Why put pool on TV?

[macguy]

I am a big fan of Seinfeld and I remember in one episode where they were pitching their TV show idea to the head of the network one of the first questions he asked them was, "Why are people going to watch the show"? That's a pretty simple question but may be difficult to answer. If you put something on TV why will someone watch and return to watch again? You better know the answer to that before you invest your time and money. Except for me personally and I don't count because I think differently then the average person regarding pool I am somewhat of a fanatic, why will the average person tune in and watch a pool match on TV, and more importantly tune in a second time? We were talking about this at the pool room the other night and could not really come up with a good answer. This may be why you don't see pool on TV, neither can anyone else.

 

[Colin Colenso]

A way you may find an answer is to ask why people watch similar programs such as golf, tennis, poker, nascar, nfl, nba, reality shows, documentaries etc.

 

[ironman]

A way you may find an answer is to ask why people watch similar programs such as golf, tennis, poker, nascar, nfl, nba, reality shows, documentaries etc.

It seems you and Mcguy both have pretty well hit the nail on the head.
The selling points are very difficult. It is easy to point out that studies have shown that pool has a participation of over 150,000,000 or whatever the number was and then the potential investor comes right back and asks, well why then does the leading billiard publication have a monthly distribution of only 30,000. i've had that gun held on me before and I was tap dancing like chicken on a hot tin roof.
It is the very reason I pull so hard for the IPT. The game/sport needs radical change on TV.

 

[Slowhand]

Slowhand has left the building

 

[catscradle]

... why will the average person tune in and watch a pool match on TV, and more importantly tune in a second time? ...

They won't. If you're not a player aware of the finer points of pool, it's IMO quite boring to watch. A lock-up safety may be a thing of beauty to you and me, but Joe Sixpack is going to find it a good stimulus to change the channel.

 

[jsp]

They won't. If you're not a player aware of the finer points of pool, it's IMO quite boring to watch. A lock-up safety may be a thing of beauty to you and me, but Joe Sixpack is going to find it a good stimulus to change the channel.

I disagree. My reason? Poker.

Why is poker so popular today? Because the World Poker Tour (in the Travel Channel) presented a high-quality program that educated the viewing audience on the "finer points" and intracacies of poker, while keeping the content fun and exciting to watch. Before the poker boom, no one knew the beauty of checking an ace-high flush after the flop in first position. But after the boom, this is regarded as general knowledge to a lot of Joe Sixpacks. Why couldn't this happen for a lock-up safety in pool?

Pool has the potential to be very much as big as poker. I'm willing to bet that, before the poker boom, there were more Joe Sixpack's that have played a rack of pool than those who have played a hand of poker. We just first need a high quality TV program that properly educates the viewing audience on the finer points of pool, while keeping the content exciting and intriguing. That's why I believe the way the KOTH tournament is presented on TV is utterly critical for the future of pool.

 

[catscradle]

I disagree. My reason? Poker.

Why is poker so popular today? Because the World Poker Tour (in the Travel Channel) presented a high-quality program that educated the viewing audience on the "finer points" and intracacies of poker, while keeping the content fun and exciting to watch. Before the poker boom, no one knew the beauty of checking an ace-high flush after the flop in first position. But after the boom, this is regarded as general knowledge to a lot of Joe Sixpacks. Why couldn't this happen for a lock-up safety in pool?

Pool has the potential to be very much as big as poker. I'm willing to bet that, before the poker boom, there were more Joe Sixpack's that have played a rack of pool than those who have played a hand of poker. We just first need a high quality TV program that properly educates the viewing audience on the finer points of pool, while keeping the content exciting and intriguing. That's why I believe the way the KOTH tournament is presented on TV is utterly critical for the future of pool.

I hope you're right and I'm wrong, and I've been wrong plenty of times.
However, I think poker is a very different animal than pool. It'll probably be at least a year, probably 2, before we know what the IPT will do for pool on tv, I hope 2 years from now I look like a damn fool for being such a naysayer.

 

[parvus1202]

If you make people think, then it is fun to watch, but if the player breaks, sunk the 9, and it's over, very boring. If a player run out in one minute, then boring. Snooker has a wider audience on TV because no run outs, position, safety, study the spread, then try to make high run. Watchers have a chance to see the table and study how to run out, hoping they have the same thinking as the players. Reyes is fun to watch, he is not fast nor slow, and he studies the table and of course people are waiting for that magical shot.

 

[macguy]

I disagree. My reason? Poker.

Why is poker so popular today? Because the World Poker Tour (in the Travel Channel) presented a high-quality program that educated the viewing audience on the "finer points" and intracacies of poker, while keeping the content fun and exciting to watch. Before the poker boom, no one knew the beauty of checking an ace-high flush after the flop in first position. But after the boom, this is regarded as general knowledge to a lot of Joe Sixpacks. Why couldn't this happen for a lock-up safety in pool?

Pool has the potential to be very much as big as poker. I'm willing to bet that, before the poker boom, there were more Joe Sixpack's that have played a rack of pool than those who have played a hand of poker. We just first need a high quality TV program that properly educates the viewing audience on the finer points of pool, while keeping the content exciting and intriguing. That's why I believe the way the KOTH tournament is presented on TV is utterly critical for the future of pool.

I think one of the big things with poker is people can play the game once they know the rules in like ten minutes and when they see the champ make the same play they would have they feel like players they jump up and down saying I told you he should have folded. They can actually play right along the players on TV. That is the big draw of "Wheel Of Fortune" you play along with the players often beating them to the right answer. Also the on line poker may also be fueling it, they are hooked and love to play and watch. Poker really has a lot going for it. The big thing was being able to see their cards with the little table mounted cameras. The drama is real and you can cut it with a knife sometimes.

Pool will have to find some of the same dynamics of drama and excitement to draw in an audience and keep them coming back beyond just the novelty of seeing the players play. I am afraid the better a player plays the less watchable it becomes. That will get old quickly and they will change the channel. The great thing about pool is there are so many different games that can be played, hell we have made up our own games, that you can create something for the public while keeping the traditional part of the sport as well. every game still requires all the same skills, It can be everything to everybody. I like the trick shot shows, it has put some money in the pockets of players without hurting the other aspects of the sport as well as promoting the sport. I think banks would really appeal to the public and would like to see a few high profile bank tournaments on TV.

 

[jsp]

If you make people think, then it is fun to watch, but if the player breaks, sunk the 9, and it's over, very boring. If a player run out in one minute, then boring. Snooker has a wider audience on TV because no run outs, position, safety, study the spread, then try to make high run. Watchers have a chance to see the table and study how to run out, hoping they have the same thinking as the players. Reyes is fun to watch, he is not fast nor slow, and he studies the table and of course people are waiting for that magical shot.

I absolutely agree that the viewing audience will be more interested the more they have to think. This is why, IMO, it was a brilliant move for the IPT to make 8ball instead of 9ball as the game of choice.

First off, 8ball is the game the average Joe knows how to play. Sink the stripes or the solids first, and then the 8ball. So they can relate to that, because more of them have played it.

Secondly, watching 8ball would allow the viewing audience to think along with the player. I think this is why watching 9ball on TV hasn't had much success at all. There's no thinking in terms of what ball to hit next. You go from the 1 to the 2, then to the 3, and so on. (Of course there is a lot of decision making in terms of position routes, patterns, and safety play, but that won't be immediately obvious for Joe Sixpack.)

The beauty of 8ball is that you have many options, and thus many decisions to make. Right after the break, you must decide if you want to shoot lows or highs. Once that decision is made, you have to determine the proper sequence of balls that will make your runout as easy as possible. The viewing audience can think along with the player, and the audience can try to guess what ball or what route the player will play next.

Thinking along with the player is what makes watching poker on TV fun... "If I had his hand, I would raise the pot on the button. What? Why are you just calling? You fool, your pair of 10's won't hold up after the flop! Argh...see? There's an ace and queen on the flop. Now you have to fold if he raises the pot."

Likewise for pool, the audience can think along with the player... "I'd shoot that straight-in 7 next. What?...why did you cut that 3 in the corner? That shot was 5 times more difficult than that 7. Now you left yourself too much angle on the 6. Oh, ahh...I see now, great shot. You wanted position precise position on the 6 to break out the 8 from that cluster. Pretty clever. I'm learning something new every rack. Pool is awesome! I'm going to watch the IPT on TV every chance I get! I'm also going straight to the pool hall right after this match to practice what I have learned. Then I'm going online to purchase a pool table of my own and a couple of cues. Yay pool!"

Hehe...I think I got a little carried away on that last example.

 

[Andrew Manning]

As far as any sports on TV, it all has to do with at least one of three things. Either you have a vested interest in the outcome, home team support or you can relate to it because of personal experience from playing that game.

1. Vested interest (gambling): When you have money on it then you are more likely to watch.

2. Home team support (spirit): You are more likely to watch games where your home team is playing than two teams from the other side of the country. Rarely do you root for the opposing team. If you attended Ohio State, there's a good chance you would be interested in the outcome of their football games. You receive a shared feeling of accomplishment, when they win you feel as though you also won.

3. Personal experience from playing that game: People that play golf, watch golf. People that bowl, watch bowling. I never played soccer, so I can't watch it without getting very bored even though it's the most popular sport in the world. It has to do with an appreciation of the game. Children grow up playing sports in the US like baseball, football, basketball and hockey. Is it because those are the sports on TV, or are they on TV because those are the sports they grew up with? Here it's the chicken or the egg question. As more children grow up playing soccer, it's gaining in popularity here in the US.

There are no common pool bookies to place your bet with and you can't root for New York City's pool team, so only the people that play pool will be interested in watching pool on TV. The number of people that play pool is also limited because you don't have pool tables in schools and most people don't have the room or money to have a table in their home. So how do you attract more people to the game?

Most people view pool as an activity associated with the consumption of alcohol and not a real sport. Face it, most places where you go to play pool serve alcohol. This is not the atmoshere that mothers want their children growing up in even though more children should be encouraged to play pool. Watching Paul Newman getting drunk in the Hustler isn't developing a politically correct perception for the game. It's a shame that it has this reputation because to be the best at anything, you should avoid alcohol during competition. However, bowling also has the same drawbacks, we need to use this as an example. Since the inception of the IPT to be like the pro bowlers tour, I'm hoping that this will help to promote the game with better paydays. (Please don't let this thread get hijacked by the KT controversy) More positive TV exposure is needed.

I agree with ironman,,, The game/sport needs radical change on TV.

I think this is a really excellent post about the draw of sports on TV, and I totally agree with the conclusion: when people change channels and see a pool match on TV, they either A) change it immediately, B) watch for a moment with slight admiration for the players' skill and then lose interest, or C) watch the match with lasting interest, and thus are part of pool's TV audience.

I think the only people who choose option C are people who are already avid (once a week or more) pool players. Most of them either have a home table, or are involved in leagues or regular tournaments.

I do wonder if bowling is the example pool needs to follow though. In my limited perception, it doesn't seem to me like bowling is really doing any better than pool in terms of popularity and TV coverage. I think golf is the example pool needs to follow. When did it go from a game old white men liked to play on weekends to a game with ample LIVE TV coverage, multi-million-dollar endorsements, and a game where the top players are household names? How did they accomplish that? What can pool do to follow that path?

 

[macguy]

I think this is a really excellent post about the draw of sports on TV, and I totally agree with the conclusion: when people change channels and see a pool match on TV, they either A) change it immediately, B) watch for a moment with slight admiration for the players' skill and then lose interest, or C) watch the match with lasting interest, and thus are part of pool's TV audience.

I think the only people who choose option C are people who are already avid (once a week or more) pool players. Most of them either have a home table, or are involved in leagues or regular tournaments.

I do wonder if bowling is the example pool needs to follow though. In my limited perception, it doesn't seem to me like bowling is really doing any better than pool in terms of popularity and TV coverage. I think golf is the example pool needs to follow. When did it go from a game old white men liked to play on weekends to a game with ample LIVE TV coverage, multi-million-dollar endorsements, and a game where the top players are household names? How did they accomplish that? What can pool do to follow that path?

Golf has emmy award winning coverage second to none. There are many dramas playing out at the same time as you watch on the edge of your seat the different players competing at the same time. It is compelling TV almost as if it were designed to the tube.

 

[JAM]

...Personally, I think that Trudeau's price tag on the taped tournament shows what a marketing IDIOT he is (despite the fact that he has been so successful in other areas)....

I guess everybody is entitled to an opinion, Whitewolf, but to label the man as an "IDIOT" doesn't seem prudent to me, though that's my opinion.

Kevin Trudeau must have some expertise in marketing or he wouldn't be where he is today.

Personally, I am disheartened when I read a small minority of the gloom-and-doom posts relating to the IPT and Kevin Trudeau. Why not wait and see what unfolds down the IPT tournament trail. It has not even begun. Yet, some naysayers continue to project the IPT's demise. It just doesn't make sense to me.

I hope that I am proved wrong, however. My first impression is that he is greedy and that he will be dropping this IPT stuff shortly because it will never make money....i.e. his pockets only go so deep....

If I am understanding your thoughts, Whitewolf, your first impression is that he is greedy. Yet, last week in Orlando, he not only gave out $1,000,000 as a total prize purse to 44 pool players, but he also spent -- and I am only guessing -- maybe three times that amount in the production of the King of the Hill Shootout. There were more cameras at this event than there are as an NFL Super Bowl. I think this kind gesture deserves better than having him labeled as "greedy," IMHO.

What we need is for one of us to hit the lottery big time and promote the hell out of pool out of love for the game.

If I were to hit the lottery big time, I wouldn't have a clue as to how to promote or market pool, even though I do have -- at times -- a great deal of love for the game.

JAM

 

[bobroberts]

Perhaps pool promoters should attune themselves to how the cable TV works. My wife and I hardly ever go out to watch a movie. We would rather buy the DVD and watch it over and over.

But what can we pool players do when accustat tapes are $30 - 40 apiece? I would personally buy many many more if the prices were a little lower. And Trudeau's IPT tournament tapes are $1,000 for the complete set?!!!!!!

From a marketing standpoint, VCRS did not start selling until they got under the $600 price tag.

If movies can be had for $10 to $20 each, do you think that accustat tapes are priced too high? Perhaps they could sell AT LEAST twice as many if they lowered the price. This $10 to $20 range seems to be what people are willing to pay - the going price if you will.

Personally, I think that Trudeau's price tag on the taped tournament shows what a marketing IDIOT he is (despite the fact that he has been so successful in other areas). I hope that I am proved wrong, however. My first impression is that he is greedy and that he will be dropping this IPT stuff shortly because it will never make money....i.e. his pockets only go so deep. What we need is for one of us to hit the lottery big time and promote the hell out of pool out of love for the game.

Look whos calling the kettle black?You cant even afford to buy a few accu stats tapes because they cost too much money but you think KT is an idiot.The whole event is 165 matches, thats about $7 bucks a match.Just look at the show Survivor,how maynt people have done anything remotely like that but they still draw a huge audience.

 

[Perk]

If movies can be had for $10 to $20 each, do you think that accustat tapes are priced too high? Perhaps they could sell AT LEAST twice as many if they lowered the price. This $10 to $20 range seems to be what people are willing to pay - the going price if you will.

I would definately buy more videos at the same cost as other movies. I can understand more cost for double and triple disc sets, for example coverage of an entire tourney.

 

[macguy]

I guess everybody is entitled to an opinion, Whitewolf, but to label the man as an "IDIOT" doesn't seem prudent to me, though that's my opinion.

Kevin Trudeau must have some expertise in marketing or he wouldn't be where he is today.

Personally, I am disheartened when I read a small minority of the gloom-and-doom posts relating to the IPT and Kevin Trudeau. Why not wait and see what unfolds down the IPT tournament trail. It has not even begun. Yet, some naysayers continue to project the IPT's demise. It just doesn't make sense to me.



If I am understanding your thoughts, Whitewolf, your first impression is that he is greedy. Yet, last week in Orlando, he not only gave out $1,000,000 as a total prize purse to 44 pool players, but he also spent -- and I am only guessing -- maybe three times that amount in the production of the King of the Hill Shootout. There were more cameras at this event than there are as an NFL Super Bowl. I think this kind gesture deserves better than having him labeled as "greedy," IMHO.



If I were to hit the lottery big time, I wouldn't have a clue as to how to promote or market pool, even though I do have -- at times -- a great deal of love for the game.

JAM

I guess that puts an end to what may have been an interesting disscusion.

 

[catscradle]

...
If movies can be had for $10 to $20 each, do you think that accustat tapes are priced too high? Perhaps they could sell AT LEAST twice as many if they lowered the price. This $10 to $20 range seems to be what people are willing to pay - the going price if you will.
...

I think it is a catch-22 they can't sell them cheaper because they don't have large enough gross sales. However, I don't think even if they dropped the price considerably the sales would rise correspondingly.