crav'in action
Registered
This past weekend I played in a $40 entry 10-ball tournament at a local bar which included a Calcutta. They had 2 blind bids and my buddy and I bought the second bid and chose one of the favorites. The player bought half of himself from us and ended up winning the tournament. So he gets the first place money for winning and half of first place in the Calcutta and my buddy and I split the other half. Monday I see a post by him on Face Book bashing us for not giving him a percentage of our share in the Calcutta that "HE" won for us. Am I missing something here? I thought the concept of the Calcutta, requiring us to allow him to buy half of himself, insures that he gets his fair share. If he wanted more than half, he could have bid and bought himself and had the whole thing. If we had all of him and got all the 1st place Calcutta money, of course we should give him a percentage but with him getting half, I don't agree with his way of thinking. Please tell me if I am wrong.