nope, unfortunately every town has these kinds of people.
Dumping money matches !
- Thread starter houmatroy
- Start date
nope, unfortunately every town has these kinds of people.
I personally feel that if the evidence is that someone saw the winning player giving money to the losing player in public then this is quite weak to use as the basis for a public accusation.
In my years in the game the players I have known who have cut up the backers or dumped the rail have met offsite well away from the pool room to cut up the money.
As the user JCIN has said there are many legitimate scenarios where two backed players would be exchanging money after a set.
I do think that gambling in pool is not what is holding pool back. Every sport has gambling and dumping and corruption at some level in it. At this moment I can't think of one sport that has been untainted by scandal of some sort.
If pool had some true money or a real visionary with the right connections then it would be a much bigger sport. Poker is of course the poster child for a gambling/hustling type of game that made it into the mainstream. Anyone who has been around medium to high stakes poker knows full well that poker has it's share of cheaters snapping off backers and clueless other players.
I vote for no dump if the players were exchanging money in or near the poolroom. I believe that this was not grounds enough to make a such a vague accusation.
In my years in the game the players I have known who have cut up the backers or dumped the rail have met offsite well away from the pool room to cut up the money.
As the user JCIN has said there are many legitimate scenarios where two backed players would be exchanging money after a set.
I do think that gambling in pool is not what is holding pool back. Every sport has gambling and dumping and corruption at some level in it. At this moment I can't think of one sport that has been untainted by scandal of some sort.
If pool had some true money or a real visionary with the right connections then it would be a much bigger sport. Poker is of course the poster child for a gambling/hustling type of game that made it into the mainstream. Anyone who has been around medium to high stakes poker knows full well that poker has it's share of cheaters snapping off backers and clueless other players.
I vote for no dump if the players were exchanging money in or near the poolroom. I believe that this was not grounds enough to make a such a vague accusation.
I own a nice bridge. It connects Brooklyn to Manhattan. Lots of upside and potential. Willing to sell cheap to the right owner and you sound like my guy.
Are you interested?
Very well stated. It is nice to read a post from someone who understands action.
I was especially delighted to read your opinion on gambling not holding pool back.
It is my opinion today, based on what I have read on pool-related Internet sites, that action games recorded on the Internet seem to breed skepticism, ridicule, and belittlement by some of the viewing public of the competitors who are shooting their hearts out, giving it their all. Dance, monkey, dance. If there's anything that is bringing pool down to a lower level, it is this. Pool is cruel to its own. :sorry:
I don't know who you are Roadie, but you hit the nail on the head! :smile:
No, I don't blame TAR. I blame some of the viewers. It is a shame that discussions of dumps are even discussed when, in fact, nobody has any involvement in the match at hand.
How are your shoes fitting today, Roy?
I was once in the bathroom when two players were about to go out and play a $1000 set. Both had backers and and one asked the other if he wanted to split their $500 share so each would get $250 for playing. The other refused. But after thinking about it, I am not sure that would have been wrong as long as both played their hearts out.
Dumping (if it exists :wink
will never, ever stop. That's just a fact.
Most "dumpers" dump because it is a "sure" thing. The 4 parties involved (2 backers and 2 players) should have an agreement in advance where the loser gets 5-10% of the bet. This ensures that both players get a guarantee piece of the pie. Since the players already have a "sure" thing in their pocket, they can win a much bigger piece of the pie if they win, an incentive for them to play their best. This should "lessen" the chances of dumping.
As cuesmith asks, is it really "dumping" if players A&B agree to split their winnings (in advance to ensure their share) but still play their hearts out?
will never, ever stop. That's just a fact.Most "dumpers" dump because it is a "sure" thing. The 4 parties involved (2 backers and 2 players) should have an agreement in advance where the loser gets 5-10% of the bet. This ensures that both players get a guarantee piece of the pie. Since the players already have a "sure" thing in their pocket, they can win a much bigger piece of the pie if they win, an incentive for them to play their best. This should "lessen" the chances of dumping.
As cuesmith asks, is it really "dumping" if players A&B agree to split their winnings (in advance to ensure their share) but still play their hearts out?
Some bizarre thinking going on here.Dumping (if it exists :wink
Most "dumpers" dump because it is a "sure" thing. The 4 parties involved (2 backers and 2 players) should have an agreement in advance where the loser gets 5-10% of the bet. This ensures that both players get a guarantee piece of the pie. Since the players already have a "sure" thing in their pocket, they can win a much bigger piece of the pie if they win, an incentive for them to play their best. This should "lessen" the chances of dumping.
As cuesmith asks, is it really "dumping" if players A&B agree to split their winnings (in advance to ensure their share) but still play their hearts out?
Dumping (if it exists :wink
Most "dumpers" dump because it is a "sure" thing. The 4 parties involved (2 backers and 2 players) should have an agreement in advance where the loser gets 5-10% of the bet. This ensures that both players get a guarantee piece of the pie. Since the players already have a "sure" thing in their pocket, they can win a much bigger piece of the pie if they win, an incentive for them to play their best. This should "lessen" the chances of dumping.
As cuesmith asks, is it really "dumping" if players A&B agree to split their winnings (in advance to ensure their share) but still play their hearts out?
This is very sensible idea and is a new twist on the backer player relationship. Basically the idea being that the player truly becomes more like a horse or a dog but not in a bad way.
I think that this could work to a degree but there is still the chance of a dump depending on if and how the players decide to work the rail.
I was once an observer but not a participant to what seemed to many on reflection after the fact to be a very slick operation to take off the rail. At a large tournament two players begin to play 8 ball for say $100 a game and one of the players is loud and obnoxious and can't play very well. He is reportedly the owner of several convenience stores. He proclaimed that he would cover all bets and promptly about ten people jumped on this seeming sucker. He loses one game and then ups the bets with the people on the rail. He lose that game as well. Then he leaves and comes back with a large stack of cash, a very large stack and he announces that he will bet as high as anyone wants to bet but ONLY with the people who were in on the first two games. Everyone bets again and they go all in and more with what they won, some people triple and quadruple the bet. There are stacks of cash literally posted all along the rail of the table and the players are playing around them. The store owner manages to win that game and everybody on the rail pulls up stuck. Was it a heist? Maybe so, maybe not. But if it was then they were very slick to take off a room full of seasoned gamblers.
I have seen many strange match-ups in my time but this one ranks among the strangest.
Thank you but I prefer to build my own bridges. I was not trying to say that a dump did not happen or could not happen. I have been around the game long enough to know that it happens far more than people think it does, unfortunately.
However a phone call from a person who saw two people exchanging money is still fairly weak evidence upon which to make a public accusation. Especially when the venue, dates and known participants in money matches are known. And to top it off the accuser states that the dumper or dumpee is a member here.
Similarly if someone were to make an accusation that they heard from a friend that a forum member were using the forum to sell cocaine because the friend noticed that one forum member sold a bag of powder to another one then there would be an uproar about not making such accusations without proof, name the people, and so on.
The funny part is half the people would want to know who it is so that they could have him or her arrested and the other half of the people would want to know who it is so that they could buy some......
Well to be frank..that wasnt the only thing that made me decide to post thread...It was also that before I talked to my friend who saw money change hands..but it was several people in live chat thought match looked strange & kinda questioned if it was fixed..plus i talked to 5 others that were there n sweated match & these guys are pool players & know pool..said it looked like a set up based on shot selection & play.
If this is true, then people got to have some pretty big....................:yikes:
Attachments
This is why I never let anyone back me. Based on my shot selection and play it ALWAYS looks like I am dumping. :wink:
100% agreement from me. Dumping/saving just sucks.
1999 and I started playing pool. I went to my first tournament and saw some great play and drove 2 hours the next day to watch the finals. Turned out that the final was between two friends that were going to just split the money and not play it but the tournament director wouldn't go along with that so they "played" the final match. One guy shot the 8 ball to lose immediately after they broke and did that 7 times. The match was over in 15 minutes, they split the $$ and I drove back home with a lesson learned but feeling very disappionted that I"d not seen the level of pool I spent my whole day to see and very upset about the ethics of champion pool players. I've been upset ever since. It's about ethics. The whole thing is about ethics.
Having ethics is seen by most gamblers (the ones I've known) as something that suckers have. But the truth is.... No ethics.... no big money in pool. The 'smart guys' are suckering themselves out of the big pots.
Why not just bet a $1000 then and the winner take all?
