Darren Forfeits Beloit

[JAM]

One of the things that’s so depressing is that anybody who actually earns a lot of money because they’re successful is treated as though they’re a thief rather than as an entrepreneur, and we have to be able to state it. And in order to do that, you have to persuade people it's a competitive industry and damnum absque injuria and pecuniary externalities.

 

[Ron Swanson]

how is this still going lol, 35 pages?!

Yeah. I coulda told you all after the first page the odds of a yorkshireman getting his hand in his pocket when he doesn't have to are slim to none.

 

[Ron Swanson]

One of the things that’s so depressing is that anybody who actually earns a lot of money because they’re successful is treated as though they’re a thief rather than as an entrepreneur, and we have to be able to state it. And in order to do that, you have to persuade people it's a competitive industry and damnum absque injuria and pecuniary externalities.

Sounds painful, that.

 

[Ron Swanson]

RJ, there are no rules about this.

It is about what we, all of us at one level or another, look for in our champions, our heroes, the guys we want to root for and emulate.

Does a champion have to act any different than a league player? No, of course not. And that is one of the things that has been wrong with pool for a long, long time. They don’t have to be better. They can just be one of us.

Our “heroes” are hustlers, sharks, and con men.

We enshrine them and the shit they’ve pulled over the years in legends of the road and encyclopedias of hustlers. We regale each other with stories about the double smart and triple smart; the lemon, the stall; the dump and double dump; the fixed game that rips off the casino; the gaffed table; the louts that ran their mouths all the while getting slaughtered by guys who were actually world champions.

Do the best at out sport need to act act differently?

Do they need to behave like someone that people outside the game would admire? Do they they need to conduct themselves to a higher standard of conduct that we could point our youth leagues, our children, friends and neighbors, and spouses to saying, “ You know what so and so did today” and have them respond, “Well, that was pretty classy” less in shock and surprise than pure admiration?

So to answer your question, RJ, yes, the “champions,” our “pros,” can act the same as the league players. And that's too bad.

Lou Figueroa

I have discovered, often to my cost, that discussing wider points on the state of pool on this forum to be a complete waste of time.

Whilst i appreciate your stance, daz is as much a victim as anyone else here. The health of the game is determined by its grassroots, and if azb is anything to go by, new growth ain't coming any time soon. Those at the top are pissing in the wind if those at the bottom are disappearing in droves.

 

[Dockter]

Justin oversleeps and gets 5 pages, Darren oversleeps and gets 35. lol.

 

[pt109]

One of the things that’s so depressing is that anybody who actually earns a lot of money because they’re successful is treated as though they’re a thief rather than as an entrepreneur, and we have to be able to state it. And in order to do that, you have to persuade people it's a competitive industry and damnum absque injuria and pecuniary externalities.

I had to google that, JAM.
Yeah, I'm on board with the limited liability thing, but it's a damn shame
for the OP.

I have been purchased in calcuttas and I felt a responsibility to give my
best effort whether I bought half myself or not.
Calcuttas, IMO, is what gave golf it's big start...the game generated
huge pools and brought it to the attention of sponsors.
This could not have happened without golfers honoring their game.

Many pool players have expressed that they don't care about who
bought them...which makes it real tough for serious buyers.

When I googled that Latin term, your post was number three. :smile:

 

[Ron Swanson]

I had to google that, JAM.
Yeah, I'm on board with the limited liability thing, but it's a damn shame
for the OP.

I have been purchased in calcuttas and I felt a responsibility to give my
best effort whether I bought half myself or not.
Calcuttas, IMO, is what gave golf it's big start...the game generated
huge pools and brought it to the attention of sponsors.
This could not have happened without golfers honoring their game.

Many pool players have expressed that they don't care about who
bought them...which makes it real tough for serious buyers.

When I googled that Latin term, your post was number three. :smile:

Strange, I've always considered her posts number twos...:wink:

 

[JAM]

Strange, I've always considered her posts number twos...:wink:

I'm not sure why the moderators allow you to continue to troll others.

One thing for sure, as long as you continue to do so, more pool peeps will continue to emigrate to FB. The pool news there is faster than Azbilliards these days, which is a bonus.

 

[JAM]

I had to google that, JAM.
Yeah, I'm on board with the limited liability thing, but it's a damn shame
for the OP.

I have been purchased in calcuttas and I felt a responsibility to give my
best effort whether I bought half myself or not.
Calcuttas, IMO, is what gave golf it's big start...the game generated
huge pools and brought it to the attention of sponsors.
This could not have happened without golfers honoring their game.

Many pool players have expressed that they don't care about who
bought them...which makes it real tough for serious buyers.

When I googled that Latin term, your post was number three. :smile:

It actually came up in a job today, and I had never heard of it, either.

After I found it by doing a Google search, I decided to post it in this thread in an effort to divert it in a new direction.

 

[Ron Swanson]

I'm not sure why the moderators allow you to continue to troll others.

One thing for sure, as long as you continue to do so, more pool peeps will continue to emigrate to FB. The pool news there is faster than Azbilliards these days, which is a bonus.

FB will always be a big fat number two in my book but if it's number one for you, you go girl.

 

[JAM]

FB will always be a big fat number two in my book but if it's number one for you, you go girl.

A Fast Larry ruined an unmoderated RSB Google Group forum years ago, and the pool peeps from RSB emigrated to AzBilliards. Now AzB-ers are emigrating to Facebook and leaving AzBilliasrd, so folks like you can have a ball here on the forum. Good work. Keep it going. We like more pool peeps in FB.

 

[BJTyler]

Justin oversleeps and gets 5 pages, Darren oversleeps and gets 35. lol.

I'm pretty sure that if there had not been a large calcutta at this tournament and Darren's oversleeping his match had only cost himself the additional prize money, this thread would not have grown to 35+ pages.

But the fact is, there was a large calcutta, and his forfeit did cost others a decent sized loss. This, in turn, has raised some really interesting and -I believe- important questions about tournaments, calcuttas, and professional behavior.

1. Are calcuttas a legitimate and integral part of today's pool tournament scene which mutually benefit both the players, tournament directors, fans, and punters alike by increasing interest in the event which brings additional revenues? Or, are they merely a side bet placed between parties otherwise unaffiliated with the tournament and therefore play no constructive role?

2. Is there any obligation (moral or otherwise) by the players of a tournament to the participants of the calcutta? the spectators? the TD? the streamer? If so, what is the nature of this obligation? Or given the fact that players -by and large- finance their own participation, do the players only have an obligation to themselves?

3. Does the behavior of pool's extended community (players, fans, promoters, tournament sponsors, etc...) directly or indirectly influence the sport's ultimate success? Or is pool's fate largely in the hands of exogenous factors such as the internet, xbox, poker, etc...

I think these are really interesting and important questions that deserve discussion on a forum such as AZB. And it's precisely for that reason I belong and participate.

 

[Ron Swanson]

A Fast Larry ruined an unmoderated RSB Google Group forum years ago, and the pool peeps from RSB emigrated to AzBilliards. Now AzB-ers are emigrating to Facebook and leaving AzBilliasrd, so folks like you can have a ball here on the forum. Good work. Keep it going. We like more pool peeps in FB.

Whilst I'm delighted i remain so prominent in your mind, you're clearly mistaking me for someone who can be arsed to post a lot.

Anyway, where's this book? Can i have a signed copy? :wub:

 

[Bigtruck]

I'm pretty sure that if there had not been a large calcutta at this tournament and Darren's oversleeping his match had only cost himself the additional prize money, this thread would not have grown to 35+ pages.

But the fact is, there was a large calcutta, and his forfeit did cost others a decent sized loss. This, in turn, has raised some really interesting and -I believe- important questions about tournaments, calcuttas, and professional behavior.

1. Are calcuttas a legitimate and integral part of today's pool tournament scene which mutually benefit both the players, tournament directors, fans, and punters alike by increasing interest in the event which brings additional revenues? Or, are they merely a side bet placed between parties otherwise unaffiliated with the tournament and therefore play no constructive role?

2. Is there any obligation (moral or otherwise) by the players of a tournament to the participants of the calcutta? the spectators? the TD? the streamer? If so, what is the nature of this obligation?

3. Does the behavior of pool's extended community (players, fans, promoters, tournament sponsors, etc...) directly or indirectly influence the sport's ultimate success? Or is pool's fate largely in the hands of exogenous factors such as the internet, xbox, poker, etc...

I think these are really interesting and important questions that deserve discussion on a forum such as AZB. And it's precisely for that reason I belong and participate.

1. You cannot say that Darren's forfeit cost him , you or anyone one dime. He was facing the hottest player in the event and odds were he was going to lose that match putting you and Darren in the exact same place. Obviously the odds are debatable. His forfeit causing the loss of money was certainly not a "fact" as you called it.

2. These events, at least the Professional side, are almost 100% sponsored. It's the sponsors that also love the calcutta's and want them.

3. Pool is 100% in the hands of the sponsors, fans, promoters and players.


Ray

 

[BJTyler]

1. You cannot say that Darren's forfeit cost him , you or anyone one dime. He was facing the hottest player in the event and odds were he was going to lose that match putting you and Darren in the exact same place. Obviously the odds are debatable. His forfeit causing the loss of money was certainly not a "fact" as you called it.

2. These events, at least the Professional side, are almost 100% sponsored. It's the sponsors that also love the calcutta's and want them.

3. Pool is 100% in the hands of the sponsors, fans, promoters and players.


Ray

Fair enough, so let's say that Darren's oversleeping potentially cost himself and others a decent sized chunk of dough. But, I'm not sure that really changes anything. Suppose you and I flip coins and I win by using a 1 sided coin. I guess you can't say I cheated you out of anything.....after all, you were 50% likely to lose anyway.

 

[crabbcatjohn]

Fair enough, so let's say that Darren't oversleeping potentially cost himself and others a decent sized chunk of dough. But, I'm not sure that really changes anything. Suppose you and I flip coins and I win by using a 1 sided coin. I guess you can't say I cheated you out of anything.....after all, you were 50% likely to lose anyway.

Lol.. good post

 

[cardiac kid]

Fair enough, so let's say that Darren't oversleeping potentially cost himself and others a decent sized chunk of dough. But, I'm not sure that really changes anything. Suppose you and I flip coins and I win by using a 1 sided coin. I guess you can't say I cheated you out of anything.....after all, you were 50% likely to lose anyway.

BJ,

You are way too articulate for the forum trolls here. Why you waste the time to be reasonable is beyond me. You wrote a great first post. 535 posts later, the trolls have managed to redefine most every point you originally made. Only on AZ!

Lyn

 

[liakos]

Fair enough, so let's say that Darren's oversleeping potentially cost himself and others a decent sized chunk of dough. But, I'm not sure that really changes anything. Suppose you and I flip coins and I win by using a 1 sided coin. I guess you can't say I cheated you out of anything.....after all, you were 50% likely to lose anyway.

Ya know what the problem is with this post I quoted? Is the fact that someone intelligent wrote it! What is the problem you ask? Simple! Approximately 90% of the forum isn't smart enough to comprehend it!

Great post sir!!

 

[KRJ]

Whilst I'm delighted i remain so prominent in your mind, you're clearly mistaking me for someone who can be arsed to post a lot.

Anyway, where's this book? Can i have a signed copy? :wub:

Well, to be fair to Jam, it's hard to keep your multiple user names straight. What do you have, like 3 now ? Good thing you don't buy memberships, it would cost you a pretty quid. You might need to ask your mum for an allowance increase.

 

[Hungarian]

The main point is that the "opportunity" was lost. It's lost opportunity, nothing more or nothing less. Speculating on how well Sky was playing is irrelevant. I'm sure Darren likes his chances against the kid. I'm also sure the kid is confident and he's playing great right now, no doubt. But to say Sky was an odds on favorite is not correct.

1. You cannot say that Darren's forfeit cost him , you or anyone one dime. He was facing the hottest player in the event and odds were he was going to lose that match putting you and Darren in the exact same place. Obviously the odds are debatable. His forfeit causing the loss of money was certainly not a "fact" as you called it.

2. These events, at least the Professional side, are almost 100% sponsored. It's the sponsors that also love the calcutta's and want them.

3. Pool is 100% in the hands of the sponsors, fans, promoters and players.


Ray