As I've stated previously. I witnessed it. I was there.
I'm ok with you not believing me. However I don't need evidence beyond what I saw.
Hunter v Frost, your stance?
- Thread starter u12armresl
- Start date
I'm ok with you not believing me. However I don't need evidence beyond what I saw.
You think you saw it but our eyes can play tricks on us. Just saying
Don't doubt you one bit but it doesn't matter. Without a ref AT THE TABLE you can NOT play fouls on all balls.
If Matchroom declares up front in player's meetings that the refs will consult spectators as necessary in these type situations, and the players are aware, I have absolutely no problem with it. Matchroom gets spectators involved in the Mosconi Cup, and that is damn well popular. They are in this to increase viewership, and the pros will do what they need to do to chase dat money, and dose titles. They know what the rules are, and have every right to call a ref over to watch the hit, if they want to protect themselves. This is literally a nonissue, past the first occurence.
Who gives a crap about antiquated, outdated ideas of how the game "should" be played, if no one wants to watch that boring crap on TV?
Last edited:
You certainly can, if Matchroom states that spectator engagement will be encouraged, and their goal is that all fouls are called, and no one "gets away" with committing a foul without being punished. Remember, Matchroom's first priority is to entertain/engage fans, NOT to conform to hardcore pool players ideals of how the game should, and has historically been played, which has done ****all for the growth of the game.
As I stated in my other response, this is a total nonissue, past this first occurence. Players will protect themselves by calling a ref over as necessary to watch their own hits, which would actually be a fantastic development, and lead to viewers getting exposed to professional players, acting like professionals.
I agree... Hunter and/or Scott should have called the very available ref to monitor the shot.
Shame on both of them for not doing so.
For the most part. They follow the WPA rules of the game.
We can't give MR credit for this hole in the rules. We can give them credit for plugging it though. Time will tell
Badpenguin
Well-known member
I've seen him move balls around with either his cue or body in several streamed matches. Enough for me to not give him the benefit of the doubt, ever. How can someone play pool "professionally" for 20 or 30 years and still have problems with "clumsily" moving balls around? I don't buy it.
The 70's are calling and they want their cheat back.
Not as bad as Schmidt getting the rack racked high/low so he has access to his break ball on a world record attempt though, lol.
Badpenguin
Well-known member
My impression of that is that it was more of an exhibition than anything else. Surely no one could have seriously considered submitting that video as proof of a world record attempt. To me he looked surprised himself when the guy racked low. My guess is his thought process was like "oh well, screw it, I'll give them a show for a little while longer and call it a night, no way I'm doing 626+ tonight".
In this case, I gave him the benefit of the doubt
I freely admit, I just don't have a high opinion of John's integrity/judgment as a general rule. This stems from him encouraging his fans to buy into Bitcoin with "$100,000 by Christmas!" BS, despite my actively trying to warn him against this for multiple reasons, including potential Crytpo Exchange compromises, hacks, major countries banning crypto currency, and a few other reasons that would all generate negative news about Bitcoin, and push a fall in price. To a one, every single one came true within about six months, and anyone who bought into his pumping lost a LOT of money, really quickly. I have never really forgiven him for doing that to his fans. The feeling is mutual, as he blocked me on Facebook for questioning his judgement on that "politely" in an explanation in private chat. He is a real thin-skinned dude, for being such a major talent.My impression of that is that it was more of an exhibition than anything else. Surely no one could have seriously considered submitting that video as proof of a world record attempt. To me he looked surprised himself when the guy racked low. My guess is his thought process was like "oh well, screw it, I'll give them a show for a little while longer and call it a night, no way I'm doing 626+ tonight".
In this case, I gave him the benefit of the doubt
For perspective, I am an IT Security Engineer, and it's my job to keep informed about the darker side of the internet, so this was not some random guy expressing his opinion on Facebook. I had been doing active reading on the dangers of cryptocurrency, and was trying to do him a favor and advising him to invest in whatever he wanted, but not to pull other people into it, through his "star power". People don't think clearly when it is their idol encouraging them to do something and promising the world.
Last time shorty
ALL CALLS GO TO THE SHOOTER
AUDIENCE CANT CALL A FOUR, NOR CAN A SEATED OPPONENT BEHIND THE SHOOTER
Apparently, they can, because they did. Matchroom is free to set whatever rules they like, and you are free to twist in the wind about it all you like, lol.
It must be depressing to feel so impotent about the game changing before your very eyes, and nothing you can do about it.
"The sky is falling!!!" - Chicken "SBC" Little
Badpenguin
Well-known member
Also IT security, and couldn’t agree more…
But trying to explain to even other IT people about blockchain/encryption and why crypto coin is nothing more than a pyramid scheme, but has the capability of causing much deeper harm than your everyday pyramid scheme, is folly at best.
Nude pool league.
Naked nine balls!
Clothing is the problem.
Historically, the Ancient Olympic games were nude events.
I ref'd and acted as a TD for over 40 years and not once did I rely on any "trusted witnesses." My attitude was simply that spectators should not be involved in the match in any way, shape or form, period! And I adhered to that philosophy for the entire time I acted in my capacity as a referee or TD. I learned there are other ways to find out the truth about what happened on the table by talking to each player individually. I won't get into all that now, but let's just say there is a long learning process involved in being a good ref. I would guess that there aren't more than five excellent pool refs on the planet right now, and there never has been many more than that at any one time. And I've seen several piss poor ones who have made very bad decisions since I quit working these tournaments. Matchroom had some great referees in Nigel Rees and Michaela Tabb. Why they got rid of them I'm not sure.
As far as this current issue is concerned, it is actually easier to ref with "all ball fouls" than with "cue ball fouls" only. Ideally you would have a referee at every table or at least one for every two tables. It should be the responsibility of the opponent to call over the ref in any situation where it looks like there could be a potential foul or bad hit. All you have to do is tell the player at the table to hold up until a ref can be called to watch the shot. If you fail to do that, then you've forfeited your right to complain afterwards.
As far as this current issue is concerned, it is actually easier to ref with "all ball fouls" than with "cue ball fouls" only. Ideally you would have a referee at every table or at least one for every two tables. It should be the responsibility of the opponent to call over the ref in any situation where it looks like there could be a potential foul or bad hit. All you have to do is tell the player at the table to hold up until a ref can be called to watch the shot. If you fail to do that, then you've forfeited your right to complain afterwards.
Last edited:
Sounds like a No Foul should have been the ruling according to this somewhat experienced gentleman.
