Damn, all this talk of "well the seeding does not matter he should have played..."
What about the freaking principle?
What about the fact that a tournament director is putting players into his "own" event for half of the winnings and than manipulating the seeding of the players he is putting in to give them a better chance at cashing?
What about the players that are not being "put in" by Charlie who are in fact paying their own cash to get in, who now have to play in an event with biased seeding and a TD who has a stake in the outcome of the matches and the tournament?
This is brutal.
Forget Mike's chances with the new seed. NOONE should be playing in this crooked event, this is absolutely terrible for pool, it is a fixed event and that is the LAST thing pool needs atm...
What about the freaking principle?
What about the fact that a tournament director is putting players into his "own" event for half of the winnings and than manipulating the seeding of the players he is putting in to give them a better chance at cashing?
What about the players that are not being "put in" by Charlie who are in fact paying their own cash to get in, who now have to play in an event with biased seeding and a TD who has a stake in the outcome of the matches and the tournament?
This is brutal.
Forget Mike's chances with the new seed. NOONE should be playing in this crooked event, this is absolutely terrible for pool, it is a fixed event and that is the LAST thing pool needs atm...