Earl's version of what happened at SBE.

[satman]

Somehow

I remember Bartram calling a foul on himself in a money match not too long ago, now that's class. Earl could learn a thing or two about being classy from Bartram.

I ain't too surprised about Bartram doing that. I think he's aware of what a reputation means, and the fact that KARMA, always bites back.

 

[Roadking]

This whole Earl thing is bullshit! The TD did the rite thing and if you can't see that then theirs something wrong with you. Earl could have pulled out a gun and shot everyone,and you'd still try to justify his actions.

 

[JAM]

I ain't too surprised about Bartram doing that. I think he's aware of what a reputation means, and the fact that KARMA, always bites back.

Oh, yes, it does. I cannot tell you how much I like this post, for reasons you may not even be aware of, Satman.

I wish I could fast-forward to 20 years from now.

 

[justnum]

What if at the next event instead of using the same old tired refs, old pros, retired pros become the refs. Who else would have a better eye and be more knowledgeable about the intricacies of the mental aspects of a tournament and be sensitive to players concerns then ex-players, retired players or older players. It is common in youth leagues that older players referee games of younger players. I am not saying it would reduce the problem but it would help to minimize conflict between players and refs because ex-players just know what players go through during a tournament and how to talk to them about their concerns.

 

[justnum]

I agree with you.

Frank is nice enough to come on here and share his side of the story. Earl's friends and fans have shared his side.

Bottom line, whether anybody wants to agree with it or not, the TD is the final ruling authority. Each professional pool player is well aware that they cannot override a TD's decision.

Keith has had bad calls in the past by TDs watching a hit. I can remember one instance at the SBE in the Pro/Am event when the referee was called to look at a hit, and he just stood there after Keith's opponent made the shot.

Finally, Keith says, "Hey, Ref, what's your call?" The Ref said good hit. Meanwhile, it was so obvious that it was a bad hit. The entire rail yelled out, "That was a bad hit." I have trouble myself recognizing bad hits and good hits, but then again, I'm not a TD or a ref. Even Keith's opponent after the match knew it was a bad hit and apologized to Keith. He kept on shooting, even though he himself knew it was a bad hit. Professional competitors must respond to the TD or ref's instruction, whether they agree with it or not. That's how tournaments are run.

Refs and TDs are people, I guess. They're capable of error, just like umpires in baseball make bad calls sometimes. Whether you agree or disagree, that's the final decision, and the competitors must comply with the ruling authority's call.

Football in America decided to update their rulings by having the instant replay coaches challenges. It helped to eliminate bad calls by refs because they didn't get a good sight on the action. This idea could be adapted to pool, but it would require a power shift taking power away from the organizers and officially recognizes an entity that can challenge it.

If the players are competing for their salaries let them work it out. Tournaments are both spectator events and competitions, but in more structured sports the competition rules are well known by the players about what is misconduct and what is not. Since pool is less structured the players should be asked for their opinions because it effects what happens to them. Sure organizers and refs set the rules but rules change and policies need updating. Is this one of those times? That is a question for players to answer. For me as a spectator it is disappointing not to see a match because that is the reason I paid money to see a match, not an ejection.

 

[JAM]

Football in America decided to update their rulings by having the instant replay coaches challenges. It helped to eliminate bad calls by refs because they didn't get a good sight on the action. This idea could be adapted to pool, but it would require a power shift taking power away from the organizers and officially recognizes an entity that can challenge it.

If the players are competing for their salaries let them work it out. Tournaments are both spectator events and competitions, but in more structured sports the competition rules are well known by the players about what is misconduct and what is not. Since pool is less structured the players should be asked for their opinions because it effects what happens to them. Sure organizers and refs set the rules but rules change and policies need updating. Is this one of those times? That is a question for players to answer. For me as a spectator it is disappointing not to see a match because that is the reason I paid money to see a match, not an ejection.

I do see your point, but it is not possible for pool to utilize some of the technology that is currently being utilized in football, mainly because there ain't enough money in pool to have this kind of technology.

I feel strongly that if every professional tournament had a professional racker, this would get rid of the rack-rigger problems. Unfortunately, it is just not cost effective to have neutral rackers either. Bowlers don't rack their own pins in professional bowling tournaments. Pool players should not be allowed to rack their own balls either.

Rigging a rack is no different than playing poker with marked cards, IMO. Yet this rack-rigging seems to continue.

The break is an important part of every single pool game. If you can't get a fair rack, it makes one's break ineffective.

There have been so many rack devices that have come out over the years. I'm not sure which one is perfect. Does a perfect racking device exist?

Also, every single player is informed at the players meetings about the rules. Sometimes rules are handed out in a hard-copy format, but not always. Each tournament has a different set of rules sometimes, and it is imperative for the player to familiarize themselves with the rules.

At a world pool tournament -- can't remember which, but I think it was in Cardiff -- Rodney Morris used his cue stick to measure a shot. He used his shooting cue as a pointer, having it touch the table, before he pulled the trigger. He promptly received a foul by the referee and lost his shot, right there on the spot. This is a case of the competitors not being familiar with the tournament's rules beforehand. If Rodney had known that using his cue as a measuring device was considered illegal, he wouldn't have done it.

 

[justnum]

I do see your point, but it is not possible for pool to utilize some of the technology that is currently being utilized in football, mainly because there ain't enough money in pool to have this kind of technology.

I feel strongly that if every professional tournament had a professional racker, this would get rid of the rack-rigger problems. Unfortunately, it is just not cost effective to have neutral rackers either. Bowlers don't rack their own pins in professional bowling tournaments. Pool players should not be allowed to rack their own balls either.

Rigging a rack is no different than playing poker with marked cards, IMO. Yet this rack-rigging seems to continue.

The break is an important part of every single pool game. If you can't get a fair rack, it makes one's break ineffective.

There have been so many rack devices that have come out over the years. I'm not sure which one is perfect. Does a perfect racking device exist?

Also, every single player is informed at the players meetings about the rules. Sometimes rules are handed out in a hard-copy format, but not always. Each tournament has a different set of rules sometimes, and it is imperative for the player to familiarize themselves with the rules.

At a world pool tournament -- can't remember which, but I think it was in Cardiff -- Rodney Morris used his cue stick to measure a shot. He used his shooting cue as a pointer, having it touch the table, before he pulled the trigger. He promptly received a foul by the referee and lost his shot, right there on the spot. This is a case of the competitors not being familiar with the tournament's rules beforehand. If Rodney had known that using his cue as a measuring device was considered illegal, he wouldn't have done it.

The guys mentioned that in their ABP video a need for a standard set of rules, better distribution about information, prepared prize money at the start of the tournament and conduct policies. It will be great to hear an official reaction from the ABP about the situation. The official racker is a great idea I could organizers not wanting it because they don't want "more cooks in the kitchen".

I am not saying tournament operators need cameras for playback. I am suggesting instead of relying on the ref for the ultimate ruling special situations that rarely occur at the tournament be dealt with as much consideration as needed. A player ejection at a tournament is so rare that deciding Earl's fate so quickly is unreasonable, there should at least be a meeting with the top level organizers about the incident before Earl was ejected. It is to easy to say Earl conducted himself poorly and that is why he left, end of story. Earl had no representation to help him with the problems he found in the match, and when he attempted to get answers he was shut down and put out.

As for the warning count, on the spectator photo ops, player competition is separate from player promotion. You don't see the other pros before their games taking photos at non-photo-op areas. The guys want to perform well and want as much concentration as possible. You want them to take photos with fans pay them or schedule time for them to do that outside of the competition, don't add it on during their competition, it is added stress and shows a poor strategy to solve the players fan interaction problem.

 

[JAM]

The guys mentioned that in their ABP video a need for a standard set of rules, better distribution about information, prepared prize money at the start of the tournament and conduct policies. It will be great to hear an official reaction from the ABP about the situation. The official racker is a great idea I could organizers not wanting it because they don't want "more cooks in the kitchen".

I am not saying tournament operators need cameras for playback. I am suggesting instead of relying on the ref for the ultimate ruling special situations that rarely occur at the tournament be dealt with as much consideration as needed. A player ejection at a tournament is so rare that deciding Earl's fate so quickly is unreasonable, there should at least be a meeting with the top level organizers about the incident before Earl was ejected. It is to easy to say Earl conducted himself poorly and that is why he left, end of story. Earl had no representation help him with the problems he found in the match, and when he attempted to get answers he was shut down and put out.

One year at Fast Eddies in Goldsboro, NC, the Carolinas Open had a very good turnout of players. Because of this large turnout, nobody knew when their matches would begin, except for Johnny Archer who was given preferential treatment by the tournament organizers, but that's the topic for another thread. He was told he could return the next day at noon, while every single other competitor had to be there at 8 a.m.

We arrived at the second day of the tournament at 8 a.m. My partner did not play his match until 3:30 p.m. We were there all day long, standing on our feet because there was no extra seating available. Spectators walked around the perimeter of Fast Eddies like lost refugees, never able to sit down. My feet were so swollen. I won't ever forget how much I suffered at that tournament, and I do wear comfortable shoes, too.

Anyway, Sparky's name was called. He wasn't there. Nobody knew when their matches would be called, and most of the competitors had been there until 2 and 3 a.m. the night before on day one.

We called Sparky on his cell phone to tell him his name was called, and he said he'd be over right away. He was staying at a nearby hotel. He could have walked if he wanted, but he drove. We informed the TD that Sparky was on his way.

Ten minutes later, the TD forfeited Sparky. Within one minute of that forfeit, Sparky walked in the door, but the TD would not let him play, even though there were no scheduled match times beforehand. The TD would not budge.

I went to Gene Hooker who was hosting the event and explained what happened, how upsetting it was for Sparky. His reply to me was this: "That's why I hire and pay a tournament director, so I don't have to deal with this B.S." He wouldn't intervene, and Sparky remained forfeited.

The TD is always the final ruling authority. They sometimes have to make decisions that are necessary for the betterment of the event as a whole, even though it may seem unfair.

 

[JLange]

Well I've read most all the posts on this topic and I am not shocked by Earl's antics in any way. Actually the last time I watched him play @ DCC a few years ago when I went there to play, I mean donate my $$$$:thumbup: he did nothing but whine , whine , whine when he was playing.
Earl is a great player maybe one of the best, but he definatly has some inner demons and he needs to seek help to conquer them.
I was not in Valley Forge like most posting here but Earl has every right to inspect the racks. The break in Professional Pool is 90% of the game at that level.
I do not condone Earls antics as he is a professional and should act in a professional manner. This is something Earl has a problem with when at the table.
The manner in which Earl was Ejected from the tournament is also not acceptable. In reading all the posts from players who were there , it seems there were other opportunities which were much more appropriate to eject him instead of before a match.
I also think its a disgrace for Earl to treat a fan or fans the way he did in the hall asking for a photograph with him.
I'm sure if Earl had another chance he would not act or have acted that way as surely he knows how unprofessional that was and im sure he is embarressed about it now.
I hope to see Earl play again , he is a great player and I hope when I do he is on his best behavior and has solved those nasty demons inside him.:thumbup2:

 

[justnum]

One year at Fast Eddies in Goldsboro, NC, the Carolinas Open had a very good turnout of players. Because of this large turnout, nobody knew when their matches would begin, except for Johnny Archer who was given preferential treatment by the tournament organizers, but that's the topic for another thread. He was told he could return the next day at noon, while every single other competitor had to be there at 8 a.m.

We arrived at the second day of the tournament at 8 a.m. My partner did not play his match until 3:30 p.m. We were there all day long, standing on our feet because there was no extra seating available. Spectators walked around the perimeter of Fast Eddies like lost refugees, never able to sit down. My feet were so swollen. I won't ever forget how much I suffered at that tournament, and I ear comfortable shoes, too.

Anyway, Sparky's name was called. He wasn't there. Nobody knew when their matches would be called, and most of the competitors had been there until 2 and 3 a.m. the night before on day one.

We called Sparky on his cell phone to tell him his name was called, and he said he'd be over right away. He was staying at a nearby hotel. He could have walked if he wanted, but he drove. We informed the TD that Sparky was on his way.

Ten minutes later, the TD forfeited Sparky. Within one minute of that forfeit, Sparky walked in the door, but the TD would not let him play, even though there were no scheduled match times beforehand. The TD would not budge.

I went to Gene Hooker who was hosting the event and explained what happened, how upsetting it was for Sparky. His reply to me was this: "That's why I hire and pay a tournament director, so I don't have to deal with this B.S." He wouldn't intervent, and Sparky remained forfeited.

The TD is always the final ruling authority. They sometimes have to make decisions that are necessary for the betterment of the event as a whole, even though it may seem unfair.

The power dilemma, because the organizer puts up all the money and does all the work they ultimately decide what happens for participants in their arena. That is a situation that happens. People don't like how they are treated and they aren't forced to stay. As for the special treatment Archer gets, I don't know. But I see a group of people that basically are tossed and turned around at will or because of poor planning or lack of capital funding. It is unfortunate.

The thinking is for what can be done to fix those problems. I am not a believer that past problems can't be fixed. Organizers tend to be scared of losing attendees and players to their events, they always want a good turnout. I am not suggesting anything other than influencing what is important.

Do I think the ABP and Archer can solve problems? I don't know. But it is better than being a conspiracy theorist on some anonymous internet board. It really is up to the players to fight for what should be and change what is. In the end it is a fight between the players and the organizing body, it is a fight over who decides what happens. Common is it that the people who finance the majority of the capital funds decides what and how, even more common are the people who attract crowds fight and win decisions giving them authority on changes to make. The ABP is an entity capable of putting up a fight as opposed to the lone player with a problem.

The worst case scenario for a tournament organizer is for an event to start and then no players show up, or no fans show up. But someone will want to show up as a player to better their odds at a tournament. But if the tournament started and everyone just left, it becomes a game of is it worth it to stay. I think most people decide to stay.

 

[justnum]

If it was a player other than Earl, if it was me I would have questioned the same things, I would have said differently that I don't want to take photos before a alleged high paying competition. But those are things considered by people that aren't humble.

From the clearest perspective I see another player gets ejected because a ref ejaculated (it has multiple definitions). Could the ref handled the situation differently? Yes. Could Earl have handled the situation differently? Yes. Was the situation resolved? Yes. Could it have been resolved better? Yes.

The consensus is that players think what happen was fine and they accept those terms of agreement with the tournament organizer. What will happen after this incident? People know to shut up, smile for photos and then play some pool.

 

[DogsPlayingPool]

Neutral racking would eliminate a lot of the problem and I'm not sure it's a cost issue. Honestly, at an event like the SBE I'm quite sure there are a sufficient supply of players known to the staff that are competent to rack balls that would be happy to do so on a volunteer basis and one for every 3-4 tables would be enough to cover each session. Use a Magic Rack and draw a spot line, or just use the Slug Doctor and not only would it eliminate a lot of problems but would speed up play too.

 

[hunger strike]

Earl fans

I am one of the minority who bet on Earl vs SVB on vBookie. I am wondering, were there any "antics" during their previous race to 100? I am not sure I like using the word antics for each instance of disagreement. He had legitimate concerns. Maybe it should be in the rules for the opponent to stand at the side of the table at the level of the foot spot so that racking can be observed without it seeming like undue scrutiny.
A rule with this kind of etiquette was the rule in one of the leagues that if you forfeit a game in a tournament you also forfeit the next game. I think that might have been done because there was a blond kid named Keith who would throw his quarter on the table as his opponent was setting up to sink the 9-ball, sometimes from as much as 10 feet away from Keith's chair. Does anyone who runs leagues know if he was the reason for it? Now THAT constitutes ANTICS. Watching out for bad racking is intelligence.

 

[westcoast]

What were Allen Hopkins' views on the whole incident? Do Hopkins and Strickland get along?

 

[inside_english]

T.D. should have disqualified himself then.

You DON'T clap for someone when you are officiating a match...just how professional is that?

Sure you do, as long as your appreciation for a good shot or great match is consistent. Too many people on here are bashing the TD. Volumes can be written about Earl's antics, and this TD's behavior has nothing to do with Earl being barred. He (Earl) had it coming.

Whether he deserved it in this instance is moot, because he certainly had it coming. At some point someone was going to bar him, and we can nit-pick the reasons and the TD, or the other players all we want, but the fact of the matter remains Earl is more trouble than not, and Earl's fans keep looking the other way because is a champion.

Sad.

 

[inside_english]

This whole Earl thing is bullshit! The TD did the rite thing and if you can't see that then theirs something wrong with you. Earl could have pulled out a gun and shot everyone,and you'd still try to justify his actions.

Probably sums it up the best, IMO.

Earl's die-hard fans defend him no-matter-what, which I think is hopelessly misguided.

 

[eddiethelock]

earl chose to challenge the rack right out of the gate, alex re-racked and earl stayed with his position

the TD came over and looked from all directions and could not see anything wrong with the rack but still asked alex to re-rack anyway. then the TD racked a few without success and alex racked again for another 5 minutes, it was a joke

then finally they had a rack all could agree on and as soon as alex got down to break earl jumped up and checked to see if alex had the cue ball over the head string... pure bullshit!

it was a bad scene and got worse as the match progressed, at one point another pro on an adjoining table dropped his cue on the floor and walked out

Earl can be an ass to the detriment of the game and deserved to be thrown out right then and there let alone during his antics at the next match

as they say, you had to be there...

earl pulled the same crap at turning stone with hatch and dennis humored him and asked is it ok now over and over. was almost funny but dennis knew how to handle it. earl lost to hunter lombardo and after he unscrewed said he should take him outside and give him a beating. i said "what", devil dave said "can you find anyone smaller?"
wtf

 

[real bartram]

Oh, yes, it does. I cannot tell you how much I like this post, for reasons you may not even be aware of, Satman.

I wish I could fast-forward to 20 years from now.

and what do you mean in this post?

 

[JAM]

and what do you mean in this post?

What do I mean? Well, let me see if I can explain. The experience of life has a way of altering one's outlook on topics. I hope I am around 20 years from now. I wonder how my opinions on topics will change. I definitely feel differently today about some subject matters than I did 20 years ago.

Pool was a big part of my life 30 years ago. I dropped it like a hot potato and went for a career. My feelings for pool 30 years later are quite different than when I was in my twenties. I did not have as many responsibilities then as I do today.

When I was in high school, we had three clicks of peeps: the hippies, the tea-baggers, and the greasers. I used to think the greasers were cool cats, as I was more of a tea-bagger in school. I wanted to hang out with the greasers, but I never could get myself to take a walk on the wild side, due to strict parents. I just stuck with my studies, but high school did not seem as cool for me as it did for the greasers.

Fast forward 30 years from then. My lifestyle today is more comfortable than some of the greasers. In fact, some of those peeps I thought were so cool have passed away and/or hit skid row. Some dropped out of school and never pursued a way to make a living that supported their lifestyle comfortably. The lifestyle I thought was cool 30 years ago doesn't seem so cool to me today.

Time has a way of changing people. This is the point I was trying to illustrate. Does this help you understand what I mean in the post you reference?

 

[real bartram]

What do I mean? Well, let me see if I can explain. The experience of life has a way of altering one's outlook on topics. I hope I am around 20 years from now. I wonder how my opinions on topics will change. I definitely feel differently today about some subject matters than I did 20 years ago.

Pool was a big part of my life 30 years ago. I dropped it like a hot potato and went for a career. My feelings for pool 30 years later are quite different than when I was in my twenties. I did not have as many responsibilities then as I do today.

When I was in high school, we had three clicks of peeps: the hippies, the tea-baggers, and the greasers. I used to think the greasers were cool cats, as I was more of a tea-bagger in school. I wanted to hang out with the greasers, but I never could get myself to take a walk on the wild side, due to strict parents. I just stuck with my studies, but high school did not seem as cool for me as it did for the greasers.

Fast forward 30 years from then. My lifestyle today is more comfortable than some of the greasers. In fact, some of those peeps I thought were so cool have passed away and/or hit skid row. Some dropped out of school and never pursued a way to make a living that supported their lifestyle comfortably. The lifestyle I thought was cool 30 years ago doesn't seem so cool to me today.

Time has a way of changing people. This is the point I was trying to illustrate. Does this help you understand what I mean in the post you reference?

sure does.