipment. I'm not saying by any means that I hope Nike starts making cues (**shudder** perish the thought). But how do you turn a pool player into a sweaty 100 foot tall black man (viewed from below, as if through glass) for a shoe commercial?
//me ponders what a break shot look like viewed from below...
//me ponders what a break shot look like viewed from below...
I agree that a big part of the problem is with marketing. Take the IPT on Versus, for example. With the hundreds of cable channels available, how many fans know that they can watch IPT reruns on Versus?TheOne said:Therefore this strongly suggests, that the problem with pool isn't that the game is "boring", or "to slow", or "not interesting to the average viewer" etc etc IMO Snooker's success blows these theories out of the water! There simple is no compelling reason why 9 ball pool in its current format can not be atleast as successful as Snooker on TV, it just isn't being marketed properly or aggressively enough.
Pool needs to do a much better job of marketing itself, to increase its public awareness.
Give pool a gimic like McDonalds and the monopoly money giveaway. Just look at all the fools who go to McDonalds to play. Even the TV news covers this nonsense.
Or better yet, the idea is being kicked around I saw on CNN to give away a million dollars to anyone who votes in a certain election. What do YOU think the voting percentage would jump to? How many people do you think would start watching the IPT if they had a possibility of winning 1 million dollars? We would just have to get Ho to put up the money in advance LOL.
Pool does need a jump start. Hell, I asked all the young people in my office if they have seen The Color of Money, and they say: "What?" These movies have come and have gone. We need a good new movie for starters, with super actors.
You guys had some good ideas though of jazzing up the current TV presentations.
We must start at the grass roots level. The APA should give away BIG bucks to new members every year. Then the league would grow and grow and grow.
Or better yet, the idea is being kicked around I saw on CNN to give away a million dollars to anyone who votes in a certain election. What do YOU think the voting percentage would jump to? How many people do you think would start watching the IPT if they had a possibility of winning 1 million dollars? We would just have to get Ho to put up the money in advance LOL.
Pool does need a jump start. Hell, I asked all the young people in my office if they have seen The Color of Money, and they say: "What?" These movies have come and have gone. We need a good new movie for starters, with super actors.
You guys had some good ideas though of jazzing up the current TV presentations.
We must start at the grass roots level. The APA should give away BIG bucks to new members every year. Then the league would grow and grow and grow.
drama & villians
"Battle of the sexes." Have co-ed competition.
Get Muslims playing. villians
Klan vs Nation of Islam sponsored teams.
Jews vs neo-nazis.
Gays & lesbians vs Christian fundamentalists.
Marines vs Army.
Live computer betting on games or even innings.
"Battle of the sexes." Have co-ed competition.
Get Muslims playing. villians
Klan vs Nation of Islam sponsored teams.
Jews vs neo-nazis.
Gays & lesbians vs Christian fundamentalists.
Marines vs Army.
Live computer betting on games or even innings.