chopping

[Wags]

I have yet to see anyone in the pool room give the players grief over chopping a local handicapped event in 30 years of pool...

...The pool players all seem to understand and are ok with it. Im wondering if the people voicing so much displeasure have been in the position to be the ones chopping a 2 day event after 14 hrs of pool is coming to a close. Or are they voicing the rail's opinion?

The OP is voicing his disagreement.

I've been on both sides, in the match and on the rail. The first time it was offered to me, I too thought it was a wonderous idea because I was playing a name shooter. I had never heard of this before and because the name shooter thought it was alright, so did I. After I did it, I felt so guilty and so in the wrong.

 

[DogsPlayingPool]

The OP is voicing his disagreement.

I've been on both sides, in the match and on the rail. The first time it was offered to me, I too thought it was a wonderous idea because I was playing a name shooter. I had never heard of this before and because the name shooter thought it was alright, so did I. After I did it, I felt so guilty and so in the wrong.

I understand your points about chopping and agree with much of it, when we are talking larger or professional events. The reason for a double standard, as you put it, is because in a professional event there are other people to consider besides the two players i.e. the promoter, sponsors, ppv audience, paying spectators, vendors who bought booth space, the room owner who added money etc.

But in a local nothing event (handicapped or not, BTW) , IF no one else has any interest other than the two players, than it just simply doesn't matter. Heck, in this situation, even if the room owner added money he might prefer the players chop and go home. He may feel he has long since gotten whatever value he was going to get out of the deal. If it's 1:30 AM, the other combatants are long gone and in bed, the spectators are gone, and the only people in the place are the two finalists and the owner. He might wish the players would chop so he can clean the place, lock it up for the night, and go home to bed. Especially if it's potentially a two set final. I just don't see anything about this kind of situation that is going to carry over into a poor public perception of professional pool.

Having said all that, I certainly don't think a player should ever be made to feel obliged to accept a chop just because his opponent wants to.

 

[Neil]

Chopping at any level, anytime, for any reason is wrong.



Funny, I thought the same of yours. :smile: This exactly illustrates what I said about chopping being so ingrained in the pool culture that some people think it's ok.

I'm just asking everyone on this thread that think chopping is ok, why the double standard?

My Norwegian roots only allow me to see this in black and white. Chopping at any level is just plain wrong and pool suffers because of it.

Oh my, what am I saying, :embarrassed2: I know that most pool players don't think beyond their nose, much less the future.

Sorry I wasted my breath. Chop away. LOL

Local tournament, 20-32 people. Handicapped. Goes on every week. Get to the finals, it's now about 1-1:30 a.m. on a Sun. nite. Only two customers left in the entire bar are the two in the finals. Most of the waitstaff has gone home. The TD has gone home and left the money with the winner of the losers bracket. The bartender wants to go home. There is a whopping $20 difference between 1st and 2nd. The two players decide to chop it.

Now, please explain how this is bad for pool. Staying to finish it would obviously upset the only staff person still there.

Oh, this is NOT a made up scenario. Happens quite frequently.

 

[Wags]

DogsPlayingPool and Neil

I understand your points all too well. I respect both of your opinions. I guess I just have to disagree.

I feel that as long as a person takes part in the chop, one can never be sure that it isn't happening. How many times have you said or thought that xxx was doing business? That thinking is based on what you know from the past about that player. Sometimes it is based on what you know about the workings of the pool culture.

As long as it keeps getting passed on to the upcoming players as the way things are done, I think it is one of the many things that keep pool in the gutter.

As for scenarios, how about if they don't want to stay so late, the TD just finds a time that is equitable for both players to find out who the champion is. I think that if you enter a tournament, one should be prepared to finish it, no matter what the time, if you have to work in the morning, etc.

Just seems like there are other options than the chop. :scratchhead:

 

[Neil]

I understand your points all too well. I respect both of your opinions. I guess I just have to disagree.

I feel that as long as a person takes part in the chop, one can never be sure that it isn't happening. How many times have you said or thought that xxx was doing business? That thinking is based on what you know from the past about that player. Sometimes it is based on what you know about the workings of the pool culture.

As long as it keeps getting passed on to the upcoming players as the way things are done, I think it is one of the many things that keep pool in the gutter.

As for scenarios, how about if they don't want to stay so late, the TD just finds a time that is equitable for both players to find out who the champion is. I think that if you enter a tournament, one should be prepared to finish it, no matter what the time, if you have to work in the morning, etc.

Just seems like there are other options than the chop. :scratchhead:

You have to understand that "chopping" and "doing business" are two totally different things. for that matter, even the phrase "doing business" can mean two different things. One is dishonest, the other is not. Dumping the match would be the dishonest meaning.

It's not fair to label one a dumper just because you know they have split first and second place, or even farther down. Two TOTALLY different things.

I will say, that if there is a calcutta, I feel the players are obligated to consult those that bought them. Especially if the player has a part of the calcutta. As far as any railbird betting on the match, if they split, then it's a wash- no bet.

 

[dogginda9]

Local tournament, 20-32 people. Handicapped. Goes on every week. Get to the finals, it's now about 1-1:30 a.m. on a Sun. nite. Only two customers left in the entire bar are the two in the finals. Most of the waitstaff has gone home. The TD has gone home and left the money with the winner of the losers bracket. The bartender wants to go home. There is a whopping $20 difference between 1st and 2nd. The two players decide to chop it.

Now, please explain how this is bad for pool. Staying to finish it would obviously upset the only staff person still there.

Oh, this is NOT a made up scenario. Happens quite frequently.

Frequently, like every Friday at the tournament I run. Just part of the drill.:smile:

 

[Wags]

Rephrase

...Now, please explain how this is bad for pool... [QUOTE

]

I thought I answered your question but maybe I wasn't clear. For pool to move forward, to get sponsors, to make it sport-worthy, the culture of pool needs changing. Clearly what has been going on the last 80 years has not worked. Main-stream society is not ready to accept chopping. Outside of pool, the people are conditioned to wanting a winner. Hence, I say that it is not good for pool at any level. Heck, no matter the reason, MI and CW apparently believe that it is ok. (I wasn't there, don't know what happened first hand. Just read the posts.) Where did they learn it? Maybe if this was the first time ever it happened in pool, it maybe could be acceptable. Although, I think most TD's would somehow re-schedule it.

You have to understand that "chopping" and "doing business" are two totally different things. for that matter, even the phrase "doing business" can mean two different things. One is dishonest, the other is not. Dumping the match would be the dishonest meaning.

As for "doing business", after 45 years of being in this business, I have never heard of it used in a positive light when used in the pool culture. And, yes I know it is different than chopping. I am 62 and been around the block a few times. The point I was making was that it stays with your reputation once it is heard about. It also stays with the reputation of pool. Las Vegas knows it, Miller Lite knows it, Camel knows it, any possible sponsor outside of pool apparently knows it just by the lack of pool sponsorship here in the United States.

I saw that Exxon was an overseas sponsor of pool tournaments. Why don't they sponsor pool in the United States? That makes me curious about the pool culture in Europe and Asia. Does the same thing occur there? Does it occur in UK snooker at any level?

Anyway, to me, it is all dishonest and harmful to the image and to the chances of pool every becoming mainstream in the United States. It is a culture that is easy to fall in love with. I think that is proven by the boost in pool popularity after "The Color of Money", which showed pool in a very negative light. It showed all of society the dishonesty of pool. The things pool players do just to make a buck. The younger crowd ate it up. Neil, were you part of that crowd? I was 36 at the time and been around it too long by then. It was interesting that most of my non-pool playing friends kept asking me, "Does that really happen?"

I was out of pool basically from 1990 to 2001, I started playing again and nothing changed.

The change has to start somewhere and I join with the other voices that say, no way, no how. Yes, I believe pool has to clean up its act and that doesn't mean wearing nice clothes to a tournament.

 

[MRP2k12]

*This Message Has Been Deleted by The Poster*

 

[JAM]

Second verse, same as the ---> first! :dance::dance::dance::dance::dance:

 

[Aaron_S]

On the list of things that are having a negative impact on pool as a sport, players chopping the money in local handicapped tournaments might come in at about #814.

And as Neil said, chopping is not "doing business". If first pays $200 and 2nd pays $150, those two players are leaving with $350 between them whether they chop it or play it out. Those players earned their way into the top positions in the tournament, and they are guaranteed that money. Nobody is getting hustled, nobody is getting dumped, and in every case of chopping I've been involved in or witnessed, there was no audience or calcutta to be concerned with, so it was a win for everyone.

I have seen places cancel their weekly tournaments because they couldn't finish by the time the place needed to close or when people wanted to go home. People have to work the next day, and a place can't justify paying overtime for two staff members to hang around for 2 extra hours to babysit a $20 tournament. IMO, a lack of local competitive events would make the top 10 on a list of things that are bad for the sport, and chopping the money in order to finish at a decent hour is by far a better alternative than killing a tournament altogether.

Aaron

 

[Roger Long]

How do you stop it??

How do you stop it? Here's one way:

When the two finalists tell the TD that they are going to split the money, the TD can tell them that 1st place money will automaticall be awarded to the hot seat holder, and 2nd place money will go to the one-loss bracket winner, and they can chop it up all they want outside.

I do agree that in small local tournaments it would seem that no one should care what the finalists do with the money; but looking at it from a room owner's point of view, where that owner may be adding money to the tournament, and may be reporting the results to a local pool publication - all for the purpose of promoting pool in his/her room and the local area - then everyone involved deserves to see a "champion" emerge from the tournament. One way or the other, the solution I offered above will accomplish this.

Roger

 

[Bambu]

How do you stop it? Here's one way:

When the two finalists tell the TD that they are going to split the money, the TD can tell them that 1st place money will automaticall be awarded to the hot seat holder, and 2nd place money will go to the one-loss bracket winner, and they can chop it up all they want outside.

I do agree that in small local tournaments it would seem that no one should care what the finalists do with the money; but looking at it from a room owner's point of view, where that owner may be adding money to the tournament, and may be reporting the results to a local pool publication - all for the purpose of promoting pool in his/her room and the local area - then everyone involved deserves to see a "champion" emerge from the tournament. One way or the other, the solution I offered above will accomplish this.

Roger

Thats the way its done now, happens very often. Even at sponsored tournaments, the last 2 guys play out a shortened set for the write up. I wouldnt call it a solution, but it has almost become the norm. Maybe the way to remedy the problem would be to raise the stakes, drive a bigger wedge between 1st and 2nd place. But the TD's know this, theyre more interested in saving time.

I still doubt any sponsor considered pool and went, "nah screw them they chop." Its all about numbers, the money.

 

[supergreenman]

Judging by the replies, it's pretty clear when it's ok to skip the finals.

For me, if people are there to watch it, it's kinda your duty to play it out. I mean, split the $ if you want, but put on the show as expected.

If it's just two guys and a TD after a long day, seems like going home would be fine.

-s

This seems to be the correct balance.

 

[12310bch]

How do you stop it? Here's one way:

When the two finalists tell the TD that they are going to split the money, the TD can tell them that 1st place money will automatically be awarded to the hot seat holder, and 2nd place money will go to the one-loss bracket winner, and they can chop it up all they want outside.

Roger[/QUOTE

I can live with that.The hot seat player will then be reported as the winner and the other player reported as 2nd place. Although, if given the opportunity, I personally feel that the challenge of playing the final match overwhelms the extra hour of sleep I would get. I've been there.
I guess it's a necessary evil.

 

[steev]

Some ideas on finishing earlier

start earlier
shorter races
set a limit on size of field
raise entry fee (trust me, this reduces field size)

-s

 

[TheNewSharkster]

I don't see a problem with chopping smaller local tournaments. Sometimes us people who have resposibilities see it in the best interest to chop and go home a little earlier. I am not sure how this impacts the game at all. Like others mentioned this is norm in poker. They have millions of tournaments every day and nobody blinks twice at a chop. Of course nobody is chopping the world championship of poker just like nobody is chopping the US 9ball Open.

 

[Masayoshi]

If there are spectators still watching, play it out. If everybody just wants to go home, just let the guys chop.

 

[Spider1]

How do you stop it? Here's one way:

When the two finalists tell the TD that they are going to split the money, the TD can tell them that 1st place money will automaticall be awarded to the hot seat holder, and 2nd place money will go to the one-loss bracket winner, and they can chop it up all they want outside.

I do agree that in small local tournaments it would seem that no one should care what the finalists do with the money; but looking at it from a room owner's point of view, where that owner may be adding money to the tournament, and may be reporting the results to a local pool publication - all for the purpose of promoting pool in his/her room and the local area - then everyone involved deserves to see a "champion" emerge from the tournament. One way or the other, the solution I offered above will accomplish this.

Roger

This is a good idea.



I also think it's got to be tough for the guy who plays his heart out to scrape into 3rd place then 1 and 2 just split the money and walk off.

Not that I've been in that situation (I'd be happy to scrape up to 10th place... ) but it seems like that would really suck.

 

[Softballmvp]

The Iowa State Pool Association puts on the largest state tourney in the nation (if I’m not mistaken). The singles 9 ball starts Wednesday, singles 8 ball starts Thursday. These are both supposed to be wrapped up by Friday night. The team event starts Saturday and finishes Sunday. 3 years ago, I won the hot seat in the 8 ball intermediate division on Friday night. By the time Friday night was over, there were still 5 people left, one of the 5th/6th matches had completed, the other had not. With everyone playing teams the next day, it was very difficult to get the singles matches finished. Saturday night, the other 5th/6th match completed. The 4th place match took place sometime late Saturday night or relatively early Sunday. My team bowed out of the team tourney after our 8 am match Sunday morning. I sat around all day long, waiting for the 2nd/3rd match to play. Both players were still on teams playing in the team tourney, with no breaks. At about 5pm one of the teams was eliminated, the other player’s team was still shooting. There were maybe 4 teams left. It could still potentially take hours for him to finish his team play, before they could play the 2nd/3rd place singles match, and then the winner of that playing me. The 3 of us got together and talked it over while the other guys team was still playing. After a bit, we decided to chop the tourney 3 ways. Blizzard type conditions were on the way, and we all had long drives ahead of us, and it was getting late on Sunday night, on a singles tourney that should have completed Friday night. The top 2 finishers get moved up to Master’s. We agreed that I would be declared 1st. The loser of the winner’s final would be declared 2nd, who didn’t mind getting bumped up to the master’s division, and the guy who came through the loser’s bracket would get 3rd. Seemed like a very logical thing to do. And this was a pretty big tournament.

 

[steev]

...Seemed like a very logical thing to do...

And it was. Those who take the 'high road' on the morality of chopping are not living in the real world. Situations vary, and responses often require taking that into account.

Now, splitting and quitting just because it's easy, well, I would think almost all of us agree that's questionable.

-s