Lawyers, we don't need no stinking laywers

W

wincardona

AzB Silver Member
Silver Member
Is the US Open in jeopardy ?


I just had the opportunity for the first time to listen to the interview between AZB, Rodney Morris, and Barry Behrman and it looks to me that we're heading for an impasse. Well anyways as long as lawyers are involved.

I really feel that after listening to both sides that i'm split about who I agree or disagree with. I feel for the players because of the economics of the sport, and agree that they should get ALL of their money at the end of their tournament. But I also feel for Barry and believe that he's really pressed for meeting the demands of the players about wanting their money after the tournament ends. I also feel that for the first time in a few years Barry has made himself better prepared to meet his obligations. But what does that mean to the players after several years of Barry not living up to his agreements with the players. So where do we go from here?

Imo I feel that it's time for Shannon Behrman to take a more active and vocal role in the US Open, I believe that her innocence will offer a different perspective for the players to mull over for them to make an intelligent decision. Not that I have a distrust for Barry, but it just lends to a more predictable outcome, I think.

Understanding both ends of the debate I think that if Barry gets the additional support that he needs to run a financially successful event, along with Shannon's endorsement, that should be enough for the players to gamble on and drop the boycott. After all no one wants to see no US Open 9 Ball Championships. No one.

There's a lot at stake for everyone concerned, especially Barry Behrman.
I say it's time to roll the dice and gamble that this will be a successful US Open for everyone.

Billy Incardona
 
wincardona said:
Is the US Open in jeopardy ?


I just had the opportunity for the first time to listen to the interview between AZB, Rodney Morris, and Barry Behrman and it looks to me that we're heading for an impasse. Well anyways as long as lawyers are involved.

I really feel that after listening to both sides that i'm split about who I agree or disagree with. I feel for the players because of the economics of the sport, and agree that they should get ALL of their money at the end of their tournament. But I also feel for Barry and believe that he's really pressed for meeting the demands of the players about wanting their money after the tournament ends. I also feel that for the first time in a few years Barry has made himself better prepared to meet his obligations. But what does that mean to the players after several years of Barry not living up to his agreements with the players. So where do we go from here?

Imo I feel that it's time for Shannon Behrman to take a more active and vocal role in the US Open, I believe that her innocence will offer a different perspective for the players to mull over for them to make an intelligent decision. Not that I have a distrust for Barry, but it just lends to a more predictable outcome, I think.

Understanding both ends of the debate I think that if Barry gets the additional support that he needs to run a financially successful event, along with Shannon's endorsement, that should be enough for the players to gamble on and drop the boycott. After all no one wants to see no US Open 9 Ball Championships. No one.

There's a lot at stake for everyone concerned, especially Barry Behrman.
I say it's time to roll the dice and gamble that this will be a successful US Open for everyone.

Billy Incardona
Click to expand...

You are correct sir, but didn't they sort of do that last year ?
 
wincardona said:
Is the US Open in jeopardy ?


I just had the opportunity for the first time to listen to the interview between AZB, Rodney Morris, and Barry Behrman and it looks to me that we're heading for an impasse. Well anyways as long as lawyers are involved.

I really feel that after listening to both sides that i'm split about who I agree or disagree with. I feel for the players because of the economics of the sport, and agree that they should get ALL of their money at the end of their tournament. But I also feel for Barry and believe that he's really pressed for meeting the demands of the players about wanting their money after the tournament ends. I also feel that for the first time in a few years Barry has made himself better prepared to meet his obligations. But what does that mean to the players after several years of Barry not living up to his agreements with the players. So where do we go from here?

Imo I feel that it's time for Shannon Behrman to take a more active and vocal role in the US Open, I believe that her innocence will offer a different perspective for the players to mull over for them to make an intelligent decision. Not that I have a distrust for Barry, but it just lends to a more predictable outcome, I think.

Understanding both ends of the debate I think that if Barry gets the additional support that he needs to run a financially successful event, along with Shannon's endorsement, that should be enough for the players to gamble on and drop the boycott. After all no one wants to see no US Open 9 Ball Championships. No one.

There's a lot at stake for everyone concerned, especially Barry Behrman.
I say it's time to roll the dice and gamble that this will be a successful US Open for everyone.

Billy Incardona
Click to expand...

Agree with you about the lawyers, Mr. Billy.

Check out how they do it down in Texas. Click here: Texas Lawyer Fight
 
wincardona said:
Is the US Open in jeopardy ?


I just had the opportunity for the first time to listen to the interview between AZB, Rodney Morris, and Barry Behrman and it looks to me that we're heading for an impasse. Well anyways as long as lawyers are involved.

I really feel that after listening to both sides that i'm split about who I agree or disagree with. I feel for the players because of the economics of the sport, and agree that they should get ALL of their money at the end of their tournament. But I also feel for Barry and believe that he's really pressed for meeting the demands of the players about wanting their money after the tournament ends. I also feel that for the first time in a few years Barry has made himself better prepared to meet his obligations. But what does that mean to the players after several years of Barry not living up to his agreements with the players. So where do we go from here?

Imo I feel that it's time for Shannon Behrman to take a more active and vocal role in the US Open, I believe that her innocence will offer a different perspective for the players to mull over for them to make an intelligent decision. Not that I have a distrust for Barry, but it just lends to a more predictable outcome, I think.

Understanding both ends of the debate I think that if Barry gets the additional support that he needs to run a financially successful event, along with Shannon's endorsement, that should be enough for the players to gamble on and drop the boycott. After all no one wants to see no US Open 9 Ball Championships. No one.

There's a lot at stake for everyone concerned, especially Barry Behrman.
I say it's time to roll the dice and gamble that this will be a successful US Open for everyone.

Billy Incardona
Click to expand...

She is hot, I think it'll work.
 
When Mark Griffin gets control pool will have a chance
not until then
he has money,good sense and respect of everyone

what are we waiting for,beg Mark to help

deab
 
wincardona said:
Lifes about gambling, everything we do, everything is about gambling. We weigh up our options, factor in our win % and then we take a chance.


Billy I.
Click to expand...

I can't visualize you going back to the same spot, you thought you got a bad deal at , over and over, unless something huge was changed.
Good gamblers don't do that.
Isn't that their beef ?
 
wincardona said:
Lifes about gambling, everything we do, everything is about gambling. We weigh up our options, factor in our win % and then we take a chance.


Billy I.
Click to expand...

Maybe Barry needs to take the gamble and tell the ABP to pound sand.

Put on the Open as plan and all the fans of the Open fill up the spots left opened by the no shows.

Let'em walk.
 
book collector said:
I can't visualize you going back to the same spot, you thought you got a bad deal at , over and over, unless something huge was changed.
Good gamblers don't do that.
Isn't that their beef ?
Click to expand...

It's not like they are getting air barrelled outright, they eventually get paid. It sucks not getting it all at once but it beats a blank.... If I had a road spot where I could go win a nice score, get paid half and get an IOU for the rest that always gets paid, I would be a regular....
 
book collector said:
I can't visualize you going back to the same spot, you thought you got a bad deal at , over and over, unless something huge was changed.
Good gamblers don't do that.
Isn't that their beef ?
Click to expand...

I guess that's what gambling is all about, the deal. But I guess it's up to us to make that judgement, what kind of deal do we have?

My take on matters like this is, risk against return. Of course you must factor in history if that's available, and then make your decision based off of how important is your time, at that time.

If Barry put on 12 tournaments a year, with each of those tournaments yielding the average pay out as the prior 35 tournaments averaged, would there be a decision on what the players as a group should do?

If you take a fair look at it, who says that the players got a bad deal? They may not have been given what was promised, in the time frame allotted but that doesn't mean that who ever is owed isn't going to get paid. I kinda like doing business with someone that i've been doing business with for 35 years.

I hope that the ABP comes to terms with Barry's offer and gives him the opportunity to make his word good again, 35 years of the US Open is at least worth that much.

And the answer to your original question about me going back to the same spot that I thought I got a bad deal from has already been answered. Like I mentioned earlier that a bad deal for one may not be a bad deal for another. The word probability is a huge word in my decision making.

Billy I.
 
deanoc said:
When Mark Griffin gets control pool will have a chance
not until then
he has money,good sense and respect of everyone

what are we waiting for,beg Mark to help

deab
Click to expand...

We can't place that kind of pressure on one individual. Mark can only do so much. For pool to get its shitt together, it will take a cooperative effort from everybody. Right now, we can't even get together and talk about these issues over a cup of coffee. There is so much work that needs to be done PRIOR to putting any plan into action. It is going to take a lot more than just appointing a savior that we can crucify if or when it all goes to hell in a handbasket again.
 
wincardona said:
I guess that's what gambling is all about, the deal. But I guess it's up to us to make that judgement, what kind of deal do we have?

My take on matters like this is, risk against return. Of course you must factor in history if that's available, and then make your decision based off of how important is your time, at that time.

If Barry put on 12 tournaments a year, with each of those tournaments yielding the average pay out as the prior 35 tournaments averaged, would there be a decision on what the players as a group should do?

If you take a fair look at it, who says that the players got a bad deal? They may not have been given what was promised, in the time frame allotted but that doesn't mean that who ever is owed isn't going to get paid. I kinda like doing business with someone that i've been doing business with for 35 years.

I hope that the ABP comes to terms with Barry's offer and gives him the opportunity to make his word good again, 35 years of the US Open is at least worth that much.

And the answer to your original question about me going back to the same spot that I thought I got a bad deal from has already been answered. Like I mentioned earlier that a bad deal for one may not be a bad deal for another. The word probability is a huge word in my decision making.

Billy I.
Click to expand...
By the way i'm not mad at the ABP for handling this in the way that their approaching it. We as people/players have to keep our credibility, and by pressuring Barry to do the right thing is a way to do it, so be it. But if they play their hand out too long and lose the US Open then yes I feel that an injustice has been made by their unwillingness to compromise.

I'm sure that i'm not the only one that feels this way, and i'm not favoring any side with my thoughts on this matter. My thoughts are unbiased and my intentions are for the betterment of our sport, plain and simple.

I've really said enough about this dispute, maybe too much, but i've already hit the submit button.:sorry:

And i'll say the same thing Rodney and Barry said. "I love you guys"

Billy I.
 
wincardona said:
Is the US Open in jeopardy ?


I just had the opportunity for the first time to listen to the interview between AZB, Rodney Morris, and Barry Behrman and it looks to me that we're heading for an impasse. Well anyways as long as lawyers are involved.

I really feel that after listening to both sides that i'm split about who I agree or disagree with. I feel for the players because of the economics of the sport, and agree that they should get ALL of their money at the end of their tournament. But I also feel for Barry and believe that he's really pressed for meeting the demands of the players about wanting their money after the tournament ends. I also feel that for the first time in a few years Barry has made himself better prepared to meet his obligations. But what does that mean to the players after several years of Barry not living up to his agreements with the players. So where do we go from here?

Imo I feel that it's time for Shannon Behrman to take a more active and vocal role in the US Open, I believe that her innocence will offer a different perspective for the players to mull over for them to make an intelligent decision. Not that I have a distrust for Barry, but it just lends to a more predictable outcome, I think.

Understanding both ends of the debate I think that if Barry gets the additional support that he needs to run a financially successful event, along with Shannon's endorsement, that should be enough for the players to gamble on and drop the boycott. After all no one wants to see no US Open 9 Ball Championships. No one.

There's a lot at stake for everyone concerned, especially Barry Behrman.
I say it's time to roll the dice and gamble that this will be a successful US Open for everyone.

Billy Incardona
Click to expand...

First, thanks for coming by and posting your thoughts.

I had a question i'm so curious to get your thoughts on if you don't mind. How much do you think the level of play at the US open would drop without the best players? Yeah, there wont be that star factor, but I think the level would stay very close to the level with thim. So from a "pure" fan perspective (for lack of a better term), the pool we'll see may be almost just as good. Should us fans care so much?? Believe me, i'm a players guy, I want to see the players do well and get what they want. But I really don't feel the level of play would suffer. Maybe the level of college football could be a good analogy?
 
wincardona said:
I guess that's what gambling is all about, the deal. But I guess it's up to us to make that judgement, what kind of deal do we have?

My take on matters like this is, risk against return. Of course you must factor in history if that's available, and then make your decision based off of how important is your time, at that time.

If Barry put on 12 tournaments a year, with each of those tournaments yielding the average pay out as the prior 35 tournaments averaged, would there be a decision on what the players as a group should do?

If you take a fair look at it, who says that the players got a bad deal? They may not have been given what was promised, in the time frame allotted but that doesn't mean that who ever is owed isn't going to get paid. I kinda like doing business with someone that i've been doing business with for 35 years.

I hope that the ABP comes to terms with Barry's offer and gives him the opportunity to make his word good again, 35 years of the US Open is at least worth that much.

And the answer to your original question about me going back to the same spot that I thought I got a bad deal from has already been answered. Like I mentioned earlier that a bad deal for one may not be a bad deal for another. The word probability is a huge word in my decision making.

Billy I.
Click to expand...

Thank you sir, for sharing your thoughts.
 
The Chinchilla said:
First, thanks for coming by and posting your thoughts.

I had a question i'm so curious to get your thoughts on if you don't mind. How much do you think the level of play at the US open would drop without the best players? Yeah, there wont be that star factor, but I think the level would stay very close to the level with thim. So from a "pure" fan perspective (for lack of a better term), the pool we'll see may be almost just as good. Should us fans care so much?? Believe me, i'm a players guy, I want to see the players do well and get what they want. But I really don't feel the level of play would suffer. Maybe the level of college football could be a good analogy?
Click to expand...

I'm certainly no Bill Incardona, but I do have an opinion ;). My opinion is this: Watching the U.S. Open WITHOUT the star players would be like a professional football season-ticket holder going to a High School football game. Still the same game, still entertaining, just not the "quality" that you're accustomed to watching. The "hoopla" won't be the same, the "star" drawing-power factor won't be the same (obviously), the "match that I've been waiting for" factor will be gone, etc. You will still see good pool being shot, with "wow-factor" shots being made (yes, amatuers can pull these off too!). You will still see packages being put together. You will still find yourself pulling for some particular player to win it all. And.....at the end of the tournament, you will still see an exuberant winner hoist a trophy over his/her head in that moment of glory we all as pool players seek.

If you are hesitating going to the tournament because the "big name" players may not be there, I say go ahead and go. You will more than likely have a great time, see good (if not great) pool, and you will possibly get to witness a part of pool history that may be talked about for generations to come (you know, the Open that the "pros" boycotted).

JMHO.

Maniac
 
I'never been a person fan. That is someone who is more a fan of the player and not the sport. Top names come and go in sports, but the sport is always there.

I'd like watching good playing and whoever is doing it doesn't matter. I've never been impressed by big names. They got to wipe their own ass just like me.

Go forward with the Open. Put the energy into providing a top tourney for the people that will show up to support the Open.
 
Maybe Barry Behrman and the ABP should contact Billy Incardona for his mediation services.................. (You're welcome Billy ;))
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top