Calcutta's,,, your obligation's????

S

satman

AzB Silver Member
Silver Member
One more before I go to work for a couple of hours.......

When you're in a tourney, are you obligated in any way to the person who bought you in the calcutta? Whether you buy half or not?

JB asked that in my JL post. My whole intent of my post was,,,, No matter what, if you see me at a tournament, I'm there to win the tourney, whether there is a calcutta or not. If I feel I sold for too much, and the risk to reward is too great, I'll not buy half. Unless I'm at a tourney like DCC, stacked with pro's, I'm a threat to win any event if I happen to be in gear that day. I've beaten Pro players before, on barboxes and big tables.
Am I obligated to the person who buys me???? My own self respect says,,,, YES,,, I am always obligated to do my best. Can I quit and go home if the need arises. YES... But unless it was an emergency, I wouldn't......

It ain't all about the money. Don't tell my stakehorse that... Shhhhhhh... he trusts me. He knows I treat his money like my own. At the same time, he knows I will always, {even if we don't buy half} do my best to turn a profit for him.

The Mcdermott Tour had a rule.... if someone buys you, and you forfeit out of the tourney, you have to pay that person their money back or you can't play any more of their events til it was paid..... For those of you who like to see pool tourneys pay out more dough, The calcutta's were getting pretty good.

JB... I do agree with giving the player a little jelly at the end if they win you some dough. But it's not an obligation either......
 
i do not feel that you are obligated to buy half of yourself, but everyone knows that IF you are going to, you should do it before the chart is drawn and not wait until you see the brackets. if i plan on buying half of myself or selling half of someone else, i usually do it immediately after that bid ends.
 
Yea

Ironman317 said:
i do not feel that you are obligated to buy half of yourself, but everyone knows that IF you are going to, you should do it before the chart is drawn and not wait until you see the brackets. if i plan on buying half of myself or selling half of someone else, i usually do it immediately after that bid ends.
Click to expand...

The rule has always been that way. Pay before you see who you're playing. Pay before the matches start, no exceptions.
 
I don't have to worry about it...if someone bought me in a calcutta it's their fault; shoulda done their homework...makes more sense to light that $10 (OR HOWEVER MUCH) on fire. lol

I kinda like JB's idea, that the standard should just be the player get's 25% of the profit made off them, and that way there's definitely incentive other than tourney money for them. If they want more than 25%, then they buyback 50% immediately...seems good to me.
 
I totally agree with if you forfeit due to getting mad or something in the players control then the player should at least give the buyer 1/2 of the money he or she paid for him or her....
 
tigerseye said:
I totally agree with if you forfeit due to getting mad or something in the players control then the player should at least give the buyer 1/2 of the money he or she paid for him or her....
Click to expand...

I don't concur there. That should be factored into what you are willing to pay for said player...You know what players have this type of personality, and if you don't, then why would you "invest" in them in the first place?? I don't call up the trainer if my horse asking for 1/2 my bet back if the horse stops to take a dump in the first turn cuz he may have had some rotten apples the day before. I don't get the player/bettor obligation thing....
 
Your obligation is to try and win. If you want to buy half then fine, do it right away. if you do not buy it right away, do not begrudge the person that bought you and quit. Pool has a bad enough imagine to start with and we need more people involved not less.
 
trustyrusty said:
I don't concur there. That should be factored into what you are willing to pay for said player...You know what players have this type of personality, and if you don't, then why would you "invest" in them in the first place?? I don't call up the trainer if my horse asking for 1/2 my bet back if the horse stops to take a dump in the first turn cuz he may have had some rotten apples the day before. I don't get the player/bettor obligation thing....
Click to expand...


You may have missed the part about the player forfieting due to UNCONTROLLED CIRCUMSTANCES.....then the player should NOT be obligated to pay any compensation....
Besides you cant compare a horse to a human in this situation.....A horse will always do it's best no matter what and a human doesnt have that kind of drive.....
 
as a buyer your on the mercy of the player. this is why player always get half of themselves no matter what. player should say yes or no immed.

i almost wana say its a stupid issue. if she quit to cost you the she cost herself too. who was in the tourney that made janette not tht favorite or atleast one oif them??

its almost laughable. if she wants to cause herslef $$$ just to screw you then so be it.

.............

i read a funny story about a woman playing poker that hit the bad beat for $100K and mucked her cards just bc the other guys at the table were riding her.

no soup for you...
 
metallicane said:
Your obligation is to try and win. If you want to buy half then fine, do it right away. if you do not buy it right away, do not begrudge the person that bought you and quit. Pool has a bad enough imagine to start with and we need more people involved not less.
Click to expand...

I would say nearly all tourney partipants go into it wanting to win, or at least play their best, but situations occur that could cause a player to leave early. Let's say the tourney favorite (highest bid in the calcutta), is getting sharked in the 2nd round, and complains to the TD....TD pretty much tells him to deal with it. Sharking gets worse and worse and it's clearly affecting said players mood thus his game suffers. Another complaint to the TD, and NOTHING!! Hears that his opponent is the TDs buddy, and loses to the guy......SCREW it, SCREW this tourney, SCREW the TD, SCREW you all...off he goes. Sorry, but after all that, you think he should payoff the calcutta buyer too....?
 
Ken_4fun said:
Of course, to say anything else is crazy.
Click to expand...
GOD this pains me but satman and you are exactly right,, anything else regardless of WHO you are is completely and utterly rediculous and in the NASTY NATI that $h!t dont fly!!!!
 
cincyman said:
GOD this pains me but satman and you are exactly right,, anything else regardless of WHO you are is completely and utterly rediculous and in the NASTY NATI that $h!t dont fly!!!!
Click to expand...

wow that had to hurt.....:rolleyes:
 
I've always been of the opinion that pool players aren't whores. If I enter a tournament it's because I want to play and do my best.

Having said that, I think if there were some sort of obligation for the person that buys you in a player auction/calcutta to pay the player some Jelly, then there's an obligation for the player to finish and play his/her best in the tournament.

No Jelly = no obligation, it's a two way street. People enter tournamtent for thier own reasons, I've seen people quit just because the person that bought them in a calcutta was riding thier ass because they didn't think that person was playing up to snuff.

Why should a person have to deal with that kind of crap? Why should a person have to have the added pressure of having to perform for someone other than them selves. Players often spend a lot of money on entry fees, and put thier own pressure on themselves to make it back it isn't right that they should also be obligated to someone who just wants to make some bucks off thier hard work and sweat.

Just my opinion(I know it isn't popular)
 
supergreenman said:
I've always been of the opinion that pool players aren't whores. If I enter a tournament it's because I want to play and do my best.

Having said that, I think if there were some sort of obligation for the person that buys you in a player auction/calcutta to pay the player some Jelly, then there's an obligation for the player to finish and play his/her best in the tournament.

No Jelly = no obligation, it's a two way street. People enter tournamtent for thier own reasons, I've seen people quit just because the person that bought them in a calcutta was riding thier ass because they didn't think that person was playing up to snuff.

Why should a person have to deal with that kind of crap? Why should a person have to have the added pressure of having to perform for someone other than them selves. Players often spend a lot of money on entry fees, and put thier own pressure on themselves to make it back it isn't right that they should also be obligated to someone who just wants to make some bucks off thier hard work and sweat.

Just my opinion(I know it isn't popular)
Click to expand...
EASY dont get in the calcutta.... Problem solved!!!
 
I am obligated to no one.

Too many times i've been in tournaments, where the people who bought someone were trying to make trouble/shark the opponents of their horse.

Bunch of bull if you ask me.

If it weren't for the players, the calcutta guys wouldn't have anything to bid on.

Player can do whatever the F@#$ they want and the person who bought them has absolutely NO say in it.

If they think they do, they are gravely mistaken.

If a player decides midway through the tournament that he/she wants to go to the friggin ART MUSEUM and bail on the tournament, they have absolutely NO obligation to pay anyone back anything.

If the bidders get shafted, that's just tough luck.

The whole "player owing the person who buys them" because of some unwritten contract, is the biggest bunch of garbage in pool.

If your there to watch the tournament, then sit down and shut up.
If your there to try and make a buck off the players, just remember, you have no say in what they do and if they decide to bend you over and give you the shaft. SMILE if it kills you, cause your just S#!T out of luck.
 
Hypothetical situation.

Joe and Bob are buddies and two of the better players in a tournament. They split the winnings of tournaments they play in.

The calcutta sees a wild card gets sold and Joe is bought by some guy neither know. Bob comes up for auction and Joe and Bob both throw in 50% and buy him. They don't bother buying half of Joe because they think he went too high.

Now coming down the home stretch it turns out that Joe and Bob both make the finals, the tournament is worth $1000 for first and $600 for second, since they are splittin they are both in for $800 each there. Also the Calcutta is worth $1200 for first and $600 for second. For them to make the most money they clearly need Bob to win the tournament, so Joe switches to left handed and shoots like a moron, clearly throwing the match so that they get the top calcutta prize to split and the guy who bought Joe has no prayer of getting 1st place money because of the thrown match.

Now, are Joe and Bob just smart and doing what they should do or is this a low class move that hurts the sport?

Keep in mind that pool in the 1980's had some support from casino's and some extra money and great locations to play in that was going to pay back to the casino's based on gambling revenue on the matches. Then a huge favorite in the finals of a pro tournament threw his match to a huge underdog, both players and alot of people in the loop made a killing on that match at the casino's expense, and the sport lost the support of the casino's because of this. This cost every person in this sport immeasurable amounts more then the money that was made that day by afew people in possible future promotion and events that might have come from having the casino's take a active interest in promoting pool. They realized that they got screwed by the players, and they thus simply cut the support and left pool to itself, and now the sport is at it's lowest point in history.
 
it happens

Celtic said:
Hypothetical situation.Joe and Bob are buddies and two of the better players in a tournament. They split the winnings of tournaments they play in.The calcutta sees a wild card gets sold and Joe is bought by some guy neither know. Bob comes up for auction and Joe and Bob both throw in 50% and buy him. They don't bother buying half of Joe because they think he went too high.Now coming down the home stretch it turns out that Joe and Bob both make the finals, the tournament is worth $1000 for first and $600 for second, since they are splittin they are both in for $800 each there. Also the Calcutta is worth $1200 for first and $600 for second. For them to make the most money they clearly need Bob to win the tournament, so Joe switches to left handed and shoots like a moron, clearly throwing the match so that they get the top calcutta prize to split and the guy who bought Joe has no prayer of getting 1st place money because of the thrown match.QUOTE]
I've seen this scenario happen, but the guy didn't play left handed. He made it look good to some of the people, but most knew who would win the match ahead of time. Life ain't perfect, and neither are people.
Click to expand...
 
I've seen this scenario happen, but the guy didn't play left handed. He made it look good to some of the people, but most knew who would win the match ahead of time. Life ain't perfect, and neither are people
Click to expand...

A few people above are saying this is fine and dandy.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top