Derby City Favortism...

wutang said:
If anyone on here thinks thats this is an isolated, exceptional, situation, you are dead a$$ wrong .... So for him to come on here and start this thread, there must be some validity (high percentage) to his story. Come on pool world, lets get it together.

Peace

WUTANG
Click to expand...


100% accurate: If you hear about it once, guaranteed it happened more than once...not everybody is inclined to speak the truth with the only potential gain being the betterment of the system.

Hand (still) clapping for the OP. I am in the office so I gotta be quiet.
 
Hopefully the folks that run the Derby City don't take all of the comments too literally and get emotional about it. There appears to be some improvements that can be made, but perhaps not many. For me, I haven't been to Derby City yet but it is on my high list of "stuff to do". It sounds like one of the greatest experiences for pool that there is. So in that regard, the Derby City management should at least acknowledge they have a good product going.

That being said, no one should get too comfortable in their shoes that they think improvements can't be made. I agree with the comment about the Tournament Director not being available. That should have never happened. There either should have been someone in his stead to make calls or they should noted where the TD was at if he was taking care of an issue at another table.

If the computer system problem was a big issue and there was reason to think that being more lenient with the forfeit rule was needed, then it probably should have became public knowledge (if it wasn't). If there are rules, enforce them. Nothing taints a competitive situation more than some grey area with how the rules are being handled or interpreted. All it takes to enforce the rule is make one big example out of it. Imagine if Archer was DQ'ed. I'll bet you everyone would be making their match on time next year.
 
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.
 
Derek said:
If there are rules, enforce them. Nothing taints a competitive situation more than some grey area with how the rules are being handled or interpreted. All it takes to enforce the rule is make one big example out of it. Imagine if Archer was DQ'ed. I'll bet you everyone would be making their match on time next year.
Click to expand...

Tap, tap, tap...
 
realkingcobra said:
...not ONE of you who would complain about how the DCC is ran...has done little more than SHOW UP, and then complain after the fact. NOT ONE of you assist in putting on, or preparing for this MAJOR event EVERY YEAR! Yet...you ALL run your mouths like YOU actually HAD something to do with the DCC!
Glen
Click to expand...

Nope, I had NOTHING to do with the DCC (and never will), but I have an opinion AND the constitutional right to express it.

Adam Wheeler on the other hand, had a LOT to do with the DCC as he paid an ENTRY FEE!!!

The defense rests its case, your honor.

Maniac
 
dogsplayingpool said:
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.
Click to expand...

He probably only forfeited the match cause 'the world' was watching!!! If this had happened 'behind closed doors', it would have been the same ****, different laxative!!!!

Peace

WUTANG
 
Last edited:
DogsPlayingPool said:
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.
Click to expand...

At the prior tournament (the World Pool Masters) in Vegas, we had a similar situation with a player being late for his match. At the 10 minute mark we docked him one game. He came rushing in shortly thereafter and I had to inform him that he was behind 1-0 in his match. He was not too pleased about it and let me know in no uncertain terms. I have been friends with this player for a long time and it seemed like our friendship was now at risk.

His name was Franscisco Bustamante. When I saw him again at the U.S. Open he had completely forgotten about any problems between us. I think he realized that I was just doing my job.
 
jay helfert said:
At the prior tournament (the World Pool Masters) in Vegas, we had a similar situation with a player being late for his match. At the 10 minute mark we docked him one game. He came rushing in shortly thereafter and I had to inform him that he was behind 1-0 in his match. He was not too pleased about it and let me know in no uncertain terms. I have been friends with this player for a long time and it seemed like our friendship was now at risk.

His name was Franscisco Bustamante. When I saw him again at the U.S. Open he had completely forgotten about any problems between us. I think he realized that I was just doing my job.
Click to expand...

I wonder if the TD knows he has been caught showing favoritism, and
should the governing body be made aware of this malpractice ? At least a warning
 
peteypooldude said:
I wonder if the TD knows he has been caught showing favoritism, and
should the governing body be made aware of this malpractice ? At least a warning
Click to expand...

I expect so, since he posted in this thread. That is, if you are referring to the DCC TD.
 
wutang said:
He probaly only forfeited the match cause 'the world' was watching!!! If this had happened 'behind closed doors', it would have been the same ****, different laxative!!!!

Peace

WUTANG
Click to expand...

Since you are referring to the streamed match, that match was not a forfeit but a loss of two games. And by "the world was watching" are you referring to the 200 or 300 people that had tuned into the stream? :grin-square:

The other match I referred to that was a forfeit was not taking place on the stream table.

I also recall a third match where Chris Bartram's (I think) opponent was late. He arrived within the 15 minute window to play, but he too was docked games on the wire for his delinquency.
 
OK, I'm casting an opinion on the water with everyone else. Johnny should have been DQ'd. He's one of my favorite players and I would have loved to have an opportunity to play him in a tournament like this, but everybody has to play by the same rules or it's not a fair game. This must feel pretty bad, Adam, and hopefully your thread will make a difference next year for everybody.
 
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 :rolleyes:)

- 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?
 
Last edited:
SUPERSTAR said:
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 :rolleyes:)

- 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, non 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?
Click to expand...


ROLL Model...LOL Sorry Super...had to do it ;)

Pillsbury_Doughboy.jpg


Melissa
 
About 5-6 years ago at the DCC, I witnessed Scott Smith disqualify a certain pro tour player from his match for being late...this player was unhappy-BIG TIME about being disqualified, and caused quite a scene...when he couldn't talk Scott into changing his mind, he stormed out to Greg Sullivan's daughters at the tournament registration counter and with f-bombs flying out of his mouth, loudly demanded his entry fee back :eek: the girls didn't know what to do, and Greg Sullivan had to be located to intercede...I can't remember how it was finally resolved...I don't feel like naming the player in public here...but, well, if anybody wants to pm me with their guess, lol - I'll tell them if they're right.

- Ghost
 
1 Pocket Ghost said:
About 5-6 years ago at the DCC, I witnessed Scott Smith disqualify a certain pro tour player from his match for being late...this player was unhappy-BIG TIME about being disqualified, and caused quite a scene...when he couldn't talk Scott into changing his mind, he stormed out to Greg Sullivan's daughters at the tournament registration counter and with f-bombs flying out of his mouth, loudly demanded his entry fee back :eek: the girls didn't know what to do, and Greg Sullivan had to be located to intercede...I can't remember how it was finally resolved...I don't feel like naming the player in public here...but, well, if anybody wants to pm me with their guess, lol - I'll tell them if they're right.

- Ghost
Click to expand...

I hope Greg backed Scotts' decision and it makes no diff to me who the player was. It's one thing to have rules and enforce them correctly but all tourny officials have to be on the same page in doing so - regardless of who may be involved.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top