Opus not was it.
Turning Stone - rip off
- Thread starter cleary
- Start date
Opus not was it.
My responses were not about "similar situations". They were all directly related to cleary's beliefs on the issue at hand, which are that the no refund policy is unethical, refilling a player's vacant spot is unethical when not refunding the forfeiting playing, not allowing players to sell their spots to others is unethical, and also his obvious failure to realize that spectator tickets and player entry tickets are very different things which results in him failing to realize why they should be treated differently.
Just because Mike's field has always been full in the past, doesn't mean that it always will be in the future. A smart man makes a policy that is good in any case, and I explained why this one is.
Actually he has had issue with this pretty much all along. Regardless though, you can respond to things people say at any time in a thread, and I quoted what part of my post was in response to but it seems you still failed to see the connection even though it was quoted. Not sure what else I could have done to help you besides quoting.
Words that fully explained how illogical and wrong it is to think that Mike's policy is unethical. Unfortunately I had to really break it down for those that have shown how much they struggle with logic.
I'm guessing MZ HAS to get a full or nearly full field as a part of his deal with the casino and of course to make sure there is enough money
Even a small pool tournament can become a massive headache when people drop out, or substitutions has to be made last minute. I can't imagine how hard a big one like this can be.Imagine if someone sells their spot, who sells it again etc..Not to speak of pressure being put on amateurs to sell their spots to pros etc. All this avoided by the no refund policy. People will show up, and even if they don't you at least have their money. You never have to deal with mystery players showing up, claiming to have bought a spot, and then having the original spot holder refuting that claim etc..
Then there is the logistical nightmare of managing 30+ refunds, I'm guessing there would have to be several deadlines for full and partial refunds, then having the refundee disputing the deadlines. Do the complainers really want the people running a tournament wasting hours upon hours of their precious time on this crap, or would you rather have them concentrate fully on the logistics of the actual tournament? But I'm guessing if the tournament organizers charged an extra 50 dollars to cover all of this they would then complain about them "stealing" 50 dollars from the prize fund, right? Maybe they should have an extra "insurance" fee for those who cannot commit to anything?
Imagine the following scenario: It's the day before the tournament and the tables are being installed, there are electrical problems, they are short of hands, suddenly an unexpected expense causes worries about the money. Craftsmen are running around and Casino executives are hanging over the TD's shoulder questioning his every decision. In the middle of all of this some yahoo comes in saying he's substituting for his cousin or someone calls to whine about not getting refunded etc. So dutifully the TD changes the chart or talks to that person, having to delegate some of the other managerial duties to someone else. Naturally the substitute for the TD does not have the complete overview and makes mistakes that cannot easily be reversed. Now the whole tournament is in jeopardy because some clown couldn't keep his commitment or at least eat his loss like a man.
I think it is good that they resell the spots and keep the money. They have counted on getting that money, and now they have to go through the trouble of selling the spot again. The cost of the extra work they have to do is not one that they should bear. That is a job that they should be paid to do. And it is not like they have unlimited staff on their hands, it's not a major airline or something like that, so in all likelyhood it's the TD himself who has to do the job. They can't leave others to sell because of the possibility of ticket scalping.
How in heavens name do you people have so many words for such a simple matter?
Mike has full fields...Nobody is asking him to refund up to the last minute. In fact, it would be reasonabke for him to say full refunds only availale (30?45?60? Days) prior to event.
Any analogies- or commentary on them- addressing the matter are now removed from their initial context and discussing such periphery is unduly burdensome and unlikely to return positive benefit.
I have still not heard a reasonable answer as to why he encourages early entry and then refuses refunds that are not 11th hour.
Mike has full fields...Nobody is asking him to refund up to the last minute. In fact, it would be reasonabke for him to say full refunds only availale (30?45?60? Days) prior to event.
Any analogies- or commentary on them- addressing the matter are now removed from their initial context and discussing such periphery is unduly burdensome and unlikely to return positive benefit.
I have still not heard a reasonable answer as to why he encourages early entry and then refuses refunds that are not 11th hour.
Guess it is a matter of POV!!
I read just about every post... both pro & con... I see both sides & can see that many are very compassionate about the policy.
I do commend - Cleary for bringing this out in the open for the public's eye to see...
The only way to be FAIR to ALL involved is to do as some suggest...
1. Open up the field to MORE players & have a cutoff time (30 days).... (this will eliminate the the refund policy for the most part - as it would be seen as fair to the average person... as the positions then can then be used/filled with bye's/forfeits)
2. Offer a refund or partial refund only or up to a certain DATE... as an example: 30days etc (which most would agree is reasonable timeline...)
3. DO NOT resell the players position to someone else... as it really isn't good business practice... regardless WHO is doing it. (By opening it up to more players would stop the need for reselling positions)
Also... I know some will continue to say - Then just do NOT enter the tournament... which is NOT helping the moral issue at all... there really is NO answer to this cause we will always have people who will take sides... but hopefully they do with respect to others opinions/views... just my 2 cents!!
I read just about every post... both pro & con... I see both sides & can see that many are very compassionate about the policy.
I do commend - Cleary for bringing this out in the open for the public's eye to see...
The only way to be FAIR to ALL involved is to do as some suggest...
1. Open up the field to MORE players & have a cutoff time (30 days).... (this will eliminate the the refund policy for the most part - as it would be seen as fair to the average person... as the positions then can then be used/filled with bye's/forfeits)
2. Offer a refund or partial refund only or up to a certain DATE... as an example: 30days etc (which most would agree is reasonable timeline...)
3. DO NOT resell the players position to someone else... as it really isn't good business practice... regardless WHO is doing it. (By opening it up to more players would stop the need for reselling positions)
Also... I know some will continue to say - Then just do NOT enter the tournament... which is NOT helping the moral issue at all... there really is NO answer to this cause we will always have people who will take sides... but hopefully they do with respect to others opinions/views... just my 2 cents!!
this man gets it
1. Have a really popular event
2. Have a wait list for your event
3. Know that some people will drop out because life happens
4. ??
5. Profit
2. Have a wait list for your event
3. Know that some people will drop out because life happens
4. ??
5. Profit
What happens when someone has a problem 29 days before the event? Won't we see a thread just like this one again? Surely Mike could fill that spot with 29 days notice!
Only if it's by noon on the 29th day. 12:01 and you're shit out of luck
Absolutely. Show up at that tournament and skip your dad's funeral. Or your wife's cancer surgery. Or rise from the grave, if you were so irresponsible that you died.
Theat would adding an administrative layer that does not solve the issue of early withdrawals.
In fact, now mike gets the shaft too.
You've heard lots of reasons for why he might have chosen his policy regarding players who withdraw:
1. He doesn't want the aggravation or hassle involved with substitutions and his policy minimizes substitutions.
2. His policy makes a full field more likely, particularly if he ever ends up having only a small waiting list (and you never know when that is going to happen).
3. Because his policy is his preference for his event that nobody is under any obligation whatsoever to have to play in, and people generally have the right to set their own policies for their own businesses.
4. He feels that his time could be better spent on other things besides dealing with substitutions.
5. His policy helps ensure that the players that he advertises will be playing, are the same ones that actually end up playing and therefore avoids disappointed and angry fans etc.
6. He doesn't want players being pressured to sell their spot.
7. He doesn't want to deal with mystery players who show up claiming to have bought someone's spot.
8. He feels he should be paid for the hassle of having to resell a spot.
9. He doesn't want people scalping their entry tickets.
10, Apparently substitutions can somehow potentially cause the loss of some of the discounted room rates for players.
11. He doesn't want spots sold because he feels it screws over the people on the waiting list.
I'm sure I am missing other reasons that have already been mentioned and probably some that haven't even been mentioned yet.
What I haven't heard yet is a reasonable answer why people feel they have a right to complain about something they agreed to.
What I also haven't heard yet is a reasonable answer as to why Mike's policy is in any way, shape or form unethical or wrong. I have heard plenty of reasons for not liking or preferring it, but none for it being unethical or wrong.
I do agree with you though on why on earth the opponents to his policy are wasting so many words on such a simple matter. The tournament is voluntary. As the owner of the business, Mike sets his policies. Whoever doesn't like those policies simply chooses not to enter the voluntary tournament. I don't like the policies or rules so I don't play. End of story, nothing more need said or complained about. But if you do decide to agree to it, and he honors your agreement. again nothing need more said or complained about. It's simple really.
Half a dozen cancelled entries would take about 30 minutes to do individually on the web, obviously much less time to do a bulk donation.
And as far as Mike getting the shaft, I thought a large part of the issue was that the spots were sold twice, and "where's the money going?"
I don't have a problem with the policy as it stands now and don't consider it unethical or "shady" in the least, just tossing an idea out there.
Last edited:
Dcc
Last year i got very sick a few days before DCC one pocket and was unable to attend. Last minute i was able to transfer my pre paid entry over to another player. He had to go over to the sign in area and have me call them to verify. This was the morning of the tournament. It was very nice of them to do that and it took several conversations with them. Not so easy for them or me to handle it as some would guess. You need the right person who handles the registration software to do it and they have to be available.
If you are made aware he's not refunding cancellations when you signup there is no beef. That should be made clear before submitting payment if its not.
Last year i got very sick a few days before DCC one pocket and was unable to attend. Last minute i was able to transfer my pre paid entry over to another player. He had to go over to the sign in area and have me call them to verify. This was the morning of the tournament. It was very nice of them to do that and it took several conversations with them. Not so easy for them or me to handle it as some would guess. You need the right person who handles the registration software to do it and they have to be available.
If you are made aware he's not refunding cancellations when you signup there is no beef. That should be made clear before submitting payment if its not.
Well, in fairness, Cleary never agreed to anything. Can you show us where he did ?
The tournament is voluntary, as is participation at AZB. AZB sets those polices where pool players and like minded folks can speak their minds about the game and whatever perceived injustices or whatever they happen to run across in their travels. Whoever does not like these AZB policies simply can choose not to enter the voluntary Main Forum.
Yes, unfortunately, people are allowed to use bad logic here. Others are allowed to correct it. What's your point?
It was quite clear but you're taking this way to personal.
But Cleary has just as much of a right to complain about a pool tournaments policies as you are to complain about him complaining about it.
Clear? Crystal clear?
As a rule..........
Pool players seldom go to funerals.
Pool players seldom get married.
Pool players do however occasionally show signs of the Lazarus effect.
That being said, you don't fix something if it's not broke.
Of the very few people who think Turning Stone is a "rip-off" and that Mike Zuglan is an unethical business man but reluctantly agree that he runs a successful pool tournament: If he were to make changes to his tournament that satisfied you, would you be willing to compensate (PAY HIM) for any losses that he might incur?
JoeyA
Pool players seldom go to funerals.
Pool players seldom get married.
Pool players do however occasionally show signs of the Lazarus effect.
That being said, you don't fix something if it's not broke.
Of the very few people who think Turning Stone is a "rip-off" and that Mike Zuglan is an unethical business man but reluctantly agree that he runs a successful pool tournament: If he were to make changes to his tournament that satisfied you, would you be willing to compensate (PAY HIM) for any losses that he might incur?
JoeyA
You are way out in left field on this one, sir... a couple hundred bucks vs being liable for "any losses"?
Hmmm...decisions, decisions.
Hmmm...decisions, decisions.