Mark, as usual, sees the world in a matter of fact, here's the reality of what's happening, light, and as usual, he's right about it. The biggest issue here, for negotiations, mediations, contracts, boycotts, or whatever, is simple: WHO and WHAT is the ABP?
If they make demands from Barry, as they have, and Barry meets the demands, what do they give him? Is there a set of bylaws that requires all of it members to play, or be sanctioned? Can the ABP deliver players or require that they do not play in a competing event, like other sanctioning groups?
The problem here, is that you have an amorphous group with a fluid membership list making demands, and making threats if their demands aren't met. What good things will they do if the demands ARE met? Does ABP have agreements with its members that will enable the ABP to keep its members in line and require that they all show up at the Open, or all boycott it?
None of this should have seen the light of day, it's a PR battle to see who can say the most crap about the other guy, which no one can ever win.....
SMART guys would have figured out that they could have built the legitimacy of the new organization by associating with the longest running tournament [US Open] and the strongest running organization [CSI] instead of trying to define itself in opposition to those entities. Funny how the boycott threat keeps popping up, over and over....
but who, exactly, is the ABP, who speaks for it, and what is it trying to do? If it gets what is demanded, what do they do for Barry? That's the missing piece, and until the ABP tells us what it CAN do, and delivers, they're really no different than what they accuse Barry of being: all hat, no cattle.....
just sayin.
