Search results

No, it wouldn't. I think that would just waste more HONEST people's time and less DISHONEST people's time. Let the cheaters keep what they win and the honest people have less chance to win, yeah, that's the way to do it. The DISHONEST people are the ones screwing it up for everyone. If they...

The first and third suggestions I agree with. The second, however, has to be the way it is in the book. If a league is totally fair, any team could finish first one session and last the next. You can threaten to take away qualification, but it's wrong to take it from a team that did nothing...

Yeah, they do. But when considering DQ, the cert process is considered. If five went up and zero certed up, that's gonna hurt you. The part that breaks your case is when captains and players come in here and say in one breath "we're all about improving" and say in the next breath "we had two...

Let me get this straight, you feel you did your LO a favor by playing in a tournament your team didn't actually qualify for, and THEY screwed YOU? Ok.

Always speak up. That's part of the system too. Bring attention to those who might not be playing fairly. Also part of the system is the LO, and a good one will know what to do with your feedback. As for the "losing players" bit, it's my belief that the vast majority of players are honest...

I get it. Being surrounded by high balls after making most of the low balls on the break is bad luck, but making most of the low balls on the break is skill. There's more skill in making the 8 on the break, but I would be ok with spotting the 8 if made on the break. However, in a bar that...

Because you're not paying attention. Plenty of us (those of us who take their money) will help anyone who asks, and will offer help on occasion even when not asked. The fact that you don't see us probably means we're busy doing what we do, providing a product and service that people are...

That's BS. Somebody wins every year, and somebody usually does get disqualified. Usually one, maybe two in 9-Ball and as many as three in 8-Ball, and they all deserve it. As many as 5 out of 1200, not bad, but half the final 16? Don't get me wrong - I'm not saying I don't believe you...

When was the last time you were there? I've been to every APA event in Vegas for the last 20+ years and in the last 15 haven't seen anything that made my eyes pop. Maybe I'm just in the wrong place at the wrong time. I'm sure there are still some cheaters, it's impossible to catch them all...

After re-reading your reply, I think you got confused by my use of the word "stack". I wasn't referring to seeding, I was referring to the physical way the winner's bracket and loser's bracket were "stacked" and finishing places determined as if it was one single-elimination bracket.

It's nothing like yours. Only first, second, and thirteenth place are the same. They can get paid. They just can't get paid more than the players who get knocked out on the winner's side. Otherwise, there's an incentive to lose and dodge a monster player. That's what I said. But I think...

I think that's pretty much what I said. If you call it modified double elimination, players hear the words "double elimination" and are surprised when they are out after one loss. Sometimes the words are important. Take your glass/water example, for instance. My glass is empty, I turn...

Who would stack brackets like that and make them one bracket? If I ran that bracket, the finishing places would be: First Place --------------- #1 Second Place ----------- #9 Third Place -------------- #2 Fourth Place ------------ #3 & #4 Sixth Place -------------- #5, #6, #7, #8 Tenth Place...

I don't think KMRUNOUT was bashing the APA or our handicapping system. He was commenting on the LO, who should have seen that the match ups dictated who he put up in that fourth match. It often happens in a tournament that a team has a player who has to play to meet the 23 rule, but who they...

This is from the Local Bylaws in Baltimore, MD. They only apply in that league area.

Actually, the current version of the rule does offer some "wiggle room". It says it's a loss if you fail to properly mark the pocket and your opponent declares loss of game. I think it would be better to explicitly say "It's up to your opponent to declare loss of game, and they should only do...

I would start by telling them to go read the manual again, starting with page four. Then I would tell them to read the first paragraph of the Game Rules (Page 42 of the team manual, page 1 of the rules booklet). Then I would ask them if they still believe "spirit of the rules" is mentioned...

No, he's not. This rule was re-worded in the latest edition of the team manual. It now says it's a loss if you don't mark the pocket and your opponent calls loss of game. That gives the opponent the opportunity to do the right thing. This change was made specifically for the "A rule is a...

Dealing with forfeits in a fair way is tricky. You don't want to provide either side an incentive to forfeit or to demand a forfeit (if the opponent is two minutes late, for example). You pick a value high enough that a team wouldn't be disappointed in winning that total through honest play...

Why does the timing have to be precise? If the grip is changing before contact and still changing after contact, isn't it changing during contact? Did you mean to say it would be interesting to see someone who could change their grip significantly enough over that tiny interval to make a...