I believe the open would expand to the next higher bracket. Johnnyt
Attention WPBA....How is this fair?
- Thread starter 1on1pooltournys
- Start date
I believe the open would expand to the next higher bracket. Johnnyt
That's a problem that I'm sure Barry wouldn't mind addressing. Of course pigs will fly before you find 256 bangers willing to cough up $600 to play in a pool tournament.
...imo
MM
Right!
I think pros should act like pros and not whine about having to play other pros.
This line is so true:
As for the argument back and forth about allowing pros, it is the Tour's option to allow pros or not.
I totally agree, it's their tour and they decide what is best for it. If players don't like how it's run, they don't have to play...
Pete
very easy for you to say Pete, but when you want to compete and you have one tour as an option within a 300 mile radius, the "don't have to play" comment doesn't stick. I realize there is a choice there but if you love the game, you do what you have to whether you agree or not with the tour's decisions.
I would like to see blind voting (i think that's what it's called) on these tours. Some might feel funny voting in the open what they feel is against the tour operators and other members on the tour feelings on a subject. Have the ballots counted in front of the whole membership. A lot of people don't like to make waves...I am not one of them. If everything is on the up and up, nobody should mind a blind vote. Johnnyt
I have actually played in some events where I was the underdog..I ended up winning or beating players I was supposed to lose to...Needless to say I played the best I ever played for months after that....When you have to step up your game to beat a pro and you actually beat the odds, it does amazing things to your mental game...I think pros should be allowed to play in all events..
Agreed The Fl State VENA tourney this year had two pros Cliff Joyner (sp) and Troy Frank and this is an amateur event. Well you can guess who came in first and second and because of it there will be far fewer player next year.
They basically rob and kill tournaments. Amateur events are for amateur
pro events are for pros, Qualifiers are for people that need to qualify.
I don't think the logistics involved in expanding the event from 256 to 512 is practical, at least not within a couple of months of the event. Sure, if the spots one year fill up fast you can always plan on expanding next year.
Well, my example of the ENTIRE field being filled with bangers was exaggerated to make a point. But say even 50 "B" and below guys enter. That's 20% of the field. I would say that greatly diminishes the prestige of the event.
It just surprises me that someone can enter a tournament called the US Open without some sort of qualifications, either through a pre-set list of exemptions or through sanctioned qualifying tournaments.
[I don't think the logistics involved in expanding the event from 256 to 512 is practical, at least not within a couple of months of the event. Sure, if the spots one year fill up fast you can always plan on expanding next year.]
I'm sure a tournament can be run with 350 players in it. Johnnyt
I'm sure a tournament can be run with 350 players in it. Johnnyt
I didn't mean exactly that, as noted I already said it can. But to expand the field like that just before the event takes place probably now means adding days to the event. Can the venue accommodate you or is the facility already committed to the next event coming to town? Now everyone involved has to amend their travel plans and are hotel rooms even available for the additional nights? What about tickets that have already been sold and do those attendees now need to change their flights into and out of town? All the pre-event advertising spent is now money down the drain since you are now changing the dates of the event. What happens with all the vendor agreements; media arrangements; booth space; sponsor agreements; insurance policies; security; and on and on and on...
I would think that even if you are not adding days to the event, their would be a lot of little things to address.
Last edited:
i will take the 9 ball playing 10 ball.
i dont know if your looking for action if you are i will play 10 ball even .
Well, this thread just took an interesting turn...
How did you move your fingers to type that??? LOL I know that's how we do it but this one is a real stretch...... You could have at least tried to say you are in town to buy your sister a car.
Then again, now that I think about it, the WPBA pros do have a curse on you! LMAO
Last edited:
I knew something would get accomplished out of starting this thread!:thumbup:
something good did come out of this thread - the discussion was finally raised at the latest JPNEWT and low and behold all of probably four people spoke up (myself included) out of the thirty-nine players. although I could care less either way (other than if I have a bad weekend I leave with a $250+ expense hit under my belt), there are many that won't come to the events if they have to play top guns (in short, they just want to compete with women on a social basis and have no thoughts of pro life). the ones that do want to go pro have a double edged sword of yes they get to play the pros on the regional circuit, but those very players may kill their shot of getting to the pro tour because they are knocked out too soon to get points they need.
it was vocalized that the tour should possibly limit pro participation by having none in the top 16, 32 or 40 play on the tour except for special events (state championships, etc.) or something similar since there is now a satellite tour to start up that would offer the pros a place to make money and compete.
then another thought came up, if that is done, hypothetical of course - but if you limit the top 40 WPBA players and they don't do well the year they are on tour, the following year they have no way to get on tour because they were excluded from playing in regional events to "qualify" by points to get to the regional tour championship.
so, really, what do you do if you are a tour director? what truly is fair for all involved (and to keep your members happy and coming back)?
it was vocalized that the tour should possibly limit pro participation by having none in the top 16, 32 or 40 play on the tour except for special events (state championships, etc.) or something similar since there is now a satellite tour to start up that would offer the pros a place to make money and compete.
then another thought came up, if that is done, hypothetical of course - but if you limit the top 40 WPBA players and they don't do well the year they are on tour, the following year they have no way to get on tour because they were excluded from playing in regional events to "qualify" by points to get to the regional tour championship.
so, really, what do you do if you are a tour director? what truly is fair for all involved (and to keep your members happy and coming back)?
I empathize with your stance. That's a real toughie!
There are some regional tours that have gone 100-percent amateur status, prohibiting pros from entering.
Then you get into the definition of what a "pro" is. At that point, anyone who has won a regional tournament is then not allowed to play.
Who's the TD of that tour? I think I remember reading that they have a GREAT one now. Is it still Linda Haywood Shea?
About 8-9 years ago 288 showed up (within 5) and Barry opened it up to everyone. 30 more guys is 18K more in prize money. hard to turn away.
I empathize with your stance. That's a real toughie!
There are some regional tours that have gone 100-percent amateur status, prohibiting pros from entering.
Then you get into the definition of what a "pro" is. At that point, anyone who has won a regional tournament is then not allowed to play.
Who's the TD of that tour? I think I remember reading that they have a GREAT one now. Is it still Linda Haywood Shea?
you are correct JAM - Linda is running the tour now and it is slowly but surely bringing in all the ladies on the east coast. this weekend I think was the highest number we have had yet this season (39) - love to see it for the tour, the rooms that host, and for the competition! this situation is a real sticky one and I absolutely feel for the TDs, but I think it comes down to what you want to define your tour as/what type of membership you want to hold up. for instance, be a gateway to the pro tour or be a tour with a few great players that move on - if the pros are allowed to play, it pushes the caliber of player up. toughie for sure. it was just interesting to see the reaction in the room when the subject came up.
What about if a player is A) Either already has a spot on the big tour for the next year or, B) already is exempt into the Q Tournament for spots for next year, then they shouldn't play. If the only way for the pro player to get back to the tour for the following year is to earn a spot into the Q Tournament through good play on the regional tours (essentially they are in the same position as all the regular regional tour players) then they can play.