HomeAbout Billiards DigestContact UsArchiveAll About PoolEquipmentOur AdvertisersLinks
From the Publisher
By Mike Panozzo
Mike became editor of Billiards Digest in 1980 and liked it so much that he bought the company. He has served on the Billiard Congress of America board of directors and as president of the Billiard & Bowling Institute of America.


Archives
• October 2024
• September 2024
• August 2024
• July 2024
• June 2024
• May 2024
• April 2024
• March 2024
• February 2024
• January 2024
• December 2023
• November 2023
• October 2023
• September 2023
• August 2023
• July 2023
• June 2023
• May 2023
• April 2023
• March 2023
• February 2023
• January 2023
• December 2022
• November 2022
• October 2022
• September 2022
• August 2022
• July 2022
• June 2022
• May 2022
• April 2022
• March 2022
• February 2022
• January 2022
• December 2021
• November 2021
• October 2021
• September 2021
• August 2021
• July 2021
• June 2021
• May 2021
• April 2021
• March 2021
• February 2021
• January 2021
• December 2020
• November 2020
• October 2020
• September 2020
• August 2020
• July 2020
• June 2020
• May 2020
• April 2020
• March 2020
• February 2020
• January 2020
• December 2019
• November 2019
• October 2019
• September 2019
• August 2019
• July 2019
• June 2019
• May 2019
• April 2019
• March 2019
• February 2019
• January 2019
• December 2018
• November 2018
• October 2018
• September 2018
• August 2018
• July 2018
• June 2018
• May 2018
• April 2018
• March 2018
• February 2018
• January 2018
• November 2017
• October 2017
• September 2017
• August 2017
• July 2017
• June 2017
• May 2017
• April 2017
• March 2017
• February 2017
• January 2017
• December 2016
• November 2016
• October 2016
• September 2016
• August 2016
• July 2016
• June 2016
• May 2016
• Apr 2016
• Mar 2016
• Feb 2016
• Jan 2016
• Dec 2015
• Nov 2015
• Oct 2015
• Sept 2015
• August 2015
• July 2015
• June 2015
• May 2015
• April 2015
• March 2015
• February 2015
• January 2015
• October 2014
• August 2014
• May 2014
• March 2014
• February 2014
• September 2013
• June 2013
• May 2013
• April 2013
• March 2013
• February 2013
• January 2013
• December 2012
• November 2012
• October 2012
• September 2012
• August 2012
• July 2012
• June 2012
• May 2012
• April 2012
• March 2012
• February 2012
• January 2012
• December 2011
• November 2011
• October 2011
• September 2011
• August 2011
• July 2011
• June 2011
• May 2011
• April 2011
• March 2011
• February 2011
• January 2011
• December 2010
• November 2010
• October 2010
• September 2010
• August 2010
• July 2010
• June 2010
• May 2010
• April 2010
• March 2010
• February 2010
• January 2010
• December 2009
• November 2009
• October 2009
• September 2009
• August 2009
• July 2009
• June 2009
• May 2009
• April 2009
• March 2009
• February 2009
• January 2009
• October 2008
• September 2008
• August 2008
• July 2008
• June 2008
• May 2008
• April 2008
• March 2008
• February 2008
• January 2008
 
November: Taking Sides
November 2024

So, the World Pool Association (WPA) did what it had threatened to do all along, and that is to enforce bans on players who participate in events not sanctioned by the world governing body. The WPA announced its ban in an email following the non-sanctioned Hanoi Open, an event promoted by Matchroom Multi Sport under the World Nineball Tour banner.

And as the Hanoi event approached, many players were left having to choose between the WNT and WPA. With many beholden to national federations who fund travel and entry fees to WPA events, a division in the pro ranks was inevitable.

I certainly understand the spot many of these players find themselves in, having to weigh independence against contractual obligations to national federations.

My confusion and concern with player movement, however, is more about what’s being taken for granted and what’s being looked over. And I’m afraid that if this becomes a battle with only one winner, it will set the game back 20 years.

Many of us old timers have waited a very long time for something that looked like it was elevating the entire sport for people outside our little railbird world to take notice of. Something that look and sounded big. Something that got talked about all year long. Something you could follow. Players becoming stars. Events leading to something.

It’s about more than prize money. It’s about growth potential. I see that with Matchroom’s WNT. This may sound like a Matchroom crush, but it’s about more than a company. It’s about presentation of a sport. I honestly do not see that with the WPA.

(And for the record, very few people outside the WPA board room have tried to get people to understand the role and value of the WPA than me. Do I think they do a lot wrong? Absolutely. But the WPA is necessary, and it isn’t going away, so forget that notion.)

And here’s why I say this.

What I see with the WPA are independent deals with independent promoters who pay a sanction fee to run an event. Nothing wrong with that. But that event comes and goes, usually without a lot of fanfare and almost always without any residual value to the sport other than prize fund payout. When the event is over, it evaporates into the ether until the following year. It has zero relevance with regards to any other event the WPA sanctions. The Predator World Championships and Pro Billiard Series events attempt to go beyond that model, but most are events are still one-offs.

And with all those independent events you have inconsistencies. Nothing looks the same. There is no uniformity. No commonality.

And the WPA? Don’t kid yourself. They are not promoters. They have no interest in a tour. No interest in shaping the future of the sport. They don’t have any control over these events, nor do they want control. They are about sanction fees and federations and government subsidies.

So, what you end up with is a hodgepodge of events throughout the year, with little rhyme or reason other than a payday for the players — and I get that is important to the players.

But where is the growth? Where is something that fans or sponsors can latch onto? The WPA does not own these events, so they can’t market them. They can’t get a sponsor for all of the events because they don’t have the power. They can’t make a TV deal for all the events because they don’t have the power. They cannot speak for these events in any way. They are solely a seal of approval. And that’s fine. But that doesn’t get the sport any closer to becoming a real sport.

To me, the real value of the WNT is that it is a commercial product, owned and produced by a company. A company with a real live full-time production team. A real full-time marketing team. A real full-time television team. This is what they do. This is their job 365 days a year.

And because of that there is uniformity and vision and a product that, when it reaches a certain point, can be marketed and sold and promoted as a single entity… a tour. It boggles my mind that the players and even the WPA don’t realize the long-term value of that for the sport that everyone feigns to care about.

Instead, players get mediocre ballrooms, inconsistency and lack of visibility. The WPA doesn’t determine where the China Open is going to be played. Or the Maldives Open. Or the Qatar Open. They don’t determine where, or even if, the event will have adequate worldwide coverage on TV or a streaming platform. And those things matter in developing a sport or legitimate tour.

I am steadfast in the belief that the growth of the sport will come from a single entity whose sole reason for being is to grow a sellable product. That does not mean that the WPA doesn’t have its place and isn’t of real value to the sport. It’s different business models. That doesn’t mean one is right and one is wrong, or that one should survive and one should perish. But I see the critical importance of the WNT and worry that we may be doing our damnedest to chase it away.

A lot has been written about player stances and statements and holding to one’s word. But if the players really want to affect change, demand that the WNT and WPA find a way to forge ahead in separate directions without forcing players to make choices. Both entities owe the players the courtesy of working toward resolution. If they proceed as “enemies,” no one will win. Certainly not the players.

MORE VIDEO...