CSI 8 Ball Finals
- Thread starter Hungarian
- Start date
Nor I, and I've attended tournaments for 38 years. In other sports and in pool, walkovers are really not that rare. If your opponent doesn't show, you win. It has been that way always, and today may be the first exception in the history of sport.
I really thought that this poll might be 100% in favor of Shane should not have been permitted to play. Of those I've chatted with here in Vegas, it's 100% that he shouldn't have been permitted to play.
Someone did come out of Shane's group, and it was Souquet. A few players had a 2-1 record in the event while being eliminated, two of them being Dechaine and Appleton. Although the semifinal spot should not have been offered to anybody and Ko Pin-Yi should have advanced to the final, Dechaine and Appleton were just as deserving as Van Boening for a berth in the semifinal.
Pool's integrity was greatly compromised today and thank heaven Shane didn't win because he had no right to be playing at all. I was so disgusted that I chose not to watch the final at all, leaving after the very first rack.
They were in different groups, but Darren achieved every bit as much as Shane in the round robin, going 2-1 and failing to qualify. Dechaine was in a different group from either of them, but he also went 2-1 and failed to qualify.
This wasn't a double-elimination tournament; this was a round-robin. One competitor from the pool moves forward to the next round.
While it is a rare occurrence, it has happened in other sports. There is precedent for an eliminated competitor advancing in place of one who withdrew after qualfiying to advance to the next round.
Withdrawals After Qualfication- FIFA World Cup "FIFA invited Portugal and France, who had both been eliminated in qualifying, to fill the gaps left by Scotland and Turkey."
Ralph withdrew so the second-highest finisher got his spot. Kudos to the organizers for giving the pool world another great match instead of a bye.
While it is a rare occurrence, it has happened in other sports. There is precedent for an eliminated competitor advancing in place of one who withdrew after qualfiying to advance to the next round.
Withdrawals After Qualfication- FIFA World Cup "FIFA invited Portugal and France, who had both been eliminated in qualifying, to fill the gaps left by Scotland and Turkey."
Ralph withdrew so the second-highest finisher got his spot. Kudos to the organizers for giving the pool world another great match instead of a bye.
That was 1950 when Fifa invited Portugal and France after they were eliminated and neither one of them went. Poor example.
This tournament was a two stage tournament, that sent one qualifier from each group through. The top qualifier in one of the groups forfeited prior to the second stage beginning, so the second place finisher in that group moves up and takes his place in the second stage. I don't see how that's "unfair" or "wrong" in any way.
Exactly. If it was unfair, don't you think one of the players in the tournament would have voted that way?
Bingo!
People seem to be stuck on double elimination and byes..... This was a completely different format. There are no byes with this style of tournament.
Chuck
Of all the posts the thing I wonder about is what would happen if Ralf beat Ko then left before playing young Ko in the final. What place money did he get?" This was uglyyyy
Hi Stu,
I wanted to address your post because you have more knowledge and integrity than most I've ever met in pool.
If we want pool to be considered a legitimate sport, than we must do what other sports do. This was clearly a two stage event. The qualifying round robins determine an advancer from each grouping. One from each, not four from all.
The term in all other legitimate sports is "Lucky Loser." Someone keeps mentioning one particular instance that might not fit the bill (the Porto, Franco, FIFA thingy). I'm more amazed that everyone doesn't know what a lucky loser is. It's not "rare." It happens quite often.
In this case, the one guy that advanced out of a particular group withdrew. By the precedence that is often seen in every legitimate sport that uses a qualifying system to advance to the next round, if there is sufficient time to fill the spot, the spot is offered to the next available highest finisher. "From the same group" seems quite obvious to me as other grouping events do the same thing. I've certainly seen it in things like amateur softball and basketball. The second place of that region got to go the bigger dance. They didn't go to the whole nation and pick some other team to fill the spot.
Please look up the term "Lucky Loser" and see if this doesn't at least convince you that this choice has precedence, has a basis, and has legitimacy. Whether you agree with it isn't going to be my goal for this post.
Thanks,
Freddie
The winner from each group moved on that was Souquet, then he forfeited
Ko should have gotten a BYE. Plain and simple.
Stock in Ralph went done in my book. How on earth do you book a flight before the well published schedule finals with most of the top ranked players in the world in it? I understand he may have commitments but then he shouldn't entered in the first place and put the organizers in the predicament they faced.
WE want this to be a legitimate sport so we should copy what amateur softball and basketball do. If anyone is going to change something drastically from the norm
of the player getting a bye. It should be made abundantly clear ahead of time. Not just at the last moment before a semi-finals match is supposed to start.
You think you're going to play one player. Then you think you're getting a bye. Then all of a sudden someone who's already been knocked out (the best American
player show up to play. Are you kidding me trying to say that's fair.
These are the people behind this big code of conduct. A very sad day for Pool in America. They won't have to worry about making all their tournaments Invitationals
a few more stunts like this one and they'll be lucky to have 16 players show up. There's a bridge for sale I think in Brooklyn for anyone who believes the airline story.
That's not why he forfeited IMO, sorry but that's just not Ralf.
That said it should have no barring on the bye Ko should have gotten. I'm sure the excuses will follow as soon as they make them up. :boring2:
Pool was the loser yesterday, luck had nothing to do with it.
Last edited:
CSI 8-ball finals
CSI will be making comments in due time. In case anyone forgets, we are (still) running a very large amateur event with over 5,000 players and 35 events.
We agree this is an unusual ( and interesting) situation. We made a decision and we can and will explain why we did what we did.
The conduct of several of the posters in this and other threads is uncalled for and borders on stupidity. People can disagree- but accusations and name calling does more damage to the game.
CSI does more for pool on amateur and pro sides than anyone in the country. If there is a problem with pool - perhaps it is in the dis-respect given towards those that do things. Just because you disagree with our decisions does not make you right or wrong. It just means we disagree. And although you definitely have the 'right' to say anything you want, the informed public has the right to hold your thoughts in contempt.
In closing. The pro event was only one event of many. Give us the courtesy to complete the task at hand. Move back to our office and we will respond in the professional manner that we always strive for.
This will be the only response for a couple of days.
And to those CSI haters - have a nice day:thumbup:
Mark Griffin
CSI
CSI will be making comments in due time. In case anyone forgets, we are (still) running a very large amateur event with over 5,000 players and 35 events.
We agree this is an unusual ( and interesting) situation. We made a decision and we can and will explain why we did what we did.
The conduct of several of the posters in this and other threads is uncalled for and borders on stupidity. People can disagree- but accusations and name calling does more damage to the game.
CSI does more for pool on amateur and pro sides than anyone in the country. If there is a problem with pool - perhaps it is in the dis-respect given towards those that do things. Just because you disagree with our decisions does not make you right or wrong. It just means we disagree. And although you definitely have the 'right' to say anything you want, the informed public has the right to hold your thoughts in contempt.
In closing. The pro event was only one event of many. Give us the courtesy to complete the task at hand. Move back to our office and we will respond in the professional manner that we always strive for.
This will be the only response for a couple of days.
And to those CSI haters - have a nice day:thumbup:
Mark Griffin
CSI