GB9
Topic: Event 3 GB9 Northern Masters

Excellent news Riggers i'll be looking to signing back up for next season then

I played Event 1 and am planning to play Event 4. I travel from Denmark and have chosen to play a couple of GB9's this year instead of Eurotours to try something new. I've tried to get others to come but the main problem is that the prize money is too top heavy. I undetstand that big money is needed to attract the top European names, but getting to the last 32 of a GB9 gives between £100-£150 where a last 32 finish at a Eurotour gives £500. At my level, I would be pleased with a last 32 finish and its really a no brainer if I have to choose between a GB9 and Eurotour with those figures in mind. Having grown up in London I enjoy playing in England and my family get to come and watch, but people with no affiliation to the UK will not see the value in playing a GB9.

Yep it is tough Alan...
But i think you can guarantee there will be at least 100 entries for next event,London area always gets the entries, so this will mean better prize monies ,also right next to Stansted airport helps to so many cheap flights available...
Now tables are paid for i think next year will be the best yet for Gb9, so future looks promising.......

                             Mark Gray.

This is a better idea by Phil IMO.. I support the tour because I enjoy playing pool at the best level in uk and prob around the world and is run brilliantly by good honest hard working people who want it to achieve..
but if there looking to get the the numbers back which I believe they can cos the players are out there..
need to lower entry to around 80-90 an event..around 30 a night at hotel "if possible" then I expect you,l see massive rise in numbers again, which would increase prize money even at a lower entry"!!

. 2 events on a weekend I think works best and I think most players would agree or a high percentage anyway..even with the current cost and format I would be considering what to do next year, because I need to see what I can get with my money, prob would work out around the same if I just play 2 euro tour events, which could be made into holiday break for my family and a couple small tb9 events.
Me and rob was talking about this on the journey home hope the cost and format does change wouldn't like to see the numbers keep getting lower and lower.... I noticed we must of had 10 players from Europe"2 Italian and 8 Spanish" I think.. That makes it only 70 home grown players which is worrying.

We've been loyal members since it started back in 2008" and hope to continue with my support.!!
.but even I am giving it a good think at the moment for next year, just because of cost and value and I can afford to play it as my hobbie. Lets come up with something and get this tour buzzing again around 120/140 entries I can't see why not for a national tour..
Would finally like to big up all the guys who run it behind the scenes because it is so professional and should be very proud, lets hope everyone can still afford to carry on to support Gb9 and let it grow into something even bigger next year. Cheers..
Don't forget it's only my opinion' be interesting to know everyone's opinion out there...??
Have spoke to a few this weekend an all seem to say they need to re think for next year, I state only for financial reasons none other.
Because they are great weekends away 5 times a year.
On 2013-06-10 07:45 , wildman147 Wrote:

I suppose the format is not going to please everyone no matter what you do but I'm kind of swaying towards the Challenge, Pro & Main again. To be honest Dom, dropping the entry fee is a no go IMO, the GB9 team have done the maths I'm sure.

Thinking about it, there is massive promise for going back to the 3 tournaments format:

1 - Lesser players feel they have better value for money. Even though its the same amount of matches, in the current format they could draw 2 pros in the first 2 rounds.

2 - A goal for Pro's to maintain the "Pro" status, and goal for the amateurs to top the challenge to get to "Pro".

3 - Still value for the Pros who can potentially win the same if not more than now (If the entries permit).

May be worth thinking about... Maybe arrange with Andy and Riggers to arrange a players meeting at the next event?

I think it used to work so much better and there were more players per event coming home with some prize money. The challenge also gave lesser players a better chance of a dream win. IMO its def the way forward however there is no point in debaiting here as i know GB9 dont responed so i will email GB9 to suggest this

The fundamental flaws of the challenge and pro though is what happened last year - 2 world class players got relegated to challenge. It's a difficult one...either format is good I just think the hotels cost way too much. Maybe the money used for tables could be put towards reducing the cost of the hotels?

Could the pro be increased to 32 and then the Challenge left for the others. A lot of the so called 'amateurs' play to a ridiculously high level and they certainly do in other cuesports. Courtney Symons is ridiculous, Arfan Dad is brilliant and then take Chris Hall. Amateur? Really? Then take the others like Shaun Chipperfield and Michael Rhodes.

The reality is most 'amateurs' can't even live with these guys yet they've all been amateur in recent times when their skill level dictates they should compete with the pros.

At least with 32 in the pro it gives more scope for progression, more people get to stay up which further enhances their skill level and experience. In turn UK 9ball gets even stronger. And importantly the elite players should not get relegated then either.

I guess prize money would be less (and more for the pro's), but at least then the remaining amateurs all have a reasonable chance!

32 pro defo. Like you say its a goal for the amateurs to aim for and invaluable experience. I for one would love a go in the pro section as currently I could end up losing to a top amateur in the main event and not gain that extra experience that the pros give you. And great call with giving lesser amateurs a chance to win too

For me personally its not about winning big prize money is the prestige of winning a GB9 event its well known and much talked about. I feel that many amateur players like myself are more interested in the big event win rather than the prize money. thats why i think if the pro section took a higher percentage of the prize money then there is another perk for being pro as its were the big money is played for. Where as most ams would be happy to win even £500 im sure and offer more players some prize money

Good debate...
My thoughts are not entry fees hotels etc if your prepared to pay £150 for the weekend you gonna be ok paying £200-£250 but for the masses to arrive you need a realistic chance of winning some matches and maybe some prize money.
Top players are top players they will be there regardless of format coz they win and will generally at least cover the cost of the weekend but for the vast majority although its good to play world champions and some of the games best players most are just getting to a point where they cannot win, two thirds of the field are losing and drop into the challenge then might make a round or two then just play someone who just lost last 32 of main and seeded into Challenge also therefore almost ruining there chances of cashing in the challenge as well, nothing seems to favour the lesser player in my opinion even a redraw at that stage might help, i was playing Donlon at that point and looked round the room and saw Osbourne, Dad, Symons, Rhodes, Colclough, Muratore, Nelson, Buckmaster, Chipperfield and im sure a few others ive missed most id guess seeded and therefore avoiding each other.
Theres a arguement to say practise more and win more games and you will benefit but people simply cannot or are just not good enough.
Ive mentioned a idea of having maybe 3 small challenge events if it could work logistically top third middle third bottom third of rankings each with there own seperate Challenge competitions (obviously anyone who had no ranking ie Appleton or Stevie Wonder would just be put into there appropiate section) and fields would get bigger perhaps lower the challenge but this would give everyone a realistic chance of silverware and a cash, understandably will result in lower money for the winner but top players will be the main mostly and lets be honest lesser ability players im sure would be happy with any kinda cash and better still a trophy..
The tour needs names but in my view needs numbers more..
Ps just to echo any views on the team at GB9 and i know a couple of them personally as good friends they work stupidly hard behind the scenes and deserve every success in the forcoming years ahead and im sure any tweaks they make will be correct ones for the good of the tour..

I think there is a big difference between £150 and £250. Plus if you are travelling from further away it can cost £300+

I agree with Phil re prestige over prize money. Probably about 1% of players play on tour to win prize money, yes it is nice but realistically who actually expects to and does make a profit out of playing on the tour? Practically nobody so my arguement would be reduce the entry fee to £75 (maybe even less) and reduce the prize fund accordingly.

This will put off the Europeans maybe but again they arent making money out of it as it stands so they might as well just lose a bit less. THats what it is, its about losing less not winning more.

The whole Mosconi cup team were meant to be on tour but iv only seen Chris Melling. The value isnt and will never imo be there for top europeans but the tour should be about the british players and the next lot of players coming through who unfortunately can just not afford to play on the tour.

I hope next season, now the tables are paid for, the extra money goes towards making it cheaper to play in rather than increasing the prize fund to attract players from Europe.

ps I feel the tables play quite tough and for amateurs it makes playing the top players even harder

I guess and by reducing the fees you may double the entry as more players are willing to risk a smaller amount. could end up having to run qualifiers again to restrict the field to 160 that would be awesome

The money is a strange one i do believe thats not the reason, when i started playing events were held in mostly trashy Rileys with logos plastering the cloth and cant say it was a huge saving on accomodation either in non hotel venues yet despite all that think they had around 140 entries on my first event and probably only cost me £50 less than i does now.. It was still costing me at least £150 per event back then for far less superior conditions than it is now... Maybe standard just getting too good and pushing masses away

yeah I agree with that , hotel is maybe an extra £30/40 extra than what you could get otherwise, its the entry fee where the money can be saved imo

I'm with Al on this one, lowering entry isnt the way forward and theres no reason why we cant get potential prize money similar to eurotours to get the Europeans over.

The best thing we can do as players is support what the GB9 team do next year. Anyone that actually plays on GB9 will understand the difficulties that we have to face over the rest of this year. After reading the comments here the format is a big one but whilst I believe reducing entry fees will increase numbers of players, it isnt the way forward for the tour. No national tour is less than 100 per event, most are more!

80 players at the weekend.
80x120=9600
9600/75=128

at £75 entry fee we'd need at least 128 players per event to match the prize structure we had this weekend, minus transport costs and general tour running costs and theres only £1400 to the winner? And thats running it as a single event with a small challenge!

Like Al says, if you can afford 75 entry fee + hotels travel etc, whats an extra 45 quid over the full weekend?

I think it's really sad to see that there were only 80 players last weekend. If you take out the Europeans then there were only 70 UK based players that entered - that's about a 50% decrease in UK based players compared to some of the more popular events over the last few years.

When the tour changes were announced last year there was a thread on here (something like GB9 in 2013) where quite a few players and former players (myself included) raised concerns that it was now too expensive with very little value for the lesser player who just plays as a hobby.

It seems to me that those fears have now been realised as 80 players has to be one of the lowest tour turnouts for many years in the UK. I just really hope that things turn around and that changes are made for the better to encourage the lesser players back to the tour. GB9 is the best thing to have happened for UK 9 ball (great conditions, great organisation etc etc) so I really hope they get this sorted sooner rather than later before they lose more numbers.

For a start the more entrys you have the more money the tour gets from the hotel, im guessing they get a kickback per room?

Yes you need more players to match the prize structure but my arguement is that the prize fund isnt an issue.

2 points that i think are important:

1. Id say nobody (from uk anyway) doesnt play because the top prize isnt big enough

2. There are loads of players who dont play becuase it is too expensive

Therefore cheaper and lower prize money is more important. The majority of players the tour need to attract wont be coming to win prize money.

Maybe its just me but id rather go to a GB9 with 128 people there with a top prize of £1400 than a tournament with 80 people there with a top prize of £1400

But a £200 weekend just as expensive as a £250 weekend? The difference isnt going to add 50 players to the field is it? As Al said?

No a £200 weekend isnt just as expensive as a £250 weekend. Or am i missing something lol

I know what you mean but if you save 50 off the entry say 10/night off the hotel then you have a weekend cost of £110 plus maybe £50 for travel/food etc Just now it costs me currently £300 per event, big difference.