Think about it ,once someone gets too good they cant play in any of the am. events so it encourages them not to improve. It would be different if everyone but touring pros could play but some tours are banning shortstops!!! These tours are strictly padding their pocket books and have no desire to improve pool. Something needs to be done to put a stop to people hand picking who can play and who can't.
Amateur events are killing the sport of pool
- Thread starter B_White
- Start date
B_White said:
Lemme guess. You were not allowed into a tour stop you are way too good for, and now, you come on here whining and officially declaring the reason for pool going dead (in the USA only, BTW) is that amateur tournaments are being selective.
Taste like sour grapes, to me.
Russ
Actually, I think this is a valid point. I started playing in open tournaments when I had only been playing for a year or two, back in the early 90s. I think that some people are put off the better tourneys because they can wait a month and play in one that has no really strong players. While this is more competitive, I think it retards the growth process, and also basically sows the seeds of nittdom-jmo-Matt
huh?
I'm not sure I follow this post:sorry:
I'm not sure I follow this post:sorry:
The poster was talking about events that are becoming popular in alot of the southeast that ban any and all shortstop and A players. Both the viking and pechauer tours put them on. They have their place, but are in danger of supplanting the open events
I for one am in favor of Amateur events because I know I have NO CHANCE of ever winning an Open event. But, I understand what B_White is saying. There should be a set guideline that is followed and not just handpicking the ones that can play or cant. In the last SE Open Amateur event, TK came up to me and asked me if I thought 2 certain people should be allowed to play...I told him I didnt mind, because I dont have a problem playing people better than me. Everyone voted on whether or not they should play and they were allowed to play. I won the event, and the 2 players in question got 2nd and 3rd. JMO.
Southpaw
Southpaw
B_White said:
great and valid points sir......anyone that disagrees has probably never been told that they cant play in an "amateur" tourney
I like Southpaw's reply. I definitely understand where he is coming from, but he also plays in the open events, and I think he would agree that they have helped his game more than the amateur tourneys. Like I said, I actually like the amateurs, but not at the expense of the opens.
muttley76 said:
Thanks, Matt. Yes I do play in the open events as well and yes I do feel they have helped my game tremedously. I am not afraid to challenge myself...I feel thats how you get better. I have been told by Mike Janis that I am on the "cusp" of not being able to play in the Viking Amateur events because I have cashed quite a bit. I cant really see myself not being allowed in an "Amateur" event, but if thats the rule and it is upheld for everyone, then I have to go along with it.
Southpaw
Hmm
The original question is an interesting one.
I have played several open tournaments (o-2 bbq) and there have been some that have 'asked' several players not to return -- i.e. they are to skilled for the tournament. However, there really isn't much of a next level for them to progress towards. They aren't good enough / don't want to / can't afford to / have other interests / etc to play at the pro level and compete well enough to win.(the Johnny Archer / Shane VB level, because they get the $$)
So -- my .02.
As long as there is an established criteria that everyone knows, I got no problem with it. I just don't like the arbitrary, off the cuff decisions which tend to be influenced by other factors.
What does a player do when caught 'in-between' skill sets. Especially when there is no motivating factors for moving up? Out of the amature, but can't ratchet up to the open? Out of the open and can't / won't committ to the pro skill level? Money, ego, success -- whatever motivators you want to put in the time to move up.
It does pose an interesting question that no one has really found the answer too.
FWIW
The original question is an interesting one.
I have played several open tournaments (o-2 bbq) and there have been some that have 'asked' several players not to return -- i.e. they are to skilled for the tournament. However, there really isn't much of a next level for them to progress towards. They aren't good enough / don't want to / can't afford to / have other interests / etc to play at the pro level and compete well enough to win.(the Johnny Archer / Shane VB level, because they get the $$)
So -- my .02.
As long as there is an established criteria that everyone knows, I got no problem with it. I just don't like the arbitrary, off the cuff decisions which tend to be influenced by other factors.
What does a player do when caught 'in-between' skill sets. Especially when there is no motivating factors for moving up? Out of the amature, but can't ratchet up to the open? Out of the open and can't / won't committ to the pro skill level? Money, ego, success -- whatever motivators you want to put in the time to move up.
It does pose an interesting question that no one has really found the answer too.
FWIW
I feel like Brian should not be allowed to play in the Sunday events that Mke Janis runs since he has won several Viking open tour stops and I think he would be stealing if allowed to play in the amateur events. However I do like the Southern billiard tours Sunday second chance tourney format where anyone that didn't cash in the open Sat. stop can play and all APA or Bca cardholders are elligible. I have drawn Bwizzle in the first round in Hickory at a Viking stop a couple years ago and he ain't no amateur so I say step up and play and if you get beat don't whine cause you are an open class player. If he is allowed to play in an amateur event I'm at I will sit and watch from the sidelines however, if I have to play him in the open division I'll take whatever the outcome is and say he played to strong for me if he did. Brian could more than likely win against me giving me the five and out with the snaps if he is in stroke and I can run a few racks at times, I think Brian plays great and makes the game look very easy.
Leonard
Leonard
jamesroberts said:
Gimme a break, James...Did you not beat Earl Strickland in one of the open events???
Russ
no ive never played earl in a tournament............i think my problem with the amateur tourneys is that its more of a popularity contest than an actual decision based on playing ability........... there are people that play like i do that play kings bay tourneys, but i cant..........someone that offers me weight in all games just got kicked off and i havent been able to play in over 2 years..... the most prestigious tourney ive ever won is the wednesday night tourney at strokers...... just because i have the money and the means to travel to play in open tourneys doesnt mean that im a professional....... its just my opinion and its a sore subject with me because it would be nice to have a tourney to play weekly or every other weekRuss Chewning said: