Another weird happening at the IPT

rackmsuckr

rackmsuckr

Linda Carter - The QUEEN!
Silver Member
Marcus Chamat and Charlie Williams were playing and their match was dragging on too long...the next round was about to start. There was a tie-up in one of the pockets where each player had a ball locked up near the pocket. Both were tactically trying to force fouls by playing safe or break it out.

Mr. Ursetti put in a call to Deno and when Deno responded, he said that no more safeties could be played. The first one who did would be giving ball in hand to their opponent! :eek: No more slow play! They rushed around the table with their heads cut off. Charlie was able to get the upper hand to maintain his perfect score.
 
Last edited:
I'll bet

that probably put both of them in SHOCK. Chamat wouldn't be too happy about the outcome.

I can see the IPT will have a lot of issues to discuss before the next IPT tournament. (late players, not showing up, overruns on time, etc..)
 
Yeah. But it does look like Deno is not going to sit still for any nonsense.

These guys are just realizing that they are playing four matches today and they will receive $7,000 for finishing 3rd or better.

Many of them play all month and don't win that much. Hell, most of them play for months to come close to that.

Welcome to the world of corporate America where you get paid well, but you do have to produce, and you do have to follow the boss' rules.

And if you don't like it the boss will stoop to their level and say "AMF".

Jake

Adios My Friend.
 
Linda, is it stipulated in the rules that this may occur, this changing of the rules mid-game? I know they've been marking a game up on the hour or something to that effect and I really don't have a problem with that. I would however, have a problem with them telling me that I wasn't allowed to play safe. If it's a matter of slow play, put them on a clock. If they're playing a legitimate safe and not simply trying to stall, I would definitely have a problem with that.
 
jjinfla said:
Yeah. But it does look like Deno is not going to sit still for any nonsense.
Click to expand...

I do not agree with this situation as described as being nonsense, 8 ball is a game of strategy, like chess. I think there is a big difference between slow play and strategic play. I just think changing the rules mid game is wrong.
 
Timberly said:
Linda, is it stipulated in the rules that this may occur, this changing of the rules mid-game? I know they've been marking a game up on the hour or something to that effect and I really don't have a problem with that. I would however, have a problem with them telling me that I wasn't allowed to play safe. If it's a matter of slow play, put them on a clock. If they're playing a legitimate safe and not simply trying to stall, I would definitely have a problem with that.
Click to expand...

Sorry, I forgot to mention that it was hill-hill so they couldn't award both of them a game, as it was determined that they were equally at fault for the match running over the time. I think the ruling came because in the beginning they were both taking too much time and it was not intentional, but it was unfortunate that the deciding game also got snarled up.
 
Am I correct in thinking that it wasn't that players were taking too long between each shot, but just that they were using strategy that didn't involve trying to run out every turn? I am confused. Is there a rule in the IPT that players can play safeties? Or that if a match is taking too long, players can't play safeties anymore? Or if a match is taking too long, they can make up rules to speed it up? Or do they just make up rules in the middle of a rack? And how does the referee decide whether I'm playing a safety or just missed my shot.

Am I the only one who thinks it's bizarre to change the rules of pool in the middle of a rack?

I guess I can answer my own question, because between the time I started writing this and when I posted it, other people have also thought this was weird. I think it makes the IPT look like a joke.
 
Last edited:
cuechick said:
I do not agree with this situation as described as being nonsense, 8 ball is a game of strategy, like chess. I think there is a big difference between slow play and strategic play. I just think changing the rules mid game is wrong.
Click to expand...
I say Declare a stalemate and start the game over if the game is locked up!
 
gregory said:
Am I correct in thinking that it wasn't that players were taking too long between each shot, but just that they were using strategy that didn't involve trying to run out every turn? I am confused. Is there a rule in the IPT that players can play safeties? Or that if a match is taking too long, players can't play safeties anymore? Or if a match is taking too long, they can make up rules to speed it up? Or do they just make up rules in the middle of a rack? And how does the referee decide whether I'm playing a safety or just missed my shot.

Am I the only one who thinks it's bizarre to change the rules of pool in the middle of a rack?
Click to expand...
You're not the only one. As two others stated.... I could even go for a stalemate... but certainly not a change of rules... in a hill hill match to boot! :eek:

I'd be slightly ticked!
 
jjinfla said:
Yeah. But it does look like Deno is not going to sit still for any nonsense.

These guys are just realizing that they are playing four matches today and they will receive $7,000 for finishing 3rd or better.

Many of them play all month and don't win that much. Hell, most of them play for months to come close to that.

Welcome to the world of corporate America where you get paid well, but you do have to produce, and you do have to follow the boss' rules.

And if you don't like it the boss will stoop to their level and say "AMF".

Jake

Adios My Friend.
Click to expand...

You do come out with some $hit jake! :rolleyes:
 
I think they inadvertently lost the stalemate rule when they added the 3-foul rule. For example, the most common situation leading to a stalemate is one guy has his last ball deep in the pocket. The other guy has only the 8 ball left, and it's right in front of the other ball. Previously, both guys would agree to a stalemate because it was impossible to do anything without instantly losing the game on your next turn.

But with the 3 foul rule, that gets turned on its head. The first guy at the table, when the above situation arises, will be the first one to foul three times. So no stalemate anymore.

That said ;), I think Charles Ursitti should have taken matters into his own hands and asked both players if they would accept a stalemate. If they do, they start over. If not, they play it out.

- Steve
 
Last edited:
Why not have a rule that says 6 missed attempts is a foul and loss of game, you can't just have a ref or Tour Director make a call not based on any particular time frame or shots.

Set up a total number of misses in a row as a foul and loss of game, players will know what they have to do and when.
 
Charlie Williams taking too much time? Never heard that before?

Marcus isn't known for his speed around the table.


Slow play? this should have never been a problem. All the other players seem to be able to meet the 2 hour time frame, why do Charlie and Marcus have a problem?

Because they are SLOW players and deserve the consequences of their actions.

As for Deno changing the rules.... IMO, great decision on his part. These guys needed consequences for their actions or rather, their no action,,, just safety play.
 
Steve Lipsky said:
I think they inadvertently lost the stalemate rule when they added the 3-foul rule. For example, the most common situation leading to a stalemate is one guy has his last ball deep in the pocket. The other guy has only the 8 ball left, and it's right in front of the other ball. Previously, both guys would agree to a stalemate because it was impossible to do anything without instantly losing the game on your next turn.

But with the 3 foul rule, that gets turned on its head. The first guy at the table, when the above situation arises, will be the first one to foul three times. So no stalemate anymore.

That said ;), I think Charles Ursitti should have taken matters into his own hands and asked both players if they would accept a stalemate. If they do, they start over. If not, they play it out.

- Steve
Click to expand...
I thought that we were talking about a safety battle? Not intentional fouling! I Still vote stallmate
 
C'mon guys. You all played this game for a long time. The bottom line is that the final authority for any non-covered event that may come up is the tournament director. His decision is final.
 
jjinfla said:
C'mon guys. You all played this game for a long time. The bottom line is that the final authority for any non-covered event that may come up is the tournament director. His decision is final.
Click to expand...
So if you play in a weekly tourney and the director comes over and says to you in the middle of your hill hill game that you have to bank the last two balls in order to win, you're going to say that's ok??? :eek: :rolleyes:

Tournament directors still have rules to adhere to when making their decisions.

Tom In Cincy said:
Charlie Williams taking too much time? Never heard that before?

Marcus isn't known for his speed around the table.


Slow play? this should have never been a problem. All the other players seem to be able to meet the 2 hour time frame, why do Charlie and Marcus have a problem?

Because they are SLOW players and deserve the consequences of their actions.

As for Deno changing the rules.... IMO, great decision on his part. These guys needed consequences for their actions or rather, their no action,,, just safety play.
Click to expand...
Tom, believe me when I tell you that I'm not a fan of either one of these guys and it's certainly not my nature to stick up for them.... I'm actually not sticking up for them but for principle. I do not agree with changing the rules mid-game..... that's something that I'll never accept as acceptable. I guess it really doesn't matter though because I don't play competitively. ;)
 
Tap Tap TImberly.....not that you care, but I am impressed of your realist attitude coming out in the past several weeks. Keep it up.
 
Timberly said:
So if you play in a weekly tourney and the director comes over and says to you in the middle of your hill hill game that you have to bank the last two balls in order to win, you're going to say that's ok??? :eek: :rolleyes:

Of course not... very extreme example, but I like the way you get your point across.
Even in weekly tournaments in the finals, it is mandatory in most cases to issue a warning to a player about conduct and the resulting consequences.


Tournament directors still have rules to adhere to when making their decisions.

I use the 'world standard rules' and keep then handy, just for players that would like to read the rules, or question a call I made. I don't make up rules, I just go by them.


Tom, believe me when I tell you that I'm not a fan of either one of these guys and it's certainly not my nature to stick up for them.... I'm actually not sticking up for them but for principle. I do not agree with changing the rules mid-game..... that's something that I'll never accept as acceptable. I guess it really doesn't matter though because I don't play competitively. ;)
Click to expand...

From the IPT website pertaining to the IPT rules... the first paragraph...

These rules are for the game of 8-Ball played at all IPT tour events. These rules are subject to change at any time. It is the responsibility of the players to know and understand these rules before competing. The most important rule is have fun, be honest, and be respectful to the other players and fans.
 
There had to be a better solution than telling the players they can't play any safeties, how would they determine what is and isn't a safety? For example if a player played a two way shot would that be considered a safety?

The IPT certainly has some changes to make before the next tourny.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top