CSI-Mark Griffin First Response

Status
Not open for further replies.

Poolplaya9

Tellin' it like it is...
Silver Member
Baloney.

They explained, repeatedly, how there could be no "bye" in an event in which the format dictated that one player advance from each group.

Lou Figueroa

They used the exact same terminology of "bye" and "getting a bye into the finals" in the exact same ways that I did. It correctly was used to describe one possible way of handling a situation such as Ralf's (and nowhere did I ever say this was the correct way).

You are actually starting to cross into the topic of which format is "correct", which is something I never argued for a side on. But I think it is pretty clear based on all the threads and posts and uproar and debates that the format didn't dictate anything in regards to a situation like Ralf's as there were loads of people on both sides of the issue. It seems to me that perhaps the real truth is that how this type of occurrence should be handled is only dictated by what the promoters decide on and publicize it will be prior to the start of the event. And in this case they failed to cover that aspect of the format in advance, hence all resulting debate with people divided. But again, I never discussed which way was best so that is an entirely different topic you can take up with someone else.
 

Poolplaya9

Tellin' it like it is...
Silver Member
It was a mistake that Mark owned up to on the stream.

... unless you are into conspiracy theories and just want to smear Mark.

Nowhere on the ABR interview, or on here, have I heard Mark say that anyone at CSI was ever operating, even erroneously or temporarily, under the format where Ralf's withdrawal was going to give Ko a bye into the finals. If he did, I missed it and would appreciate if you can point me to it. All I have heard is "we made a mistake on the payment amount", which could be a typo, or handing him the wrong check, or anything else.

Now if part of CSI was initially operating in the belief that Ko was going to get a bye into the finals, then it would be somewhat understandable and would certainly explain everything. But Mark has never said that and I can think of no reason why he would not admit that if that is what actually occurred. That was my whole point though from my very first post, that it seemed like something like that did occur, and it would be best to just say so if it did.

And nowhere in this thread or anywhere else have I ever smeared Mark, ever.
 
The only thing that discredits the sport is posting this kind of BS.

Lou Figueroa

And the way you play. The only reason you beat JB in one hole is because he is somehow even worse. You must be good at something but pool isn't it. That was an embarrassment.
 

jmurphy

SWEET
Silver Member
The way I see it Mark & CSI are a private business, and really have ZERO obligation to defend their actions to anyone. It is their Pool, their Party, and they are free to do as they wish.

Coco for Mark not to respond to this issue would have been a bad business practice.
CSI/BCAPL are in business because of US the amateur players who play in the BCAPL/USAPL pool leagues "paying sanction fees" & participating in the "for profit" National event at the RIO.
So it is only prudent that CSI comes out with an explanation of why they did what they did.

Me personally:
1. I enjoyed the BCAPL & USAPL events. I played in the USAPL team event and had a lot of fun doing so.
2. As a whole I think Mark/CSI did a great job with the event.
3. As to the Ralf/Shane switcheroo it is MHOP that KO was done wrong. Having said that Mark's upcoming explanation may or may not change my opinion of what went down, but as Mark also said it's possible for people to disagree and still be civil.
 

BeiberLvr

AzB Silver Member
Silver Member
And the way you play. The only reason you beat JB in one hole is because he is somehow even worse. You must be good at something but pool isn't it. That was an embarrassment.

I'm no fan of Lou's, but a good player he is. Maybe you missed the recent video he posted of a 112 ball run. Not really something your average run of the mill player is going to accomplish anytime soon.

Yeah, it's easy to criticize his one pocket match. However, for never have played for that kind of money, I think both Lou and John played about as well as expected.
 

Mark Griffin

AzB Gold Member
Gold Member
Silver Member
CSI - Mark Griffin first response

Ya know - there are about 5-6 posters in this thread that are coming very close to just being written off as antagonists or just plain dense.

I don't give a rats ass on your 'evidence' - you were not involved in the decision and you persist in insinuating that CSI somehow went in one direction and then changed our mind.

How about just believing what I said. Obviously you can have a different opinion. But between you and Celtic, one- stroke and now Dom-Poppa and a couple of others would make a guy go nuts.

WTF is wrong with you guys?

Ralf created an unforeseen situation - we made a logical decision. If you don't like it go do your own event.

I sure as he'll don't want you near anything that I do in the future. People like you will be the death of pool.

After we hear from Ralf, we will decide what ( if any) sanctions will occur. In the meantime start your own thread and rant among your selfs.

Maybe not so respectfully,

Mark Griffin
 

watchez

What time is it?
Silver Member
I like to see the format and the rules of the format that were presented to the players before hand ,,anybody got a copy of that


1

I love how you prove this guy wrong (Ken S. made an announcement on the situation) and he just quickly moves on to the next point of argument he can attempt to make.

I'll let you know this as well -- Ozzy made up a player multi page packet/rule book that was quite large. Guess how many players actually read it?
The same number as your IQ. Zero.

And there was a rule in there that stated (as Jay Helfert also explained for situations that happen in any tournament) basically the tournament director has the right to make any decision he feels fit at the time of the instance that is not spelled out in the rules. This would go for the unforeseen occurrence of a player bowing out of the tournament in the final four to the light falling from the ceiling while Lil Ko was making the 8 ball. Both weren't in the rules written out specifically but both would be ruled upon if they happened.
 

Wedge

WO Wedge Lock
Silver Member
Thanks CSI

Thanks to Mark and Oz for all they are doing to promote our sport! I love being a member of AZ but am ashamed at the way CSI has been treated on this forum!

Wedge
 
I'm no fan of Lou's, but a good player he is. Maybe you missed the recent video he posted of a 112 ball run. Not really something your average run of the mill player is going to accomplish anytime soon.

Yeah, it's easy to criticize his one pocket match. However, for never have played for that kind of money, I think both Lou and John played about as well as expected.
I run 138 last summer on my home table after 3 weeks of practice just to see what I could do. Really don't get to play much straight. Broke and run 7 pack on 9 foot in 9. 12 pack in barbox 8 ball. I got Lou covered. Not everybody hates their money like John!
 

one stroke

AzB Silver Member
Silver Member
I love how you prove this guy wrong (Ken S. made an announcement on the situation) and he just quickly moves on to the next point of argument he can attempt to make.

I'll let you know this as well -- Ozzy made up a player multi page packet/rule book that was quite large. Guess how many players actually read it?
The same number as your IQ. Zero.

And there was a rule in there that stated (as Jay Helfert also explained for situations that happen in any tournament) basically the tournament director has the right to make any decision he feels fit at the time of the instance that is not spelled out in the rules. This would go for the unforeseen occurrence of a player bowing out of the tournament in the final four to the light falling from the ceiling while Lil Ko was making the 8 ball. Both weren't in the rules written out specifically but both would be ruled upon if they happened.

Brain surgeon , I asked the question because that's normally been my experience in the tours I played in , forfeits are certainly not rare I've done it my self it's certainly by no stretch or the imagination rare ,, this would have squashed any arguments ,, ,,, I've played in Ozzys tour he's very thorough so it kind of surprises me this was not covered ,,

1
 

one stroke

AzB Silver Member
Silver Member
I run 138 last summer on my home table after 3 weeks of practice just to see what I could do. Really don't get to play much straight. Broke and run 7 pack on 9 foot in 9. 12 pack in barbox 8 ball. I got Lou covered. Not everybody hates their money like John!

Dam I'm going to have to ask Ryann about you ,,


1
 

Celtic

AZB's own 8-ball jihadist
Silver Member
But between you and Celtic...

Mark Griffin

I have not been posting that much TBH. My most recent posts have actually supported the fact that CSI was put into a bad position where there was no "right" answer. But you want to ignore that now and call me out on things?

Do you want to quote "exactly" what I said in a post or two that you take so offensive and I will explain it to you? I don't "have" to be quiet and settled on the matter that CSI got screwed and Ralf owes you money. You want to talk? Lets talk, since your last PM to me ended up as nothing but quotes with no new content.
 
Last edited:

Mark Griffin

AzB Gold Member
Gold Member
Silver Member
I went back and I was referring to post #176 - which is actually a quote of what you had said. Poolplaya9 was the author of the new post. So I did kinda mislead - because you did not actually post.

So for that I apologize - but it just shows what I have said all along. That this crap is bad for pool. Once something is said, it is repeated and passed around. I do, however, appreciate your recent position.

I have no inclination to debate anything with anyone. I have said what happened and people can believe it or not. I refuse to let the critics cause us to stop providing the premier pool events.

Mark Griffin


I have not been posting that much TBH. My most recent posts have actually supported the fact that CSI was put into a bad position where there was no "right" answer. But you want to ignore that now and call me out on things?

Do you want to quote "exactly" what I said in a post or two that you take so offensive and I will explain it to you? I don't "have" to be quiet and settled on the matter that CSI got screwed and Ralf owes you money. You want to talk? Lets talk, since your last PM to me ended up as nothing but quotes with no new content.
 

Celtic

AZB's own 8-ball jihadist
Silver Member
I went back and I was referring to post #176 - which is actually a quote of what you had said. Poolplaya9 was the author of the new post. So I did kinda mislead - because you did not actually post.

So for that I apologize - but it just shows what I have said all along. That this crap is bad for pool. Once something is said, it is repeated and passed around. I do, however, appreciate your recent position.

I cannot help people posting what I might say, on a different thread and out of the original context in which it was presented. You of all people should agree that going at someone for that is not fair, it is actually somewhat similar to the attacks you yourself have faced, half truths and one off statements taken out of context of the complete conversation.

I have come to terms with the decision, I am never going to be a huge fan of it, but I do understand that CSI was put into a tough spot where nothing you guys were going to do was going to please everyone and I CAN see the positives and negatives on each side you guys might have went. I already told you that in the PM I sent you in response to the one you sent me.
 

buckshotshoey

AzB Silver Member
Silver Member
Brain surgeon , I asked the question because that's normally been my experience in the tours I played in , forfeits are certainly not rare I've done it my self it's certainly by no stretch or the imagination rare ,, this would have squashed any arguments ,, ,,, I've played in Ozzys tour he's very thorough so it kind of surprises me this was not covered ,,

1
I've been trying to avoid this thread, but hear goes nothing.....

You just are not hearing anything anybody is saying. You keep using the word forfeit. THERE WAS NO FORFEIT! It was a withdraw. If Ralf would have showed up for the match, lagged, and broke (or waited for opponent to break)......and then quit, it would have been a forfeit.......and he would have gotten 3rd/4th in the tournament...and would have deserved the payout (which was a mistake) that he received. He withdrew before the match started. Obviously, how a forfeit is handled is going to be different then how a withdraw is handled. I firmly believe Mark handled the situation admirably. And because he didn't respond to the situatuon according to your timeline, well, tough cookies. And while you are at it, shake the old school single and double elimination formats out of your cobwebbed mind. It had absolutely nothing to do with this tournament. Its very simple really. Ok. I just gave you a new target. Fire away. I can take it.
 

lost

AzB Silver Member
Silver Member
I've been trying to avoid this thread, but hear goes nothing.....

You just are not hearing anything anybody is saying. You keep using the word forfeit. THERE WAS NO FORFEIT! It was a withdraw. If Ralf would have showed up for the match, lagged, and broke (or waited for opponent to break)......and then quit, it would have been a forfeit.......and he would have gotten 3rd/4th in the tournament...and would have deserved the payout (which was a mistake) that he received. He withdrew before the match started. Obviously, how a forfeit is handled is going to be different then how a withdraw is handled. I firmly believe Mark handled the situation admirably. And because he didn't respond to the situatuon according to your timeline, well, tough cookies. And while you are at it, shake the old school single and double elimination formats out of your cobwebbed mind. It had absolutely nothing to do with this tournament. Its very simple really. Ok. I just gave you a new target. Fire away. I can take it.

I apologize for not knowing, but did the players pay an entry fee into this or was this purely all sponsor prize money to an invitational field? If the latter I'd say the debate is sort of moot.
 

KoolKat9Lives

Taught 'em all I know
Silver Member
I apologize for not knowing, but did the players pay an entry fee into this or was this purely all sponsor prize money to an invitational field? If the latter I'd say the debate is sort of moot.

$1k entry for the 10 ball and $1k for 8 ball. 16 players and $16k added.
 

lost

AzB Silver Member
Silver Member
$1k entry for the 10 ball and $1k for 8 ball. 16 players and $16k added.

I thought so, that's why I've been confused over this. The players should have been in on the decision at the very least. That's my take.
That's a big difference then the other so-called "sports" scenario's people may have brought up. Not equivalent at all if the player's are footing a large portion of the bill.
I think it was handled wrong since player's funded a significant portion of the prize money..
 

yobagua

AzB Silver Member
Silver Member
Mark now that we got you here. No criticism. No angst. No boot licking or butt kissing either.

But can you bring back the US Open One Pocket back to Las Vegas? It just seems more fitting with the premier events.

Keone Young
Mr Wu
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top