Smoking at tournament matches

[LoVe4DaGaMe]

Everyone's pro-smoking arguement all boils down to "If you don't like it.. don't go there", without taking into consideration, that you can smoke outside, perfectly acceptable, ANYWHERE. This doesn't infringe on you one bit. Now.. if there are no smoke free places around, you say.. "Ha, Too bad!" Now.. why is this too bad? I am no longer allowed to do things I enjoy, because I am bothered by something a small amount of people enjoy doing? That is hazardous to my health and theres? I should have to accept that I am going to have to inhale your nasty exhale for hrs, if I want to play a pool game?

This doesn't make sense.

It will never make sense, and since that is the case, you will not be able to explain your side further than.. "If you don't like it.." Because there is absolutely no way that it is acceptable. You can make claims of it being the persons business and should be up to them, etc.. but That doesn't matter either, obviously you have a serious double standard when it comes to all these counter arguements you are presenting.

Either way, Like I said.. you can fight tooth and nail.. grind your teeth to dust over this topic.. and in the end.. I forsee a Nation Wide Indoor Smoking Ban, within the next 10-15 years.

It won't go away.. you are just going to have to learn to "Suck it Up" as you have been telling us to do.. Our time is coming, whether you like it or not. So Get ready to bust out those "Stick it to the 'Man'!" speeches, and while your at it.. tell us some more about how the government is controlling all aspects of our life.. and we are just falling prey to it, like little pawns!

 

[hunger strike]

Right on brother

I'm going all in with this rant.

I believe that all pool tournaments should ban smoking during tournament play even if smoking is legal in the tournament rooms.

My reason is quite simple. I should not have to sit next to someone's stinking cigarette smoldering in an ashtray while they are playing a match. Nor should I have to tolerate smoke clouds blown out over the pool table. This smoking during a tournament match is plain BULLSHIT.

It negatively affects my pool game because it irritates my eyes. If this makes me a whiney baby, then so be it.

I'm also tired of cigarette smoking pool players reaching for their cigarette, just as I am about to shoot a shot and I am facing my opponent from across the table. Same goes for striking a match or using a cigarette lighter. This is all BULLSHIT.

I am really fed up with smoking during a tournament match and I'm declaring war on cigarette smoking during a tournament match. And NO, this is not an effort to get smoking banned from pool rooms. In a pool room, I can always get up and move away from someone who is smoking but in a tournament I am confined to one area and just don't like being distracted by smokers and their smoke.

I realize that a lot of AZBers are not tournament players but if you've ever played in a tournament and don't smoke and your opponent has a cigarette laying in an ashtray and the smoke keeps drifting toward you, well let's just say it's no fun, especially after driving a few hours to play in an event.

I'm not an anti-smoking zealot in general but during a tournament match, non-smokers shouldn't have to deal with these irritations and distractions.

Let's hear your opinions..., especially those of you who play pool in tournaments.

Since your postion is 100% correct, you should not ask for opinions. AZ should lock up this thread and post your original post as a sticky. I can't burn a sack of dog sh#t while my cigarette smoking opponents shoot.
~
"Having a 'smoking section' in a pool room is like having a 'peeing section' in a swimming pool"

 

[Autist]

Studies have shown that LESS people die of lung cancer that smoke than don't. They suspect that since smoke is an irritant, it causes a mucus buildup in the lungs that protects them from other chemicals actually penetrating the lung tissue. Most smokers that get lung cancer get it AFTER they quit smoking. But, that doesn't fit the "agenda", so it gets buried under a mountain of false info.

Hi Neil. I respect your opinion, but don't agree with it at all.

According to the World Health Organization (see: http://www.who.int/en/), tobacco is the second biggest cause of death in the world and is responsible for about 5 million deaths each year, or one of every 10 adult deaths. Smoking will kill 10 million people per year by 2020 if current smoking patterns continue. Half of the people who smoke today, about 650 million people, will eventually die from tobacco-related illness.
On February 27, 2005, the WHO Framework Convention on Tobacco Control (FCTC) came into force. Countries that signed the treaty are bound by its provisions, which include tobacco advertising bans, price and tax increases, and measures to protect against second-hand smoke. There are 168 signatories to the treaty.
Earlier in the month, Cuba, which is famous for its cigars, instituted new anti-smoking regulations which will ban smoking in many workplaces and the sale of cigarettes near schools.

So, do you think that people at WHO are idiots? They got it all wrong?

And please refer to your studies if you bring those facts out, like name or author of the studies etc, or I can't be sure if it's something that was told to you when having a couple of beers or solid facts that you personally read.

Thank you.

 

[Spider1]

Everyone's pro-smoking arguement all boils down to "If you don't like it.. don't go there", without taking into consideration, that you can smoke outside, perfectly acceptable, ANYWHERE. This doesn't infringe on you one bit. Now.. if there are no smoke free places around, you say.. "Ha, Too bad!" Now.. why is this too bad? I am no longer allowed to do things I enjoy, because I am bothered by something a small amount of people enjoy doing? That is hazardous to my health and theres? I should have to accept that I am going to have to inhale your nasty exhale for hrs, if I want to play a pool game?

Welcome to the free market system. If there is demand, someone will fill it. If you see demand, and no one has filled it yet, then open your own business and run it how you see fit or quit crying.

My nearest pool hall is an hour away each direction. It sucks and it annoys me having to drive that far. So should I start whining for a law requiring every town to have a pool hall? Or should I just suck it up and drive or if it bothers me enough, open my own pool hall? Which is the more rational response to market conditions?


Mp3s make the drive not so bad, by the way.

 

[chefjeff]

I never said I was forced to go to smoky pool halls (in this case, it is more that I am being forced NOT to go to smoky pool halls). I said that I am forced to make different choices than I would have had there been no smokers, therefore my freedom (as Drew puts it) is being infringed upon. Did you not read my post, or do you just have poor reading comprehension?

You claimed my argument was circular and I showed it wasn't by integrating the axiomatic concept of self-ownership with this particular issue.


Jeff Livingston

 

[bankshotbo]

Sorry about your cousin. But, remember, doctors are not infallible. Think about it- just how would her doctor KNOW it was from second hand smoke?? He CAN'T!! When they don't know the answer, and the patient is wanting an answer, guess what happens? They get one. Doesn't matter what it is, just so they get an answer, after all, doctors are supposed to be all knowing. Do you realize that now they are saying that almost all cancer is due to smoking? When they don't know the cause, it's smoking.

As someone else pointed out to me, did you know that smoke from a campfire or fireplace has forty times the carcinogens that cig. smoke does? A lot of our foods actually are carcinogenic. But, let's just put it all on smoking. Doesn't matter that the person didn't even smoke, we'll just blame it on second had smoke.

Studies have shown that LESS people die of lung cancer that smoke than don't. They suspect that since smoke is an irritant, it causes a mucus buildup in the lungs that protects them from other chemicals actually penetrating the lung tissue. Most smokers that get lung cancer get it AFTER they quit smoking. But, that doesn't fit the "agenda", so it gets buried under a mountain of false info.

I wonder if their doctors even bothered to have a radon check done on their home to see if it came from that. I'd be extremely surprised if they even bothered to ask your cousins about that problem. Why take the time to actually properly diagnose what caused an illness when you have something so easy to just blame it on without doing any checking at all. Bet they didn't even ask them if they have a garage attached to the house, and if so, have it checked for leakage of exhaust into the home.

You see, lots of things can cause cancer, but doctors don't have the time or desire anymore to actually look for causes, they just diagnose and then treat. When it comes time for the cause, their pet causes get the blame. Thereby skewing any stats all the more.

You make some very valid points. I like the radon and exhaust thought.

As far as the second hand smoke goes, I am going to go with the doctors on this one. The connection between the smoker and non-smoker is two close to deny a link. I do not have a medical degree but I think I have enough common sense to see a connection.

 

[Neil]

..............

 

[Spider1]

"I am forced to make different choices because this particular business does not do things the way I think they should" might just be the most amazing line of rationale I have ever read in my life.

You've got to wonder how some people even tie their shoes in the morning.










Now that I think about it, tying shoes must be frustrating to contemplate, because you know Red Wing has forced them to make different choices by not offering Reeboks in their store.

 

[easy-e]

You claimed my argument was circular and I showed it wasn't by integrating the axiomatic concept of self-ownership with this particular issue.


Jeff Livingston

There you go contradicting yourself again, Jeff. You say that if someone doesn't like the conditions of the establishment (smoke in a pool hall), that they can choose to not go to said establishment. How is this different than choosing not to fly because you don't like the body scanners? YOU DON'T HAVE TO FLY!!!

Go ahead, reason your way out...

 

[OneIron]

.

You all claim second hand smoke is so bad. Did you even know that you have to be in a small bar with very heavy smoke in it for 48 hours straight to even get the same effect as smoking ONE cigarette?

That seems illogical to me. How can smoke coming out of one end of a cigarette be safer than smoke coming out of the other?

 

[OneIron]

Actually, they are banned just like tobacco in a lot of places. Does zero harm, but have to control peoples actions.

I think the logic is that eCigs make enforcement more difficult. It's a dumb argument since any fool can identify a real cigarette from 50 feet by the stench.

 

[cuenut]

Joey,
Having a hard time conceptualizing the big tournament in Lafayette if it were smoke-free. That would be awesome!!! Well, that and about 5,000 extra square feet and a few more tables during the event. Hope to see you there in a couple of weeks. Would like to shake hands over the last pms we exchanged if you are willing.

 

[Neil]

............

 

[Masayoshi]

You claimed my argument was circular and I showed it wasn't by integrating the axiomatic concept of self-ownership with this particular issue.


Jeff Livingston

Unfortunately for your argument, if we were to abide by your rules of not discriminating against smokers, we would be discriminating against non-smokers by forcing them to make decisions they would other wise not make. You claim to be against discrimination, and yet, your solution just yields to more discrimination. Sorry, I guess it wasn't a circular argument, just plain old hypocrisy and double standards.

 

[hunger strike]

Forty years

I am a vascular specialist. In my experience there is an interesting number that seems to come up in the patient history of those whose cardiovascular system is going to sh#t: Forty years of smoking. Heart attacks, strokes, gangrene from poor leg circulation, and yes a permanent stink. Hey, your peck*r won't work anymore, but who cares really.

Your right to swing a bat ends where my skull begins. Most bat swingers know this and don't even risk it. But smoke spreading stenchophiles wait until after it spreads to find out if someone dislikes it. Then they act all innocent like they had no idea there could possibly be a clean person in a pool room. I started a thread called "ain't a damn thing wrong with pool;" I would not have said such a thing when smoking was universally forced on me while doing what I love.

 

[easy-e]

Unfortunately for your argument, if we were to abide by your rules of not discriminating against smokers, we would be discriminating against non-smokers by forcing them to make decisions they would other wise not make. You claim to be against discrimination, and yet, your solution just yields to more discrimination. Sorry, I guess it wasn't a circular argument, just plain old hypocrisy and double standards.

Welcome to the wonderful world of being involved in a discussion with Jeff.

 

[sfleinen]

Think about it- when you take a drag off a cig., you are inhaling ALL of the smoke from that drag into your lungs. Some of the byproducts will stay there in your lungs obviously. Now, when you exhale, all the smoke has less byproducts in it, and, the person breathing it is not inhaling all the smoke you exhaled, only a very small portion of it. Plus, by the time another person inhales it, it has cooled. When heated, it is more harmful than when cooled.

Also, you get the most smoke from a burning cig. by drawing air through the cig, taking a drag from it. While you do get some smoke just from it burning, that smoke is far less than what happens when you draw air across the smoldering embers and burning it that way. So, most of the smoke from a cig is from actually taking a drag off it and then exhaling it, not from it just burning.

Neil:

A couple points about what you describe above:

1. The process of forcing air through embers (via drawing, as in dragging on a cigarette) actually helps create a more complete combustion. It's the same process that is used to smelt iron, or to burn normally difficult-to-burn materials (e.g. trash, as in an incinerator). When you use a bellows to blow air through embers, you can visually see those embers intensify in brightness -- the same way when a smoker takes a drag on a cigarette, you see the lit end glow bright orange. When this happens, the process of combustion has been assisted by the presence of more oxygen (one of the three sides in the fire triangle), the combustion accelerates, creating more heat (another side of the fire triangle), which more intensely burns the fuel (the final side of the fire triangle). Thus, the smoke that the smoker takes in has been cleansed of a good percentage more of the tars and hydrocarbons than if the cigarette were just sitting in the ashtray, smoldering. When a cigarette just sits in an ashtray smoldering, the smoke that emanates is from a less complete (incomplete) combustion, more full of harmful tars and hydrocarbons. I find the smoke that a smoker exhales to be less irritating than if the smoke from a smoldering cigarette in an ashtray wafted in my direction.

2. In addition to the more complete combustion offered by forcing air through the embers, let's not forget the smoker has the benefit of the cigarette filter itself. One merely has to inspect the filter of the spent cigarette butt, noticing the intense yellow/brown discoloration of the filter, to see that the filter is doing its job of blocking tar and other impurities/irritants from entering the smoker's lungs.

So these two things combined show that the smoke from one end of the cigarette (the filter, or "smoker's end") is actually less harmful than the other end. Now sure, both smoker and non-smoker alike have to endure both ends of the cigarette, because both types of smoke end up in the same space where smoker and non-smoker alike are present.

-Sean

 

[JoeyA]

Bottom line for Joey is that it really isn't smoking that's the problem. It's Joey's reaction to it. If the guy is sitting there flicking his lighter, or constantly packing a pack, or constantly blowing smoke across the table, smoking isn't the problem, a jerk trying to shark him is the problem. If the jerk didn't happen to smoke, he would be trying some other "tricks".

It's always appropriate to first ask the offender to please stop what he is doing because it is bothering you. A lot of the time, the person is just so insensitive to his own actions on others that they don't even realize what they are doing would bother someone else. And, when asked to stop, they do. Those that don't stop are just loser jerks, and you have to deal with them according to their actions. The best way is just to ignore them, although I have to admit that USED to be the last of my options.:embarrassed2:

Neil,
I probably didn't express myself clear enough on what bothers me the most.

While all of the above, little tricks that some players use on purpose AND UNINTENTIONALLY occasionally bother me, I usually give them a dark look if they happen. If that doesn't eliminate the problem, I give them a very loud exclamation that is at the very least, embarassing for them. I don't get upset because I stop those kind of things before they get to me.

What really bothers me the most, is having to sit still in my chair, while my opponent's cigarette smoke curls around me engulfing me with its noxious fumes. There's a whole list of reasons why smoking should be banned from a match but the most important one is consideration for your opponent.

Like most other important things in life, if you want respect, you must give respect. Smoking during a pool match shows a lack of respect for your opponent and the game

Look, I'm not against people having the right to smoke. I just want to enjoy my tournament match without having to be bothered with the smoke.

I also don't want to wait for my opponent to come back from a smoke break because that will delay the game unnecessarily and most tournaments are short on time as we all know.

Many of my friends smoke. When I move away from their smoke, they either quit smoking or they move their cigarette so that the smoke doesn't come my way. That's respect. I also don't condemn them for smoking. That's respect. I smoked years ago and I know how strong the addiction is and I empathize with all smokers.

I would love it if everyone quit smoking, not for me, but for themselves. I'm already fcuked in that department. But I'm not trying to make the world a non-smoking world. The only thing I want is the right to play my match unencumbered by my opponent's smoking.

 

[JoeyA]

The sky is not falling.

Since your postion is 100% correct, you should not ask for opinions. AZ should lock up this thread and post your original post as a sticky. I can't burn a sack of dog sh#t while my cigarette smoking opponents shoot.
~
"Having a 'smoking section' in a pool room is like having a 'peeing section' in a swimming pool"

I genuinely appreciate hearing the opinions of others even if they differ with mine, just as long as they offer their opinions with the same respect that I offer mine.

I have been reading the "debaters" opinions and it almost seems that both side are simply trying to determine who can argue better. That's fine but it wasn't my goal to stir up a hornet's nest about whether people shoule be allowed to smoke in pool rooms.

I wonder how many of the posters in this thread actually participate in pool tournaments? I know some of the posters from having seen them in tournaments that I play in. Once in a while an old stalker like Lou Figueroa will pop out, and try to get under my skin but I'm used to Chicken Little even if he has me on ignore.

I also realize that some people want to extend their agenda to this discussion but primarily I want to see smoking banned from tournament match play. No player should have to be distracted by another person's actions.

 

[JoeyA]

Joey,
Having a hard time conceptualizing the big tournament in Lafayette if it were smoke-free. That would be awesome!!! Well, that and about 5,000 extra square feet and a few more tables during the event. Hope to see you there in a couple of weeks. Would like to shake hands over the last pms we exchanged if you are willing.

Absolutely Scott. Never a problem doing that. See you in Lafayette. :smile: