SJM at the 2023 Derby City Catastrophe

1pocket said:
Nah you get the last twisted word 😁

Unless…. You wanted to bet on who has demonstrated more “care” for pool.
Click to expand...

How do you manage to come up with all these goofy bets — like SAT scores and who cares more about pool — but when someone suggested we just play some to settle our differences you couldn’t come up with enough excuses?

Lou Figueroa
 
penguin said:
Are you trying to be the first guy to get banned from AZBilliards and OnePocket.org simultaneously?
Click to expand...

I can’t do anything about the one pocket site, he’ll pick a fight there (and now apparently here) for no good reason — time before last it was because I jokingly used the old Dragnet/Joe Friday catch phrase, “Just the facts ma’am” claiming I was attempting to insult another member by referring to them as a female (no, lol, not making that up).

He made a huge thing out of it despite several members telling him it was just a phrase from an old TV show and movie reboot.

Lou Figueroa
 
Last edited:
lfigueroa said:
I can’t do anything about the one pocket site, he’ll pick a fight there (and now apparently here) for no good reason — time before last it was because I jokingly used the old Dragnet/Joe Friday catch phrase, “Just the facts ma’am” claiming I was attempting to insult another member by referring to them as a female (no, lol, not making that up).

He made a huge thing out of it despite several members telling him it was just a phrase from an old TV show and movie reboot.

Lou Figueroa
Click to expand...
When a poster gets clearly and specifically warned, not to use “ma’am” and “panties in a bunch” ahem jokingly, referring to other posters known to be men, but they go on to ignore the warnings and repeat the targeted insults they’ve been specifically warned about, a normal person would expect consequences.
 
Last edited:
C
1pocket said:
When a poster gets clearly and specifically warned, not to use “ma’am” and “panties in a bunch” ahem jokingly, referring to other posters known to be men, but they go on to ignore the warnings and repeat the targeted insults they’ve been specifically warned about, a normal person would expect consequences.
Click to expand...

What warnings, lol?!

You issued “warnings” before I even said it, lmao?!

Besides, I can’t do anything about your misogyny — using feminine references should never be considered an insult, especially when the reference is a well known catch phrase. Unless you’ve been living under a rock or hate women. Been living under a rock and/or hate women, Steve?

How about that SAT score challenge, Steve, lol? Remember how you *twice* have said you wanted to bet on SAT scores, lol.

What’s with THAT?!

Do you actually think that SAT scores would prove you’re smarter than someone else? How about we just play some instead ;-)

Lou Figueroa
y’all better load up
on the popcorn
 
Last edited:
garczar said:
Wouldn't put much stock in one players take on the equipment. If she doesn't play again no one will miss her. Seeing how she's married to Tyler Steyer she probably will be back.
Click to expand...
Seems like she wasn’t the only person complaining about the equipment, from all the posts on this forum
 
iusedtoberich said:
Small variations in equipment is fine imo. Can you imagine if all the specs said we had to have olhousen pockets, as an example? We’d be stuck with garbage.

Baseball changes what a home run is at every single stadium.

Don’t golf tournaments change the tee or cup location each round? (I’m only a casual golf fan I might be off).
Click to expand...
...no, you would be right on the pin placement, daily changes for tournaments.
I am wondering though,
that the greenskeeper would have a clause in their contract that they cannot,
under any conditions, as a hobby or professionally, engage, preform or coach any 1P game prior to their Sunday Tournament pin placements.
 
Last edited:
1pocket said:
When a poster gets clearly and specifically warned, not to use “ma’am” and “panties in a bunch” ahem jokingly, referring to other posters known to be men, but they go on to ignore the warnings and repeat the targeted insults they’ve been specifically warned about, a normal person would expect consequences.
Click to expand...
I interrupt Stu's thread about his experience at the Derby City Classic. Steve and the website of OnePocket-dot-org has contributed more to pool, especially the game of one pocket, than most others on this thread.

I am sure you know, Steve, that engaging in a back-and-forth with some will result in a never-ending tit-for-tat. Some always want to have the last word, and in some cases, it's better to let them have it. Long-time members of AzBilliards and OnePocket-dot-org forums know who the good guys are. And, you, Steve, are one of the good guys in the pool world.

I could add more, but I don't want to fan the flame on this thread. Hope you are well. I'm just chiming in to let you know that there are some in this pool world who appreciate your contributions.
 
Bottom line is, it's obvious that the smaller pockets contributed to the schedule problems at this year's Derby, and it sounds like that is already being addressed by DCC staff. As for the TV table, I think it would be fine to have the pockets slightly tighter. I suspect Greg Sullivan, Pat Fleming and most of the pros that would be likely to compete on that table would agree. But of course, what I think and Lou thinks doesn't matter that much in that regard, as it should be.

I wonder if the TD software and practices can tighten anything up? But here again, I am sure those that run the tournament have made this kind of question their annual number 1 priority for years. So who knows what they could do to improve it, within the David/Goliath redraw/buyback tournament format that is a key piece of the Derby experience. About all I can suggest there would be possibly do the redraws a littler earlier each round -- even if matches are still going on -- which would force players to commit earlier to re-buy. In that case, the TD redraw software would have to readily accommodate (player A or player B) to represent the advancing player in matches that are still incomplete. Earlier round draws would permit earlier scheduling of next round matches -- just like TD's do all the time in standard bracket driven tournaments.

As for Lou, you know where you can get my attention if you want to continue to negotiate any challenge or beef with me. But it is not going to be here in SJM's thread for me. My sincere apologies to SJM far the digression I was part of.
 
Last edited:
1pocket said:
Bottom line is, it's obvious that the smaller pockets contributed to the schedule problems at this year's Derby, and it sounds like that is already being addressed by DCC staff.
Click to expand...
I'm not as sure. Yes, tight pockets on the outer tables slowed down the Derby to a crawl. Yes, Diamond has been made aware of it. But no, I don't see any evidence that something is being done about it and am concerned by the prospect of this mistake being repeated in 2024.
 
I
sjm said:
I'm not as sure. Yes, tight pockets on the outer tables slowed down the Derby to a crawl. Yes, Diamond has been made aware of it. But no, I don't see any evidence that something is being done about it and am concerned by the prospect of this mistake being repeated in 2024.
Click to expand...
I thought I read that they were planning to go back to 4-1/2” for the tournament floor tables.

But the more difficult questions of how to make the schedule run more efficiently, the only “simple” thing I can think of would be to cap the entries at lower numbers.

The potential for software solutions is out of my league, so the little suggestions I made in the last post are probably quite naive.
 
1pocket said:
I

I thought I read that they were planning to go back to 4-1/2” for the tournament floor tables.

But the more difficult questions of how to make the schedule run more efficiently, the only “simple” thing I can think of would be to cap the entries at lower numbers.

The potential for software solutions is out of my league, so the little suggestions I made in the last post are probably quite naive.
Click to expand...
Hope you're right. I know the idea of looser equipment was being kicked around, but I didn't sense that a decision or commitment had been made on pocket size going forward.

There is another simple solution and that's shortening the nine ball races. The races were to seven until 2013.
 
sjm said:
Hope you're right. I know the idea of looser equipment was being kicked around, but I didn't sense that a decision or commitment had been made on pocket size going forward.

There is another simple solution and that's shortening the nine ball races. The races were to seven until 2013.
Click to expand...
My very limited experience running tournaments, is mainly having a hand in our OnePocket.org members only tournaments. As you can imagine our membership includes a lot of classic one pocket players with a tendency to have some long games lol. But we’ve come up with a schedule after some trial and error, that works every time. We have a specific number of matches/rounds that have to get finished each day, and those players that are running behind are going to play later that day or night should I say. Worst case scenario players that are behind have to come in earlier the next morning so it doesn’t mess with the next days schedule . But we are only dealing with 32 player brackets lol not 400!!

On the scale of the DCC it would mean they would need a night shift at the tournament desk to avoid delays pushing into the next day. It might also impact the late night minis that are a staple of the DCC’s.
 
1pocket said:
I

I thought I read that they were planning to go back to 4-1/2” for the tournament floor tables.

But the more difficult questions of how to make the schedule run more efficiently, the only “simple” thing I can think of would be to cap the entries at lower numbers.

The potential for software solutions is out of my league, so the little suggestions I made in the last post are probably quite naive.
Click to expand...
It’s not that difficult to figure out - the number of maximum entrys for each discipline should be based on the number of match tables that are available, particularly if there are multiple disciplines being played simultaneously.
 
Another thing they could do is at the time players initially sign up, they could collect the buyback in escrow. Which players could get that money back by withdrawing prior to the pertinent redraw round if they lose. And of course they could always just forgo the buyback option when they first sign up. I’m sure there would be some grumbling but it would probably help the TD logistics quite a bit.
 
I wonder if Diamond has done a time study. Maybe it's not even possible to have all the matches on time? For example, multiply the average match length per division with the total number of matches per division. That would tell you how many total hours are needed to complete the matches. Then figure out are there even enough hours in a day to accomplish that? That's the max ever possible. If that showed there would need to be matches 25 hours out of a 24 hr day, well then that is simply never going to happen even if you had zero downtime on any table and staff and players were awake 24 hrs per day. Then work backwards from there.

That would show which tournament took the longest, overall, and on a per-match basis. Maybe it was the 9 ball, not the one pocket, for example. If that were true, maybe the 9 ball should start earlier?

I just went to the DCC site, there are 5 days included for round 1 to the finals of banks, and round 1 to the finals of One pocket. 9 ball, on the other hand, has 4 days from round 1 to the finals.
 
1pocket said:
As for Lou, you know where you can get my attention if you want to continue to negotiate any challenge or beef with me.
Click to expand...

The suggestion was made that we play for $5k at a neutral location — I’m not hard to find ;-)

Lou Figueroa
no idea where
my SAT scores are
 
sjm said:
I'm not as sure. Yes, tight pockets on the outer tables slowed down the Derby to a crawl. Yes, Diamond has been made aware of it. But no, I don't see any evidence that something is being done about it and am concerned by the prospect of this mistake being repeated in 2024.
Click to expand...

I believe Chad said in a podcast they were going back to 4.5 everywhere except the streaming table, which IMO, is not kosher.

Lou Figueroa
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top