Don't let the Philippino's play each other in the early rounds.
- Thread starter bfdlad
- Start date
Again you are right, I am wrong. Go Mikaf210 said:
:grin: Whatever.... Next time stop being so gullible and believing whatever you read. You are just trying to make excuses and sour graping because your favourite players did not make the semifinals. I am going to enjoy the rest of the games and will not waste my time responding to you anymore.
Sweet Marissa
www.Bella-Muse.com
American and Canadian players have spent thousands to travel and play in the WPC, but no exception was made for them. Players all over the country spend about that much to make it to Virginia in airline fares and luggage fees, since we now have to PAY to transport our cues, something most airlines don't charge for on international flights.JoeyInCali said:
yes it will
Assuming that the original post was accurate and a ruling was made that only applied to two countries, then yes a win by a player from either of those two countries is tainted. That in itself is makes these kind of decisions ridiculous. It isn't fair to other players and it isn't fair to the players that get the sweetheart deal either. If they are only after the dollars, well they get those. If they want the respect also, the win will always be tainted.
Making the number of players eight so that the ruling only applied to two countries looks very much like it was a sweetheart deal for those two countries. It cost the players from those two countries a great deal of respect. If honor and integrity were important to the players once they saw how the ruling was structured they should have turned it down. Might have cost them some dollars but I still remember as a great human being a fellow competitor who adamantly refused special treatment when it was offered to him about thirty-five years ago. Bap is still missed. The winner is long forgotten.
Hu
gopi-1 said:
Assuming that the original post was accurate and a ruling was made that only applied to two countries, then yes a win by a player from either of those two countries is tainted. That in itself is makes these kind of decisions ridiculous. It isn't fair to other players and it isn't fair to the players that get the sweetheart deal either. If they are only after the dollars, well they get those. If they want the respect also, the win will always be tainted.
Making the number of players eight so that the ruling only applied to two countries looks very much like it was a sweetheart deal for those two countries. It cost the players from those two countries a great deal of respect. If honor and integrity were important to the players once they saw how the ruling was structured they should have turned it down. Might have cost them some dollars but I still remember as a great human being a fellow competitor who adamantly refused special treatment when it was offered to him about thirty-five years ago. Bap is still missed. The winner is long forgotten.
Hu
ShootingArts said:
You won't get a pip from them unfortunately. I won't even be surprised that they don't even know that such a ruling like this was implemented this year, all they'll do is play and try to win, whoever they are up against; against fellow Filipinos, Americans, Martians, whoever, they will play hard and try to get the dough.
And we are both assuming that Warren will get to play a fellow Filipino in the 1st round, what are the odds to that? Like 34 to 1?
I still like his odds (reverse the odds) of playing someone from another country!
Sweet Marissa
www.Bella-Muse.com
Since I have to check my clothes, I end up paying for my cue as extra baggage. I believe it was $50, but I haven't flown with it since last year.ribdoner said:
bfdlad said:
I know Philippine history. My friend already explained that. I asked him the same question. Well he said that originally Philippines is really "Filipnas" from the name Rey Felipe, which in english is King Philip. So the natives called themselves in original form which Filipino.
don't know that it was enacted
It isn't clear if the ruling was actually enacted after it was announced. However, I assumed nothing about the draw. Regardless of who he would have drawn anyway, once it is guaranteed that Warren does not have the possibility of drawing people he otherwise might have drawn because of a ruling that only applies to a few the event is tainted.
I wouldn't have minded as much if the ruling had been announced for future matches and having a smaller number of players from each country get the exemption although any exemption at all seems ridiculous for individual competition. Announcing an exemption at the last minute that was tailored to only apply to two countries leaves a bad smell.
I don't blame the competitors, I have taken advantage of rules while complaining that they weren't fair myself although the rules I used applied equally to all. I blame the one(s) that decided to make a last minute policy change.
Hu
gopi-1 said:
It isn't clear if the ruling was actually enacted after it was announced. However, I assumed nothing about the draw. Regardless of who he would have drawn anyway, once it is guaranteed that Warren does not have the possibility of drawing people he otherwise might have drawn because of a ruling that only applies to a few the event is tainted.
I wouldn't have minded as much if the ruling had been announced for future matches and having a smaller number of players from each country get the exemption although any exemption at all seems ridiculous for individual competition. Announcing an exemption at the last minute that was tailored to only apply to two countries leaves a bad smell.
I don't blame the competitors, I have taken advantage of rules while complaining that they weren't fair myself although the rules I used applied equally to all. I blame the one(s) that decided to make a last minute policy change.
Hu
ShootingArts said:
I agree exactly to what you've just said except for the "tainted" part. Nobody requested anybody to
do them favors here, and the thread title makes it look like the Filipinos were responsible for the last
minute changes. It should've been titled as, "Don't let players from the same country with 8 or more
entries play each other in the early rounds", although it will make it look very long and winding!
What I'm wondering about is why are they bracketed in the same group, but they, the players
themselves just don't care about who they'll play, and if it's fine by them, it's fine by me too!
"tainted"
When I say an event was tainted, I mean that it wasn't fair for all. I think the Filipinos and those from Kuwait were the only ones to benefit from this rule and it may have been made to cater to the folks from the Mideast and happened to catch up the Filipinos also. Unless this is something the Filipino players pressed for it isn't a reflection on them.
Assuming that the Filipino players play better than average, this not only gave them an easier path but gave others a tougher path. To explain what I mean about paths, say just four of us were playing in a mini. You, me, Bustamante and the infamous Travis Trotter. Since you can't play Bustamonte in this first round, you automatically get an easier path, me or Travis. Since You can't Play Bustamonte, Travis or I automatically have to also. All four players are affected. So while we don't know how this affected the paths of the players, up to 32 players were affected if this ruling was used. Even more if you consider that the paths of all of the affected players also affected the paths of other players in the later rounds.
I do agree that the thread could have been titled better. I doubt this idea came out of the blue but there is no indication where it originated from. Two countries benefitted so I suspect that at least one individual from one of those two countries pushed for this ruling. It could have been a person of wealth and power from one of these countries, not even a player.
Hu
When I say an event was tainted, I mean that it wasn't fair for all. I think the Filipinos and those from Kuwait were the only ones to benefit from this rule and it may have been made to cater to the folks from the Mideast and happened to catch up the Filipinos also. Unless this is something the Filipino players pressed for it isn't a reflection on them.
Assuming that the Filipino players play better than average, this not only gave them an easier path but gave others a tougher path. To explain what I mean about paths, say just four of us were playing in a mini. You, me, Bustamante and the infamous Travis Trotter. Since you can't play Bustamonte in this first round, you automatically get an easier path, me or Travis. Since You can't Play Bustamonte, Travis or I automatically have to also. All four players are affected. So while we don't know how this affected the paths of the players, up to 32 players were affected if this ruling was used. Even more if you consider that the paths of all of the affected players also affected the paths of other players in the later rounds.
I do agree that the thread could have been titled better. I doubt this idea came out of the blue but there is no indication where it originated from. Two countries benefitted so I suspect that at least one individual from one of those two countries pushed for this ruling. It could have been a person of wealth and power from one of these countries, not even a player.
Hu
gopi-1 said:I agree exactly to what you've just said except for the "tainted" part. Nobody requested anybody to
do them favors here, and the thread title makes it look like the Filipinos were responsible for the last
minute changes. It should've been titled as, "Don't let players from the same country with 8 or more
entries play each other in the early rounds", although it will make it look very long and winding!
What I'm wondering about is why are they bracketed in the same group, but they, the players
themselves just don't care about who they'll play, and if it's fine by them, it's fine by me too!