CSI-Mark Griffin First Response
- Thread starter Mark Griffin
- Start date
- Status
I am not sure how to be any more clear in what happened. Ralf requested his check NOW. We usually go through a process in issuing checks. There would be a good possibility our error would have been discovered prior to the check being issued.
Please remember while all this was going on, most of the staff was involved in resolving the team forfeit problem. There were a lot of distractions.
Very quickly after getting together to discuss the situation, we discovered that Ralf's check had been for 3-4th place.
We discussed - what do we do now. Well since Ralf was on a plane, the sense of urgency decreased and we went back to running the other 30+ events.
You are reading too much into when the check was cut and once again - what are you trying to accomplish? We admit the amount was in error and have requested Ralf to return the excess money. There was no discussion of the other 'option' - so it became obvious that an error had been made because you cant have 3 people in 3-4th place.
You are thinking that the check is acknowledgment of what position he finished. That is not the controlling factor. We admit an error was made and are trying to correct it. Beyond that I am done trying to explain. It is what it is.
It wont happen again - and if this was an isolated event, I am quite certain it would not have happened this time. But we were very busy running many other events. I do appreciate your acknowledgment that it would be 'OK' to change positions - depending on the reasoning.
Mark Griffin
Please remember while all this was going on, most of the staff was involved in resolving the team forfeit problem. There were a lot of distractions.
Very quickly after getting together to discuss the situation, we discovered that Ralf's check had been for 3-4th place.
We discussed - what do we do now. Well since Ralf was on a plane, the sense of urgency decreased and we went back to running the other 30+ events.
You are reading too much into when the check was cut and once again - what are you trying to accomplish? We admit the amount was in error and have requested Ralf to return the excess money. There was no discussion of the other 'option' - so it became obvious that an error had been made because you cant have 3 people in 3-4th place.
You are thinking that the check is acknowledgment of what position he finished. That is not the controlling factor. We admit an error was made and are trying to correct it. Beyond that I am done trying to explain. It is what it is.
It wont happen again - and if this was an isolated event, I am quite certain it would not have happened this time. But we were very busy running many other events. I do appreciate your acknowledgment that it would be 'OK' to change positions - depending on the reasoning.
Mark Griffin
Mark didn't cut the check. Mark didn't even know what went down, till Ralf had already left the building, which was 20mins before the match. (see threads #48 & #52)
if Ralf had known that he was losing ($1000), against a $1500 one-way new ticket - i'm pretty sure we wouldn't be having this conversation.
PS - Corey booked his trip the day before & got a ridiculously low price. and if they'd all realize that you can book from China, to US, then back to China (3 legs) for $1000, they'd quit paying $2000-$2500.
Last edited:
Get 100 people together and 10% will be complainers, cheeter, lazy,dishonest, or problems of some kind either big or little. That makes 90%of the people good honest people wishing others the best.
I'm in the 90% group (i think) and appreciate the effort you put into improving pool in the U.S.A
I'm in the 90% group (i think) and appreciate the effort you put into improving pool in the U.S.A
Mark, the difference is like the old game of telephone...start with a sentence at one end and 100 people later it's completely distorted.
Those that were not there and not involved will NEVER fully get the magnitude of you and your staff's duties at this show. Most of the people on this forum have never run a local weekly tournament much less one that has to deal with thousands of people in huge rooms spread out over 30 events.
They don't understand timing and communication and circumstances.
Personally, I can't even imagine where my head would be at trying to do what you guys did. Seriously it was all I could do to manage to put a 10x20 booth together and run it for ten days.
How in the world you managed to run the event and ONLY have one payment issue is beyond me.
Wondering what would of transpired if Ralf would of been given the same option as Ko was given? Play or you will take home 5th-8th money. In other words did Ralf know that by "withdrawing" he would be conceding his 3rd/4th place finish? I could speculate that he did not realize the tornado he would produce by withdrawing and maybe thought this was like any other tournament, and why wouldn't he if it wasn't explained in advance.
Last edited:
What is interesting as well is that Satori, onestroke, itsfroze and the rest of their cronies keep saying that there was no explanation given ---- they obviously didn't even watch the stream, let alone be there in person. Ken S., before he made his introductions of the players, made the announcement giving the explanation as to why SVB was playing.
I'm just having a hard time understanding why anyone feels that they have a right to put Mark Griffin and CSI on trial here.
Roger
Roger
If these things were pre-planned then when Ralf pulled Ozzy out of the meeting to tell him he was quitting because he had a plane to catch and wanted his check he would habe been told right there and then "ok, but you will be giving up 3/4th and be paid for 5/8th right there and then by Ozzy. Ralf knowing he was to be paid $1500 would have been paid $2500 "in error" and instead of bringing this to anyones attention walked out with 3/4th money?
From the sounds of it Ozzy did not "know" how CSI was going to play this all out because it looks like he never told Ralf at all about his giving up 3/4 if he withdrew from the event. Either that or Ralf purposely walked out with the wrong check, I am positive he looks at them before jumping a plane to make sure they are correct.
All I have to say is this, I've done quite alot of buisness with Mark and he is a class act and has alot of integrity period
Well my thoughts are that Ralf is getting thrown way under the bus for a decision he made based on the information he had at the time.
Does he have a part in this debacle yes! But I think there is enough to go around!
Scenario 1: You forgot to tell Ralf that if he withdraws that he would only get 5th-8th money, just like you told Ko. On top of forgetting to tell Ralf that he will only be getting 5th-8th place monies, you also forget to actually make the check out for 5th-8th place monies and instead issue Ralf a third place check, even though you fully intend to replace Ralf with another player and still play two semi-final matches that would still be producing two third place finishers.
Scenario 2: You had to make a snap call rush decision on how to proceed once Ralf informed you he was withdrawing and leaving immediately to catch a plane. Ralf is standing there with his hand out waiting for his check tapping his foot in a rush to make his flight and you didn't have time to properly think it out thoroughly. The call was made that Ko gets a bye and Ralf gets third place monies. Then after Ralf leaves and you actually have a few more moments to think about it and you realize that this wasn't what you felt was the best course of action after all, and that you should in fact replace Ralf with the second place finisher from his group and go ahead and play the match.
Regardless of what actually occurred, I think even you will have to admit that scenario 2 is the one that is far more likely to occur and therefore understand why people might suspect that is what happened.
But for the sake of argument let's just say both are equally probable and forgetting to tell Ralf he only earned 5th-8th place monies and then accidentally paying him 3rd place monies on top of it are both easy mistakes to make even though you fully intend to still play two semi-final matches with four players. Those mistakes still don't explain why personnel from CSI would be discussing the possibility of not having a semi-final match to put on the live stream because of a bye in Ralf's place. If the plan from the very beginning was to replace Ralf with the second place player from his group, then a bye and the resulting lack of a match to stream is a possibility that never existed and would have no reason to come up and be discussed. Perhaps you can explain why someone says that they heard that being discussed then?
I'm just trying to look at it with some logic based on the evidence. If you did change the plans, it would be far better to just say so. As I stated previously there isn't necessarily anything wrong with a change of plans anyway, especially if the format had never been publicized to begin with, the initial call had to be made quickly and without ample opportunity to think it out and fully consider all the factors, and if your motivation was to do what you felt was in the best interest for the integrity of the event. And if there was no change of plans, surely you can understand that it has those appearances and forgive those who might suspect that as a strong possibility.
Last edited:
GOOD POST! i'm going to add to this, cause we upfit 3 of my furniture manufacturers' showrooms, 4 times a year in 2 cities. it takes an incredible amount of planning & coordination!
forget all the weeks of negotions for supplies, so that it's cost-effective. forget all the purchase orders that have to be placed & landed on _X_ date. forget all the paperwork with the JBCases vendors. forget all the negotiations w/ the hotel. forget all the deposits & invoices & ensuring cash-flow. forget dealing w/ the union guys @ the Rio docks, and the freight elevator delays.
now, start tracking ALL OF THE ABOVE & reconfirm. then get delays from suppliers. then strongarm them to deliver ASAP. then confirm on-site that it's there - meet all trucks. then assemble & inspect & deal with damage or relevelling tables or short-ships. then step back & double-check. OMG - where's the chalk?!?! now overnight it. track it. confirm it. same with all of the vendors - are they all here????
it is a logistical nightmare. i'm sure CSI spent at least 2 weeks prior, working 12-15hr days, once everything started rolling in for crunch-time.
now get up & do it all over again for 2 wks at the event, 12-15hr days, being pulled in 20 directions constantly & unable to be in 2 places at 1 time.
then break it down.
CSI needs to do what we all do - go on vacation after it's over & sleep for a week....
I am positive that Ralf did not act with any malicious intent whatsoever. He is a consummate professional and would definitely not have wanted to pull out of the event. I am also sure that CSI didn't anticipate that anyone would withdraw from a 16 player event when they are in the final four.
The overriding point is and should be - WHO CARES?
It's a pool tournament. Shit happens. At the end of the day it was a bad roll but so what? It's not like it's the end of the world.
All parties involved will deal with it and make adjustments accordingly.
The overriding point is and should be - WHO CARES?
It's a pool tournament. Shit happens. At the end of the day it was a bad roll but so what? It's not like it's the end of the world.
All parties involved will deal with it and make adjustments accordingly.
Exactly right and who should care if anybody has anything to say about it,,, nobody ,,,,
1
+1...and the unfortunate sh*tty answer is
Free site
Free posting rights
Fake Screen names
0 Accountability
It is what it is....
Well that's a bit different....when people are making accusations that are defamatory at worst and just rude at best it changes what should have stayed an internal tournament issue into a public debacle.
That then is the kind of stuff that makes promoters want to just say screw it and spend their money and time doing things that make them happy where they don't need to face the scrutiny of uninformed and borderline malicious speculators.
Hey Einstein the first thread was from a guy sitting ringside and his version and remind you he did not have the benefit of reading 200 posts before he made his statement ,,
1
- Status