Open Tournament Seeding

lfigueroa said:
enzo, have you been to big tournaments?

I ask, because if you have you will have seen that almost all of these events have their collection of pros and then a big contingent of amateurs. Those are the guys that need and deserve a fair shake. I mean -- put yourself in that position: you're a good amateur and go and throw your money in to support and be a good sport, and then learn that your first match is guaranteed to be a killer. I know that playing a champion can be a thrill, but really, how about if the roll of the dice comes out that you will meet him in the third or fourth round instead of a guaranteed 1st round match up because of seeding?

Lou Figueroa
Click to expand...

i have been to big tournaments.

i played the bicycle club warm up at hard times about 15 years ago. i drew tony ellin first round, then rafael martinez (somehow he got knocked over). and i STILL have the opinion that i have (that there should be seeding). note: a friend of mine told me that would have been a tough draw on the final day of a major event, he was right, haha.

i think for me, im always going to error on the side of the most skilled, and therefore (i feel) most deserving players. this is just personal choice though.... i think TECHNICALLY, you are correct. one player's money should not be worth more than another's. cheers.
 
lfigueroa said:
Stu, I totally see that from a fan's perspective. Now, come out of the bleachers and talk to me from the tournament floor. Now you are a player.

Is your point of view the same?

Lou Figueroa
Click to expand...

I guess the point here, Lou, is that the players, as a group, need to do everything in their power to make their events more exciting for the fans. In a period in which the pro pool product is, far too often, leaving event producers with losses, I don't see any other reasonable course of action.

While this may or may not be the reason, or part of the reason, that the top pros want seeding, it is one reason they should want it, as it improves the pro pool product, which, in the long-term, improves prospects for attracting fans, sponsors and entrepreneurs. For this reason, Lou, as a player, whether I'm a good one or a bad one, I favor seeding.
 
sjm said:
I guess the point here, Lou, is that the players, as a group, need to do everything in their power to make their events more exciting for the fans. In a period in which the pro pool product is, far too often, leaving event producers with losses, I don't see any other reasonable course of action.

While this may or may not be the reason, or part of the reason, that the top pros want seeding, it is one reason they should want it, as it improves the pro pool product, which, in the long-term, improves prospects for attracting fans, sponsors and entrepreneurs. For this reason, Lou, as a player, whether I'm a good one or a bad one, I favor seeding.
Click to expand...


Nothing more exciting than an underdog knocking off the big guns.

So OK, the pros should do everything in their power to make their events more exciting for all the reasons you state, which basically boils down to benefiting themselves. I guess that leaves it to the amateurs to do everything in their power, like oppose seeding, to make things fair for everyone.

Lou Figueroa
 
lfigueroa said:
Nothing more exciting than an underdog knocking off the big guns.

So OK, the pros should do everything in their power to make their events more exciting for all the reasons you state, which basically boils down to benefiting themselves. I guess that leaves it to the amateurs to do everything in their power, like oppose seeding, to make things fair for everyone.

Lou Figueroa
Click to expand...

In case you haven't noticed lately, many regional tours and local tournaments are now handicapped, meaning *if* pros are allowed to play -- some events ban pros today -- the pros pay a higher entry fee and/or they have to spot all opponents in the event. Keith played in a one-hole tournament recently and had to spot a player 13 to 4. :eek:
 
Open Tournment Seeding

JAM said:
I do not think there should be any seeding anymore. The reason why I believe this is due to events that I have witnessed in the past at so-called "pro tournaments."

Number one, I don't think the Europeans should get a free pass to come to the U.S. Open a day or two late just because they are competing in a European event that is logistically close in time to the U.S. Open dates. Why should they get seeded to advantage them, when all the other American schmucks have to pay for a full week of expenses and play in the tournament from the first bracket with no byes?

Secondly, the pros in the United States, with the exception of the ladies pro tour (WPBA), don't really have an organization that looks out for the interests of *all* professional players. There are a minute few who are calling the shots, and why should they get byes in tournaments that are advantageous to them and not the other professional players? What the heck is a professional player anymore? Just someone who signs up for the organization du jour?

There ain't no such thing as a professional American player for the men anymore. They can call themselves "professionals," but they're out there grinding in the regional events and amateur tours just like the social shooters, shortstops, and league players.

I've seen my partner's name not get a buy because one outspoken senior player voiced his opinion at the U.S. Open. He believed that all seniors should get buys in the U.S. Open. Even though my partner came in third place in 2003 and was supposed to get a buy in 2004 for his third place finish -- LIKE EVERY PREVIOUS U.S. OPEN SEEDING WAS HANDLED -- his name was removed for seeding to allow senior players who only competed in one senior event the year previously. What a joke: one senior tournament for an entire year and those seniors got byes in the U.S. Open.

It was a sham and a travesty for the 2003 third-place finisher to get bumped, lose his seeding and free bye, to allow the senior players their free bye. Players should not be able to dictate to the tournament organizers who gets seeded and who doesn't, and that is *exactly* what this senior player did.

Put all the names in a hat, and may the best player win. Pool is such a damn game of luck now anyway. What's wrong with the luck of the draw? Luck may be luck when it comes to the draw, but talent should always come out on top.

Seeding sucks, especially when a few pros go behind closed doors and get themselves that free buy with less expenses. They should not be given favoritism, and that is all seeding does in 2011. Maybe things will change if there is a *real* pro tour, but for now, there ain't.

That's my story, and I'm sticking with it.:grin-square:
Click to expand...

Makes perfect sense to me,Why should their entry fee be worth more than mine. Have a random drawing and let the chips fall where they may.
 
JAM said:
In case you haven't noticed lately, many regional tours and local tournaments are now handicapped, meaning *if* pros are allowed to play -- some events ban pros today -- the pros pay a higher entry fee and/or they have to spot all opponents in the event. Keith played in a one-hole tournament recently and had to spot a player 13 to 4. :eek:
Click to expand...


13-4?! How'd he feel about that?

Lou Figueroa
 
I'm not sure I would mind. If I entered one of these tournaments I would prefer to get the chance to play against some of the top pros even though I know I will get my A$$ whipped. I would much rather that than possibly lose to some guy I never heard of. At least I would get to say I played Cory, SVB, Earl, etc.... I might lie about how close the score was in my later years when telling pool stories :D
 
ajuarbe said:
I'm not sure I would mind. If I entered one of these tournaments I would prefer to get the chance to play against some of the top pros even though I know I will get my A$$ whipped. I would much rather that than possibly lose to some guy I never heard of. At least I would get to say I played Cory, SVB, Earl, etc.... I might lie about how close the score was in my later years when telling pool stories :D
Click to expand...


Drawing a big name early on happens enough on it's own. Trust me on this one :-)

Lou Figueroa
 
ajuarbe said:
I'm not sure I would mind. If I entered one of these tournaments I would prefer to get the chance to play against some of the top pros even though I know I will get my A$$ whipped. I would much rather that than possibly lose to some guy I never heard of. At least I would get to say I played Cory, SVB, Earl, etc.... I might lie about how close the score was in my later years when telling pool stories :D
Click to expand...

It would be cheaper to hang out, sweat the tournament on the rail, and pay a pro to play you a set for a sawbuck or two. Most pros wouldn't mind doing that, helps pay their expenses. Meanwhile, there would be a unique one-on-one experience that you could enjoy, instead of in a competitive environment in front of an audience, with nerves running raw, and paying $2,000 to be tortured on a field of green during the week-long event. :D
 
JAM said:
It would be cheaper to hang out, sweat the tournament on the rail, and pay a pro to play you a set for a sawbuck or two. Most pros wouldn't mind doing that, helps pay their expenses. Meanwhile, there would be a unique one-on-one experience that you could enjoy, instead of in a competitive environment in front of an audience, with nerves running raw, and paying $2,000 to be tortured on a field of green during the week-long event. :D
Click to expand...

You're a genius!!! This is what I will probably do come August at the Seminole stop at Snookers. Maybe I can convince one of them to let me win to help with their action for the rest of the weekend. Once anyone finds out I beat them they will line up to play.
 
lfigueroa said:
Nothing more exciting than an underdog knocking off the big guns.

So OK, the pros should do everything in their power to make their events more exciting for all the reasons you state, which basically boils down to benefiting themselves. I guess that leaves it to the amateurs to do everything in their power, like oppose seeding, to make things fair for everyone.

Lou Figueroa
Click to expand...

My point, Lou, is that the quality of the pro pool product should be a higher priority than what is fair to all players. That's what serves the game's long-term interest. At a time when tournaments are disappearing, pros and amateurs alike need to put their own issues aside and do what's good for the sport. Sadly, players at all levels are not sufficiently inclined to think of what's good for the sport first, and woe is us because of it.

I don't hear anyone complaining that seeding in pro tennis is unfair.
 
Last edited:
sjm said:
My point, Lou, is that the quality of the pro pool product should be a higher priority than what is fair to all players. That's what serves the game's long-term interest. At a time when tournaments are disappearing, pros and amateurs alike need to put their own issues aside and do what's good for the sport. Sadly, players at all levels are not sufficiently inclined to think of what's good for the sport first, and woe is us because of it.
Click to expand...

I definitely can see your point, though I totally agree with Lou's about the seeding.

Allowing amateurs and social shooters to compete in the U.S. Open 9-Ball Championship kind of makes it a ProAm-type tournament as opposed to a so-called "professional pocket billiards" competition.

Pool does have to mature in order to gain recognization as a viable sport. Until then, we're stuck with a patchwork blanket of alphabet-soup acronyms, each doing things differently. It would be nice if there was more organization with everybody working together. :smile:
 
sjm said:
My point, Lou, is that the quality of the pro pool product should be a higher priority than what is fair to all players. That's what serves the game's long-term interest. At a time when tournaments are disappearing, pros and amateurs alike need to put their own issues aside and do what's good for the sport. Sadly, players at all levels are not sufficiently inclined to think of what's good for the sport first, and woe is us because of it.

I don't hear anyone complaining that seeding in pro tennis is unfair.
Click to expand...


Pool is not professional tennis, NASCAR, PGA, or a lot of other sports and you know as well as I do that we're never going to see a Wimbledon type event in pool. And that is because those sports don't need the hackers. Pool tournaments do.

I think you've got it ass-backwards, Stu: the higher priority in pool should be fairness for all competitors. The sport has a bad enough reputation for skullduggery as it is. If the pros want seeding so bad, have them hold some "pro only" seeded events and let them cannibalize each other and see how they feel about how great seeding is for the long term interests of the game, lol.

Lou Figueroa
 
lfigueroa said:
Pool is not professional tennis, NASCAR, PGA, or a lot of other sports and you know as well as I do that we're never going to see a Wimbledon type event in pool. And that is because those sports don't need the hackers. Pool tournaments do.

I think you've got it ass-backwards, Stu: the higher priority in pool should be fairness for all competitors. The sport has a bad enough reputation for skullduggery as it is. If the pros want seeding so bad, have them hold some "pro only" seeded events and let them cannibalize each other and see how they feel about how great seeding is for the long term interests of the game, lol.

Lou Figueroa
Click to expand...
i'm convinced :) haha, how often do people actually change their minds in these discussions? nice points you brought up. i still personally like the seeding if we really had our shiz together (like tennis), but we never will so its a moot point. cheers!
 
lfigueroa said:
Pool is not professional tennis, NASCAR, PGA, or a lot of other sports and you know as well as I do that we're never going to see a Wimbledon type event in pool. And that is because those sports don't need the hackers. Pool tournaments do.

I think you've got it ass-backwards, Stu: the higher priority in pool should be fairness for all competitors. The sport has a bad enough reputation for skullduggery as it is. If the pros want seeding so bad, have them hold some "pro only" seeded events and let them cannibalize each other and see how they feel about how great seeding is for the long term interests of the game, lol.

Lou Figueroa
Click to expand...

We'll have to agree to disagree here, my friend. Though we don't seem to disagree on where men's pro pool is as a sport, we clearly differ on what it can possibly be and how we can get it there.
 
seeding protects the elite few

The ABP has explained that the seeding is to insure that two top players don't meet early in an event causing one of the player's ranking to fall drastically. Nice for the elite few ABP players who are seeded. What about the rankings of the players just below the seeded group that are struggling to get into the seeded group? The seeding of the few and the open draw for their opponents increases the chance that some of these second tier players will meet monster players and some will get an easy trip through the first few rounds. How is this fair for these players but not the higher ranked players?

Seems elite players put together the ABP and they have severe tunnel vision. They are taking care of themselves at the expense of lower ranked pro's, promoters, and the sport itself. This isn't surprising however, I have seen the same thing with a dozen or more associations over the years regardless of the form of competition.

Without sugar coating it, the ABP wants to run the sport. They want seeding to suit them, tournament structure to suit them, and payouts to suit them. However anyone who wants to run a successful venture has to consider the needs of everyone involved. That means all players, all promoters, and all fans. Sponsors or could be sponsors too.

Hu
 
My biggest concern with how the ABP folks are presenting the seeding issue is the repeated use of the phrase "paying your dues", by having newer/younger players required to play the big boys early in tournaments. You can't use the rationale "well, that's what I had to do coming up" if you want to operate a professional organization that is fairly run and administered.

I completely understand the concept of "paying your dues." Unfortunately, it an abstract concept, not easily defined. And when you are dictating policy for events, you need clearly defined rules, regulations and the reasons for them.

Exactly when has one "paid their dues", sufficient to meet the expectations of the ABP? How does one ensure that they have done so? Is there a board of review, conducted by the ABP, to decide who has "paid their dues", and therefore is now eligible to benefit from the advantage of being seeded?

Some of that sounds facetious, and perhaps it is, to an extent. But we are talking about a business plan, laid out by a professional organization. Businesses cannot be run successfully based on abstract concepts, and the ABP wishes to be considered a professional pool players organization. They wish to be able to influence how tournaments are run. If they wish to be successful at that goal, they need to become far more professional in their approach.

Personally, I believe that truly fair and equitable seeding can only happen with a real ranking system. Who is currently the best, who is in second, etc, etc, etc? That is necessary in order to determine who gets seeded, and where they get seeded in any given tournament.

Even some of the best players in the world in their sports have to deal with that. Venus Williams hadn't played well (or even played much at all, due to injury) so she was seeded 23 at Wimbledon this year, even as a past champion. In 2006, Andre Agassi and Serena Williams had to compete in The US Open as un-seeded entrants, due to poor previous performance. I know, I know, you can't compare tennis to pool, yada yada. When discussing "seeding" a tournament, we must use real-world examples for comparison purposes.

I don't know that I'm against the concept of seeding, I just would like to see how it is to be implemented and administered. And who decides the seeding order. Transparency is paramount here, as pool has a shady enough reputation as is. If the ABP truly wants to be considered "professional", the "shady" elements have to be eliminated. I'm not sure they are ready to go that far yet. We shall see.
 
Round Robin 14.1 Format

The only instance where I agree with seeding is in a 14.1 Round Robin Format like the DP Worlds 14.1 Tournament. I think seeding works out very well in the type of tournament.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top