Derby City Favortism...

[wutang]

Real topics, fakes disappear

Its just funny how when you get a real topic going on this forum, certain screen names are a no-show. You know who they are. Lol!

Just like the 'powers that be' have the authority to put a player on the clock but dont have the power to forfeit them, I exercise that same 'authority' by bringing this up and not reveal names: SO DONT ASK!!!...lol!

What??? No gravy???.......QQ....lol!

 

[Blue Hog ridr]

I see that Coco finally decided to add his insipid opinion.
I suppose if he can't figure out a way to stick his finger in John's bum, the thread doesn't warrant his presence, except for one of his assinine gifs in lieu of actual words.

 

[pooladdict]

It does seem somewhat implausible that no staff member was present or available via cell phone with the authority to call the forfeit. First off, wouldn't the person with the authority to put JA on the clock have the same authority to DQ the match? Secondly, even if the TD wasn't there, wouldn't the head referee have the authority? After all, this is a call about a rule in force for the event. I would find it hard to believe that the head referee wasn't present while matches were going on.

At the first US Open 10 Ball last May I personally saw two instances of the rule put into effect. For the life of me I can't remember who the first one was (a forfeit) but it was a known name. In the second instance a player was late to his stream table match. At 5 minutes promptly after the scheduled starting time a lost game was declared and the referee physical posted a game on the wire in favor of the player who was present, and at 10 minutes another game. The missing player showed up before the 15 minute forfeit deadline but had to start the match down two games. He couldn't fade this weight and lost the match. The officials were fully prepared to call a forfeit and not have a streamed match for that session. And BTW, the missing player was EFREN.

And the player getting a 2-0 headstart was Johnny Archer :smile:

Efren was totally out of it, and it became an easy win for JA.

In the same tournament I also saw Lee Van Corteza come running in with perhaps 30 seconds to go in his match versus a canadian player. Lee van had to start the match 0-3 down, came back and won on double hill.. He ended up winning the whole tournament.

I another post Jay posted about a late Bustamante. The filipinos were very busy playing poker those days in May, and had some problems with the time schedule

 

[lfigueroa]

I wouldn't be surprised if this happens.

Due to the zoo that was the old tournament schedule system, the staff historically has been in many more situations requiring them to be more personally involved in the notifications.

This being the second successful year of the new scheduling software, which I have to say I'm extremely impressed with, I'm pretty sure the staff would welcome not having to get involved in making these types of decisions if they didn't have to.

While I do like the scheduling of the matches the computer has facilitated, I *hate* the black box computerized draw and much prefer the old ping-pong ball styled draw. I have said this before, (and for Greg, *I am not inferring that there is any skullduggery going on,*) but there are certain things in life that should be totally transparent and the draw for a big tournament like this should be one of them. Just my opinion.

Lou Figueroa

 

[lfigueroa]

So what did we learn as a result of this thread?

Just off the top of my head...

- JA lied to his opponent (way to be a roll model and demonstrate professionalism and integrity by the way )

- The DCC has a 13 year history of showing favoritism towards name players, while discriminating against the opponents that are getting shafted as a result, and apparently, none of the complaints they've had over the years have mattered. (maybe it's just tradition)

- People running the tournament will outright lie to a no name player, to protect the name players interests.

- Adam Wheeler got ripped off to the tune of $300 because of all the above points, and someone owes him that money.

- non name players are apparently considered toilet paper for the pros to use, despite paying the same exact entry fees to play at DCC events.

Did i miss anything?

Well, that assessment is a bit harsh (but accurate).

I certainly can't speak for Greg, but I have spoken to him about the tournament, a length, a few of times and I believe that he very much tries to make this tournament player friendly and as a result we all get the opportunity to play legends like Efren. That does not happen in any other sport (OK, maybe poker and darts And frankly, I don't believe there is any concerted effort to play favorites, but more just to be as accommodating as possible.

As a few others have pointed out, the tournament staff makes a tremendous effort running a show as big as the DCC and they are to be commended for their hard work, long hours, and generally pleasant disposition. I'm sure it is no easy task. BUT, I do believe the pendulum has swung too far in the direction of giving the pro players too much leeway and preferential treatment and, after 13 years, it is time for that to stop, IMO.

Lou Figueroa

 

[Lance Link]

A few years ago...

... there was a series of tournaments surrounding the Rochester area called 'Top Shots Tournaments'.

The individual who ran those tournaments was upfront with everything from the money collected (entry, greens, calcutta), and there was never really a question regarding the rules.
One of his favorite line in times of controversy was, "It's not my job to hold anyone's hand. It's my job to keep the tournament moving".

Sure, there would always be a few players here and there that were getting gas before the next match, or outside smoking, or playing a card game, or eating thier lunch while it's hot (you get the idea).
Didn't matter in the least. Here's your start time for your match. If you're not ready to play at that time, you're put on the clock (and as a great deal of these tourneys weren't as large as DCC, the clock was only three minutes). If you ain't there three minutes later (or at least running towards the table), you forfeit that match. Period.

"I was gassing up the car."
"You should have done that earlier. "
"I was outside having a cigarette."
"Then quit smoking. You'll be able to hear if you're name is called."
"I was playing cards while I was waiting."
"Maybe you can win your entry fee back in the next hand. This forfeit knocked you out of the tournament."
"The waitress just brought me my lunch."
"Eat it when your opponent is shooting. You should have ordered earlier."
"You got my cell number. Why didn't you call me ?"
"If I call you, I gotta call everybody else. Are you willing to pay my phone bill ?"

Sure, there were a few guys pissed off, but they respected him for enforcing the rules. And most knew that if the situation were reversed, he would have made the same call.

There was never any favoritism towards any of the players (regardless of thier status). Hell, he forfeited one of his own league teammates because the guy wasn't at the table after three minutes.
And when his teammate DID show up, and learned that he forfeited, he simply said, "Ok." No tantrum, no swearing, no whining, he accepted that he was not at the table at the specified time.

And it was the same way when he and another player were operating the local tavern league. If there was an issue, a fair and unbiased decision was made. And all parties involved accepted it.

When he stepped down from the LO position, he made a point to tell the incoming LO that, "You will never make everyone happy, no matter how hard you try. But you do need to insure that anything you do in regards to the players in the league is fair, unbiased and impartial. The same rules need to appy to all. The players need to know that you will make the same decision if the circumstances were reversed."

I can guaran-damn-tee you that if this situation had taken place in one of his tournaments, the forfeit would have been honored, regardless of any names involved.

The Wheeler/Archer match wasn't an issue of who wanted to play who. It wasn't an issue of who those players were. Didn't matter who anyone was rooming with, or where someone's cues were. Didn't matter if someone overslept, or got hot in a card game.

It was an issue of rule enforcement, and the lack thereof.

Someone at the DCC should have manned up and DQ'd the offending player. It's really that simple.

 

[CocoboloCowboy]

 

[Black-Balled]

So what did we learn as a result of this thread?

.

Did i miss anything?

That the extra consideration JA gets extends to people jumping to take the proverbial bullet for him.

 

[Rick S.]

I see that Coco finally decided to add his insipid opinion.
I suppose if he can't figure out a way to stick his finger in John's bum, the thread doesn't warrant his presence, except for one of his assinine gifs in lieu of actual words.

As if it wasn't bad enough already.

His finger has nothing else to do again.

 

[SUPERSTAR]

And frankly, I don't believe there is any concerted effort to play favorites, but more just to be as accommodating as possible.

Lou Figueroa

Actually, i will disagree with you on this.
I believe that there IS a concerted effort to play favorites.

They aren't going to the great extended lengths to hunt down non name players so that they get to their matches on time. They are ONLY doing that for the name players.

If they were conducting massive search and rescue operations for every single player that was late regardless of who they were, then i would have to agree with you about trying to be as accommodating as possible.

But that's clearly not the case and never really has been.

 

[bestinthezest]

18 pages,,, Really,

This is a joke.

Its simple, he was over 15 minutes late.. It is a Forfeit.

 

[SUPERSTAR]

18 pages,,, Really,

This is a joke.

Its simple, he was over 15 minutes late.. It is a Forfeit.

Apparently, the people in charge, who made that rule to begin with, don't know how to enforce it with some of the names in the game.

 

[Maniac]

18 pages,,, Really,

This is a joke.

Its simple, he was over 15 minutes late.. It is a Forfeit.

It's snowing/crappy weather in many parts of the country and we really don't have much to do (cabin fever), so give us our jollies, will ya ???

Maniac

 

[lfigueroa]

Actually, i will disagree with you on this.
I believe that there IS a concerted effort to play favorites.

They aren't going to the great extended lengths to hunt down non name players so that they get to their matches on time. They are ONLY doing that for the name players.

If they were conducting massive search and rescue operations for every single player that was late regardless of who they were, then i would have to agree with you about trying to be as accommodating as possible.

But that's clearly not the case and never really has been.

OK, so maybe they are trying to be as Pro Player friendly as possible

Lou Figueroa

 

[SUPERSTAR]

OK, so maybe they are trying to be as Pro Player friendly as possible

Lou Figueroa

Now the question is, will they ever do something about it.

Maybe i should set my calendar now, so that i can bump up this thread BEFORE next years DCC to see if they in fact, put their money where their mouth is.

Maybe get Adam some of the money that they robbed him of or some form of compensation.

I doubt they will.

13 years of this garbage is a pretty clear indication that they really don't care.

 

[Scott Lee]

Joe...I agree with you 100%. If you're going to state rules, they should be held up, regardless of who the player is. A friend of mine was matched up with Dynomite (Darren Appleton...world champion, and current BD Player of the Year) in the banks event. Daz didn't show, was forfeited, and my friend moved on the bracket. Seems like it should have been no different with JA, in this case. jmo

Scott Lee
www.poolknowledge.com

I'd take Adam's side on this too assuming his statement is factual. During the players meeting they were very clear about this. If the player is not there at the scheduled time, he is then put on a 20 minute clock. If they don't show, they lose... PERIOD..

They also stated that after day one that the dress code would be enforced. That was a joke too as I even saw that being broken regularly even on the TV table. I think it was the banks final and Pags was wearing a T-shirt over a long sleeved T-shirt and no fuss was made.

It makes no difference to me either way but if you are going to have rules, why not enforce them. Be consistent, we all pay the same money to play in the tourney, we should all abide by the same rules. JMHO

 

[ykndoit]

Joe...I agree with you 100%. If you're going to state rules, they should be held up, regardless of who the player is. A friend of mine was matched up with Dynomite (Darren Appleton...world champion, and current BD Player of the Year) in the banks event. Daz didn't show, was forfeited, and my friend moved on the bracket. Seems like it should have been no different with JA, in this case. jmo

Scott Lee
www.poolknowledge.com

just curious, did the TD attempt to look for Daz? Call rooms/cell phone? Did Daz previously tell the TD that he wasn't gonna make it? Was this at the 2011 DCC?

The reason I ask is that Daz being Daz, I would think that they would do the same for him as they did for Archer.

Also, has Greg spoken with the person that put Archer on the clock and is that the exact same person that said they don't have the ability to forfeit them? Did Greg speak to that person if they are different? What was Greg's response to that?

I'm guessing that this won't be much of a problem next year due to the influx of issues this year. Maybe the grace period might be longer but I bet the cold hand of the law will be cold and swift.

If I was in Adam's position, I would have waited because I like to play but I hate being lied to. I would have been fine with it if JA just came down and said, "Damn, I over slept/lost track of time/was getting some. I am sorry. Do you mind if we still play this match instead of a forfeit which you are rightfully entitled to?"

 

[SUPERSTAR]

I'm guessing that this won't be much of a problem next year due to the influx of issues this year.

13 years of the same thing happening over and over again leads me to believe that the odds are definitely against your statement.

 

[purpdrag]

While I do like the scheduling of the matches the computer has facilitated, I *hate* the black box computerized draw and much prefer the old ping-pong ball styled draw. I have said this before, (and for Greg, *I am not inferring that there is any skullduggery going on,*) but there are certain things in life that should be totally transparent and the draw for a big tournament like this should be one of them. Just my opinion.

Lou Figueroa

Amen. I have to agree.

I also agree with most here that Johnny Archer should have been forfeited. I'll repeat that if rules are not equally enforced for everyone it's demoralizing and demotivating to the 90% + of top players who aren't big name players and it is an embarrassment to the sport that further decays the sport's long term success and popularity.

 

[ykndoit]

13 years of the same thing happening over and over again leads me to believe that the odds are definitely against your statement.

You are possibly right but I haven't seen any TD's come on here before and address issues like this.

Maybe I'm just being optimistic but I definately wouldn't put any money on it!!!!