"Former" World Champion?!

Once a World Champion, always a World Champion?

  • Yes, I agree.

    Votes: 101 87.8%

  • No, I disagree.

    Votes: 14 12.2%
  • Total voters
    115
CrownCityCorey

CrownCityCorey

Sock it to 'em!
Silver Member
This is a little rant about the presentation of Champions in general, but I see this in Billiards television broadcasts, media write ups, and the like.

Let's say someone is talking about Alex Pagulayan, they always say "former World Champion." I think that is a crock of sh**.

Alex should be referred to as "2004 World Champion." Once a World Champion, always a World Champion. One does not only get this title for the year they won it. You are a World Champion forever!

Mind you, I believe this applies to any earned title as well, such as the Presidency of the United States. Jimmy Carter, for example, should still be referred to as "President Carter," whether he is currently on office or not. It sticks for life!

It show a lack of appreciation, in all walks of life, IMO. But, it especially irks me in Pool & Billiards.

What do you think. Once a World Champion, always a World Champion?
 
Last edited:
CrownCityCorey said:
This is a little rant about the presentation of Champions in general, but I see this in Billiards television broadcasts, media write ups, and the like.

Let's say someone is talking about Alex Pagulayan, they always say "former World Champion." I think that is a crock of sh**.

Alex should be referred to as "2004 World Champion." Once a World Champion, always a World Champion. One does not only get this title for the year they won it. You are a World Champion forever!

Mind you, I believe this applies to any earned title as well, such as the Presidency of the United States. Jimmy Carter, for example, should still be referred to as "President Carter," whether he is currently on office or not. It sticks for life!

It show a lack of appreciation, in all walks of life, IMO. But, it especially irks me in Pool & Billiards.

What do you think. Once a World Champion, always a World Champion?
Click to expand...
That is something they can never take away from him or anyone. Unless of course there was proof he was taking steroids :). I think he is safe.

BVal
 
I think it is absolutely appropriate/fair and good to use the term "former" World Champion to describe someone's accomplishments.

1/ It is good for the readers to know and identify whom the current champion is. For example, without the term "former", it would be confusing for a lot of people to know who the current US Open Champion is, who the current world's 9-ball champion is, who the current world's 8-ball champion is, etc...

2/ The term "former" World Champion should not be taken as a slight. Anyone that has their names attached with the word champion, or "former" world champion, should be very proud. It is an accomplishment that cannot be taken away from them. Which is the reason why the writers associate their names with the term "former" World Champion.

3/ Past accomplishments do not equal current accomplishments. Yet, past accomplishments should be identified. Which is why the term "former" is very appropriate.

4/ As you said, once a World Champion is always a World Champion. But he/she is not the CURRENT World Champion.




CrownCityCorey said:
This is a little rant about the presentation of Champions in general, but I see this in Billiards television broadcasts, media write ups, and the like.

Let's say someone is talking about Alex Pagulayan, they always say "former World Champion." I think that is a crock of sh**.

Alex should be referred to as "2004 World Champion." Once a World Champion, always a World Champion. One does not only get this title for the year they won it. You are a World Champion forever!

Mind you, I believe this applies to any earned title as well, such as the Presidency of the United States. Jimmy Carter, for example, should still be referred to as "President Carter," whether he is currently on office or not. It sticks for life!

It show a lack of appreciation, in all walks of life, IMO. But, it especially irks me in Pool & Billiards.

What do you think. Once a World Champion, always a World Champion?
Click to expand...
 
Michael-Hoang said:
I think it is absolutely appropriate/fair and good to use the term "former" World Champion to describe someone's accomplishments.

1/ It is good for the readers to know and identify whom the current champion is. For example, without the term "former", it would be confusing for a lot of people to know who the current US Open Champion is, who the current world's 9-ball champion is, who the current world's 8-ball champion is, etc...

2/ The term "former" World Champion should not be taken as a slight. Anyone that has their names attached with the word champion, or "former" world champion, should be very proud. It is an accomplishment that cannot be taken away from them. Which is the reason why the writers associate their names with the term "former" World Champion.

3/ Past accomplishments do not equal current accomplishments. Yet, past accomplishments should be identified. Which is why the term "former" is very appropriate.

4/ As you said, once a World Champion is always a World Champion. But he/she is not the CURRENT World Champion.
Click to expand...

The current World Champion, IMO, should be referred to as the "Reigning World Champion."
 
You just said it. Identify and acknowledge the current, or reigning, world champion. But how will people identify and acknowledge the previous champions?

For simplicity purposes of writing, it would be bad journalism to identify each and every accomplishments that each champion has accomplished. Imagine if a writer writes "1984, 1987, 1993, 1997, 2000 US Open Champion Earl Strickland", or "1987, 1990, 1991, 1994, 2002 World 9-Ball Champion" when he/she is talking about Earl.
 
Yeah I agree with Hoang on this too. Its the same way in golf. For example when Larry Mize walks to the first tee they will say "former Masters Champion" and when Retief Goosen tees off they will say former 2-time US Open champion.

Another example is in next years US Open when Tiger Woods is introduced they will say "3 time and current US Open Champion". If you lump everyone in under US Open Champion then the individual accomplishment and dates are de-emphasized. People like to remember the year that someone won and the feelings they had at that moment from watching or remembering an athlete win. IMO
 
In most cases the insertion of the shortest word in the dictionary might just about solve this for both sides of the debate, for example .......

"Alex Pagulayan, a former world champion" :thumbup:

"memikey, a ten time former world champion"
 
CrownCityCorey said:
Let's say someone is talking about Alex Pagulayan, they always say "former World Champion." I think that is a crock of sh**.

Alex should be referred to as "2004 World Champion." Once a World Champion, always a World Champion.
Click to expand...

I don't take the phrase "former world champion" to mean "once a world champion, but no longer a world champion." I take it to mean something like, "won the world championship in a previous year."

So I don't think the phrase is disrespectful, and I think most everyone would agree that, once a world champion, always a world champion!
 
PoolBum said:
I don't take the phrase "former world champion" to mean "once a world champion, but no longer a world champion." I take it to mean something like, "won the world championship in a previous year."

So I don't think the phrase is disrespectful, and I think most everyone would agree that, once a world champion, always a world champion!
Click to expand...

I agree. Saying they are "Former World Champ" is not derogatory. It gives them credence. Saying they are 3 time former, or 2 time former and current makes it more impressive in that they won multiple times.

If Ronnie Alcono challenges me to a match as the "Former" US Open winner, do I think I have a better chance of beating him than SVB, the Current US Open Champ? Hell no.
 
"i'm a former world champion spelling bee champion"<----True statment, So what da think Cory????:D
 
CrownCityCorey said:
This is a little rant about the presentation of Champions in general, but I see this in Billiards television broadcasts, media write ups, and the like.

Let's say someone is talking about Alex Pagulayan, they always say "former World Champion." I think that is a crock of sh**.

Alex should be referred to as "2004 World Champion." Once a World Champion, always a World Champion. One does not only get this title for the year they won it. You are a World Champion forever!

Mind you, I believe this applies to any earned title as well, such as the Presidency of the United States. Jimmy Carter, for example, should still be referred to as "President Carter," whether he is currently on office or not. It sticks for life!

It show a lack of appreciation, in all walks of life, IMO. But, it especially irks me in Pool & Billiards.

What do you think. Once a World Champion, always a World Champion?
Click to expand...

I think you are getting hung up on semantics.

As long as they refer to Alex as "World Champion", regardless if they also use "2004", "former", "prior" or any other term, there is no disrespect. They are still acknowledging that he was a World Champion and indicating that he is not the current World Champion.

I found it impossible to vote in this poll, because Alex will always be a World Champion, but he is not the current World Champion.
 
Maybe a little out of text but i was thinking maybe they should be giving out championship rings to identify a world champion. They cant always be carrying that embarrassing gigantic trophy around all the time. Something that the cameras can zoom in on and the year which the player was world champion.
 
Rich R. said:
I think you are getting hung up on semantics.

As long as they refer to Alex as "World Champion", regardless if they also use "2004", "former", "prior" or any other term, there is no disrespect. They are still acknowledging that he was a World Champion and indicating that he is not the current World Champion.

I found it impossible to vote in this poll, because Alex will always be a World Champion, but he is not the current World Champion.
Click to expand...

IMO, semantics are important. Some of us feel a certain responsibility, duty if you will, to the positive portrayal of the Billiard Sports.

It's all in the details...

I find it interesting that although there have been some good arguements brought up, thus far 90% of those polled agree with me. Pretty landslide if you ask me.
 
Last edited:
CrownCityCorey said:
IMO, semantics are important. Some of us feel a certain responsibility, duty if you will, to the positive portrayal of the Billiard Sports.

It's all in the details...

I find it interesting that although there have been some good arguements brought up, thus far 90% of those polled agree with me. Pretty landslide if you ask me.
Click to expand...


thats probably because the wording of your poll is a bit skewed. While I agree that once a champion always a champion, I think the terms "former champion", "2 time champion", "current champion", etc. should be used to distinguish the individual accomplishment and not lump them all together.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top