Wpa contract

Contracts for playing pool carry as much weight as contracts to play miniature golf. Actually, a mini golf contract would be more valuable imo.

So you sent a letter recently to the WPA complaining that they did not have player membership.

They enacted player membership.

You attack them on an AZB thread about enacting player membership.

...

The "player membership" Doug is suggesting is a far cry from the one attempting to be enacted now by the WPA. He's talking about a pro player representative on the WPA board or the WCBS board. That's not even dreamed about by the current WPA, who are so disorganized that they cannot even run their own ship, without running into some kind of problems...and it has happened several times now. BTW, Celtic, Doug is a very respected member of the international pool community, as well as a very respected and longtime poster here on AzB. What he is doing is letting us judge for ourselves the incompetence of the current leadership, both organizationally, and pro player-wise. It's all chiefs, and no indians! Been that way for decades, on both sides. Thanks Doug, for sharing! :thumbup:

Scott Lee
http://poolknowledge.com

Celtic said:

So you sent a letter recently to the WPA complaining that they did not have player membership.

They enacted player membership.

You attack them on an AZB thread about enacting player membership.

...

Click to expand...

Needs pictures

pulled it of some chinese, maybe korean or jap, the asian person's FB, it could've been a black or indian maybe pakistani (best not use names, and be ambiguous)

A license to participate in WPA events?
The license also requires permission to participate in non-sanctioned events.

To get access to prize money requires a license. How many situations can you create that are not cited in detail by the license agreement?

The license is tournament promoters locking in future entry fees and establishing punishment policies against unruly players.

Promoters need the ability to eject players and revoke their license from an event.

It makes sense because if you have friends and want to help them, screw over people that you don't know.

The publicity thing is small potatoes, being available isn't the same as obligated to appear.

The big items are loss of license and the lack of conditions stated for how that can happen.

Promoters win big because the definition of a promoter requesting a penalty is loosely defined and the conditions for when a penalty arises are not articulated. The whole request of penalty process is vague and leaves too much to the imagination.

Players not signing the license contract
will they be allowed to participate in WPA events, major question
is a major legal issue.

the analogy to practicing law or medicine does not apply.
In a legal mediation battle, analogies are for losers.

Dont think playing pool is like practicing law or medicine.

Some states have a right to work, meaning you can work multiple jobs, an employer can't prevent you from doing that.
Some companies that "employ" people have other agreements like not working for a competing company.

The WPA creating a "global license" for events around the world is a first of its kind.

The main reason for the license is to assure all the best players show up at specific events.
When events overlap and players have to choose their best chance to win or place, promoters hate it.

Promoters want the best player list to advertise, to get the best spectator sales.

Scott Lee said:

The "player membership" Doug is suggesting is a far cry from the one attempting to be enacted now by the WPA. He's talking about a pro player representative on the WPA board or the WCBS board. That's not even dreamed about by the current WPA, who are so disorganized that they cannot even run their own ship, without running into some kind of problems...and it has happened several times now. BTW, Celtic, Doug is a very respected member of the international pool community, as well as a very respected and longtime poster here on AzB. What he is doing is letting us judge for ourselves the incompetence of the current leadership, both organizationally, and pro player-wise. It's all chiefs, and no indians! Been that way for decades, on both sides. Thanks Doug, for sharing! :thumbup:

Scott Lee
http://poolknowledge.com

Click to expand...

Fact is they don't need one USA has a seat at the table Skip Nemecek
Board Member
Chicago, USA
It's a voluntary sign up thier not breaking anyone's arms no one has to sign up or play in any of thier sanctioned events , it's well within thier right to impose thier rules if a tounoment wants it to be a sanctioned event and as we have seen with Tom Brady courts generally don't side with players in these cases
The US open upped the money to attract world wide players that simply would not come to the USA to play otherwise look at that field this yr easily the best in yrs from a worldwide standpoint and that's the ultimate goal
The truth is we need more high entry fee events sanctioned by some kind of governing body and weed out all but the few capable of compeating at the higher level consistently and do it looking and acting professional at the same sametime I'd love to see some gamesmanship between shots never over the shot but just to make the product more appealing.. ok maybe that's to much to ask

1

WPA Contract

The document

The contract is simply an attempt by the WPA to monopolize the tournament industry and force non-WPA tournament promoters to join the organization. (i.e. if you -- Mr. Tournament Promoter -- don't join WPA none of the players will play in your event).

Some people think this is a good idea. I don't think it is. There are too few people willing to risk investing in a pool tournament; making it more difficult for them will only reduce their numbers even further.

Of course there are other elements in the contract, but they're all nickel-and-dime stuff.

It is also an attempt to legitimately promote events to larger sponsors.

They can say we have rules and policies like larger sports entertainment organizations.

Whether or not this is needed right now has not been explained?

The great big sponsor to save pool, should have some ground rules set before investing.

Because the players are just the product, the promoters influence finances.

Players show up for a few days of playnig pool.

Promoters work all year like dogs, for a chance to make money. That means all year no income, until they have the big event. This contract is just to help the events go smoothly.

All the walkout talk and boycotts, no one will invest when players think they are more important than promoters.

I mean Strickland, Archer,, ... all these older touring American players can easily be replaced with foreign players, they might draw the same size crowds.

bdorman said:

The contract is simply an attempt by the WPA to monopolize the tournament industry and force non-WPA tournament promoters to join the organization. (i.e. if you -- Mr. Tournament Promoter -- don't join WPA none of the players will play in your event).

Some people think this is a good idea. I don't think it is. There are too few people willing to risk investing in a pool tournament; making it more difficult for them will only reduce their numbers even further.

Of course there are other elements in the contract, but they're all nickel-and-dime stuff.

Click to expand...

justnum said:

all these older touring American players can easily be replaced with foreign players, they might draw the same size crowds.

Click to expand...

But therein lies the problem: there are no crowds.

Just because it's a WPA event, doesn't mean more people are going to watch it. (Actually, from what I can gather, WPA appears to be a rather poor marketer of events).

Sponsors only care about secondary stuff like Sanctioning Body, etc. AFTER you've met their requirements for providing LOTS of viewers. Otherwise just having a sanctioning body like WPA gets you nothing. It just means there will be fewer tournaments because promoters will look at WPA membership as just another cost/headache/risk.

You make it sound like the WPA

wants to restrict when pro players compete in events.

We all know how much money the pros make and they can afford to limit themselves to the most regarded WPA events.

It makes sense WPA players could get hurt in other events, just like how college restricts athletes

Promoters are protecting players future interests, not their immediate interests

bdorman said:

But therein lies the problem: there are no crowds.

Just because it's a WPA event, doesn't mean more people are going to watch it. (Actually, from what I can gather, WPA appears to be a rather poor marketer of events).

Sponsors only care about secondary stuff like Sanctioning Body, etc. AFTER you've met their requirements for providing LOTS of viewers. Otherwise just having a sanctioning body like WPA gets you nothing. It just means there will be fewer tournaments because promoters will look at WPA membership as just another cost/headache/risk.

Click to expand...

justnum said:

You make it sound like the WPA wants to restrict when pro players compete in events.

Click to expand...

That's exactly what WPA wants to do. Read the contract; do you really think they care about Player Meetings or Publicity Appearances, or that those make any difference to the future of pool? No.

They want to use the players to force promoters to put on WPA-sanctioned (i.e. fees paid to WPA) events. An organization can get away with it (PGA, NBA, NFL, etc.) if it brings real value to the table (and there are already a lot of viewers/sponsors that provide the cash flow). But WPA brings nothing.

I'd like to hear why a promoter should put on a WPA-sanctioned event. You don't need WPA to draw players; the prize fund and added money do that. You don't need them for promotion since they don't do any. You don't need them for management/administration because they don't do that either. WPA is just another cost...but one that can also tell you that you have to do something that makes no sense. Too much risk for any business.

But the WPA helps protect players, if they need a license that means not all players can compete.

If fewer players compete, they have better chance to win prizes.

they also lose the ability to freely (wo permission) play in events they can win, when tourneys conflict

bdorman said:

That's exactly what WPA wants to do. Read the contract; do you really think they care about Player Meetings or Publicity Appearances, or that those make any difference to the future of pool? No.

They want to use the players to force promoters to put on WPA-sanctioned (i.e. fees paid to WPA) events. An organization can get away with it (PGA, NBA, NFL, etc.) if it brings real value to the table (and there are already a lot of viewers/sponsors that provide the cash flow). But WPA brings nothing.

I'd like to hear why a promoter should put on a WPA-sanctioned event. You don't need WPA to draw players; the prize fund and added money do that. You don't need them for promotion since they don't do any. You don't need them for management/administration because they don't do that either. WPA is just another cost...but one that can also tell you that you have to do something that makes no sense. Too much risk for any business.

Click to expand...

An interview with Ian Anderson is now available.
Listen now: www.americanbilliardradio.com

After the ABR interview.

Personal Gripe: Why the need to make the license year round, instead of on a per event basis?

Player Concerns:
Players can't afford to say no if they can win WPA prize money.

Pressure Tactic:
Players have signed up, so unsigned players need to sign up otherwise they lose out in events.

Response: Allow additional time for players to transition in, no full license requirements until players can understand from their backers the full effects of signing. The lack of notice and preparing for players to learn about these agreements and changes to US Open is promoter and WPA failure.

Organizers had all year to think about this, but players get a three day signup window and penalty for not signing with the pressure of expenses already put up for the event.

Vague and unclear:
-What does getting permission to participate in non-WPA events mean?

-Is permission conditional on fees or expenses?

-If a player participates in an event and needs permission, how is the permission process decided?

-What are the range of penalties for participating in other events? It will be very memorable for players to learn those penalties after being told they can't participate in a tournament.

justnum said:

After the ABR interview.

Personal Gripe: Why the need to make the license year round, instead of on a per event basis?

Player Concerns:
Players can't afford to say no if they can win WPA prize money.

Pressure Tactic:
Players have signed up, so unsigned players need to sign up otherwise they lose out in events.

Response: Allow additional time for players to transition in, no full license requirements until players can understand from their backers the full effects of signing. The lack of notice and preparing for players to learn about these agreements and changes to US Open is promoter and WPA failure.

Organizers had all year to think about this, but players get a three day signup window and penalty for not signing with the pressure of expenses already put up for the event.

Vague and unclear:
-What does getting permission to participate in non-WPA events mean?

-Is permission conditional on fees or expenses?

-If a player participates in an event and needs permission, how is the permission process decided?

-What are the range of penalties for participating in other events? It will be very memorable for players to learn those penalties after being told they can't participate in a tournament.

Click to expand...

Why the lateness on this, people that want to play have a option to play the open or not ?

justnum said:

The document

View attachment 437200

View attachment 437201

Click to expand...

this is a treat

they have to sign

they already paid to show up

wpa made it convenient

just make sure players know how to avoid being penalized or ejected from a tournament

it might require translators and pictures and embarrassing demonstrations, a written description is inadequate

xxxbilliards said:

Why the lateness on this, people that want to play have a option to play the open or not ?

Click to expand...