Galveston One Pocket Payout

Efren Reyes is beloved by pool fans the world over! He is one of the most popular players I've ever seen. He is treated like a Pool God, as well he should be. And when he plays everyone flocks to get a good seat. There is only one Magician! We have been most fortunate to have seen him play pool. He will go down in history like Greenleaf, Mosconi, Worst, Lassiter and Mizerak. People will be comparing players to him forever.

Besides all that he's a helluva nice guy and a damn good man who is quick to help his fellow filipinos when there is a crises. I don't care how he votes. I'll ALWAYS vote for him!
 
selfish?

gulfportdoc said:
I have a little different take on this than do all of you Efren worshippers. Reyes was very fortunate to have won the 1P event. He easily could have lost a couple of his matches; especially the match with Ike Runnels, who had Reyes down 2-0 with a routine 3 ball runout at hand. Efren is no longer the player that he was in the mid-90's.

I saw the player meeting taking place. I thought it was the final 12 guys. Oscar Dominguez told me that the promoter held the meeting and asked the guys if they wanted him to take money from first and spread it out to the remainder of the field, since it was so top heavy due to mediocre attendance. They all agreed, except Reyes. At that point I realized that Efren is a selfish pr*ck. From that moment on I was rooting for him to lose. When he did win, I was happy that he only won 15K.

I've often heard rumors that some of the Filipinos chop up their winnings anyway. I don't know if that's true. As far as chopping the final money, I know that this is a common practice in poker tournaments.

Good arguments can be made for whether or not the deal should have been offered at all. In my opinion, it was the smart thing to do, so as to insure that most of the players would return.

Taylor Road put up hundreds of thousands for the venue, personnel, equipment, and prize money. They've said that if the event is successful next year that they intend to put on several events each year around the country.

There's only one other American event that offers this many players anywhere close to this much money: the DCC. From what I've seen, I believe that Taylor Road is the real McCoy. In my view the positives completely outweigh any negatives on this event.

Doc
Click to expand...

How can you call Efren selfish? He wanted to win what was advertised that he could win... Because he is confident, you call him selfish? The event was advertised that he could win that much, he travelled, spent time away from home, spent money, prepared (I assume), and showed up and played in order to win that much... and then when it was proposed - after play began - that first place be reduced, you call him selfish for not wanting it reduced? Wow.

Not all poker players chop up the money either.. they usually do because so much luck is involved, but pool is different. Great players know their great, they are unafraid, and they go after the money, they don't chop it up.
 
Roy Steffensen said:
If Efren is a selfish ***** then Allison should be the same also, since she was the only woman voting against the prize distribution...
Click to expand...

It's funny how the only two people that voted to keep the money the same was were the two that played in both finals. They are both smart enough to know they had a great chance on winning. Did no one know what the other places paid until it was down to the final so many players. Who can blame them for wanting what was advertised.:shrug:
 
Last edited:
What the heck wrong is with a "chop"? Professional Pool players have only their skills to count on. No medical insurance, no pension fund, no minimum wage rule, etc. They have to do everything legitimate to survive. One way is to help each other out.

As far as it being prevalent among the Filipinos that isnt a surprise. When the pilgrims came here and established the 13 colonies didnt they share amongst themselves. And didnt the settlers who moved out west first share prosperity to those of their group who werent so lucky. Its called being "neighborly".

Im sure if we were Americans in a foreign country we would only think it is honorable to share with our fellow countrymen and those who would only keep their riches to themselves as a bit miserly and uncaring.
 
It was in his best interest not to split..period !

Under the circumstances...How can anybody blame him for voting the way he did..He thought he was the best player left and liked his chances...That would be like a player getting mad for a Pro player sitting on top the rock & the local shortstop gets mad cuz he asked pro to split tourney and pro said no..Efren is a true professional and it was in his best interest not to make any deals that didn't favor himself. JMO.
 
thanks guys, now that I read fully what gulfportdoc's statement was, I believe it's really outrageous.

so what's wrong with chopping down the winnings? it ain't illegal and in no way immoral. it is more of a selfless act rather than selfish. besides, those boys came down a long way from home. just imagine the travel expenses and accomodations they have to pay. they don't have the luxury of the homegrown americans who only had to spend a few couple of bucks on travel. unless the tournament or some of those who complain that Efren is selfish, would willingly cover his travel expenses and accomodation, then they have something to complain about. but since these boys are on their own and gulfportdoc doesn't seem to atleast be kind enough to give them a free accomodation and pay their travel expenses, well those guys needs every penny they could muster from the event. I could hear him saying "are you insane?" . well that is exactly what Efren would say if you asked him to share his hard earned money to the "deserving losers" ?

I don't want this argument to go down to a racial thing and somebody would argue that there are just too many Filipinos in American tournaments that split their earnings with each other. well, it's none of your business if they help each other coz you as an american never gave them something to support them either.
 
Last edited:
seriously, how can people not see that advertising a certain payout for a tournament, then paying something completely different AFTER the players pay entry and arrive is incredibly disingenuous and can be perceived as outright breech of a contract.

you just can't do that, and to be frank, only people associated with pool don't know any better. sad but true. i praise efren for not putting up way more of a stink. if there were more money involved, i'd advise efren to get a lawyer, and i hate lawyers, but these people deserve to have to pay that advertised amount to the winner.
 
gulfportdoc said:
I have a little different take on this than do all of you Efren worshippers. Reyes was very fortunate to have won the 1P event. He easily could have lost a couple of his matches; especially the match with Ike Runnels, who had Reyes down 2-0 with a routine 3 ball runout at hand. Efren is no longer the player that he was in the mid-90's.

I saw the player meeting taking place. I thought it was the final 12 guys. Oscar Dominguez told me that the promoter held the meeting and asked the guys if they wanted him to take money from first and spread it out to the remainder of the field, since it was so top heavy due to mediocre attendance. They all agreed, except Reyes. At that point I realized that Efren is a selfish pr*ck. From that moment on I was rooting for him to lose. When he did win, I was happy that he only won 15K.
I've often heard rumors that some of the Filipinos chop up their winnings anyway. I don't know if that's true. As far as chopping the final money, I know that this is a common practice in poker tournaments.

Good arguments can be made for whether or not the deal should have been offered at all. In my opinion, it was the smart thing to do, so as to insure that most of the players would return.

Taylor Road put up hundreds of thousands for the venue, personnel, equipment, and prize money. They've said that if the event is successful next year that they intend to put on several events each year around the country.

There's only one other American event that offers this many players anywhere close to this much money: the DCC. From what I've seen, I believe that Taylor Road is the real McCoy. In my view the positives completely outweigh any negatives on this event.

Doc
Click to expand...

Wow kinda disappointed that you would insult one of the
best pool players in the world with such pettiness.

The players came to the event in good faith, they were told
top prize was X dollars, that is what should have received.
NO discussion on changing the structure half way thru the event.



I have no bones with the Galveston Group, kudo's to them
they totally rocked this event. But if people were told X then
that is what they should have received.

That is what is fair, nothing less.
 
yobagua said:
What the heck wrong is with a "chop"? Professional Pool players have only their skills to count on. No medical insurance, no pension fund, no minimum wage rule, etc. They have to do everything legitimate to survive. One way is to help each other out.

As far as it being prevalent among the Filipinos that isnt a surprise. When the pilgrims came here and established the 13 colonies didnt they share amongst themselves. And didnt the settlers who moved out west first share prosperity to those of their group who werent so lucky. Its called being "neighborly".

Im sure if we were Americans in a foreign country we would only think it is honorable to share with our fellow countrymen and those who would only keep their riches to themselves as a bit miserly and uncaring.
Click to expand...

I did not say there is anything wrong with a chop, but ALL parties involved must agree. If one party does not agree, then there is no deal. Otherwise, effectively, the party that does not agree is just getting robbed. Efren like his chances, and felt confident, why she have to accept less that what was offered.

This should have been done before the event, and then, if anyone disagrees, they have the option to not play. But you can't do it in the middle, or near the end. What if there were 4 players left, and 1 was an overwhelming favorite? Could the other 3 vote to "redistribute" the prize money and effectively steal money out of the winners pocket before he even got it?

I know all about the difficulties the poolplayers face, if they ALL AGREE to chop, that's fine. But when you allow the majority to change rules after play has begun, thats just wrong. They all knew the prize pool before they started playing.

And yes, settlers helped each other, and many communities help each other... (and many take advantage of the "help") I don't really see how this helps support your point.

This is a voluntary pool tournament, not frontier-ing the wild west.
 
allen_jr said:
I did not say there is anything wrong with a chop, but ALL parties involved must agree. If one party does not agree, then there is no deal. Otherwise, effectively, the party that does not agree is just getting robbed. Efren like his chances, and felt confident, why she have to accept less that what was offered.

This should have been done before the event, and then, if anyone disagrees, they have the option to not play. But you can't do it in the middle, or near the end. What if there were 4 players left, and 1 was an overwhelming favorite? Could the other 3 vote to "redistribute" the prize money and effectively steal money out of the winners pocket before he even got it?

I know all about the difficulties the poolplayers face, if they ALL AGREE to chop, that's fine. But when you allow the majority to change rules after play has begun, thats just wrong. They all knew the prize pool before they started playing.

And yes, settlers helped each other, and many communities help each other... (and many take advantage of the "help") I don't really see how this helps support your point.

This is a voluntary pool tournament, not frontier-ing the wild west.
Click to expand...

Allen I was not referring to your post but to those who criticize the Filipinos for chopping amongst themselves. I am totally in aggreement with you on the point of changing the terms During the tournament. Please read previous posts. Not referring to yours but OP criticizing Efren.
 
gulfportdoc said:
At that point I realized that Efren is a selfish pr*ck. From that moment on I was rooting for him to lose. When he did win, I was happy that he only won 15K.
Click to expand...

You didn't pray hard enough, did you, because your pool gods still let the selfish pr*ck to win. The hallelujah chorus from Efren fans may sometimes become boring, but your posts to put down Efren, here and at other forums whenever you have the chance, are often laced with animosity and rancor. If you want your gods to help you, don't cheat on the frankincense.
 
Y'see, this is what makes Mr. Reyes so great - He can still pull out his best game when there's only a measly $15 large on the line ;-)

Seriously though I think it's telling the only players objecting to adjustment of the prize purses were Efren Reyes and Allison Fisher, the two most consistently dominating players in their respective divisions. I think that, although it may run contrary to the normal social contract's rules of appearing moderate and selfless there is a point where the very best have to utterly believe they will win everything and they want to be rewarded accordingly. That self-belief is one of the things that makes them champions.
 
Efren selfish? Then why did he turn over the whole $165,000 that he won in the Tokyo Open a few years ago to Philippines charities.

When he was in Cardiff he did a spot for me in The Pool Village. He arrived half asleep, took off his topcoat, grabbed a rack cue and played 34 racks against an adoring public.

That sure is selfish:grin:
 
a good story...

I have been lucky enough to hear many great stories, and this is one of my favorites, and I think it applies to this situation...

My dad was in the finals of a fairly large tournament, I think 1st was 15K, 2nd was 10K. He had been playing good the whole tournament, and just felt like he was going to win. Before the match, his opponent asked if he wanted to make a deal, even-out the prize money... My dad replied "No thanks. Instead, why don't we just play for all of it, winner takes the whole 25K?"

His opponent (another top player-but I am not trying to say anything negative about this particular player, so I'll leave his name out) didn't like this idea as much, and declined... the match was close, and my dad ended up winning....

To me, this is heart. This is not backing down, or accepting that you might lose and just be happy with 2nd or 3rd. Me, I probably would have taken the "split", but I don't have that level of ability or confidence to match :) At some times, a top player just has that feeling, and to make a concession just doesn't seem right. And to be forced to make a concession when the group votes against you is just plain wrong.

Oh yeah, my dad's name is Allen Hopkins.
 
allen_jr said:
Oh yeah, my dad's name is Allen Hopkins.
Click to expand...




Allen Jr.....Thanks for laying it out so eloquently in this and your previous posts on this subject of Efren's selfishness.

I totally agree with everything you said.....If everyone had agreed to the reduction in the top prize then it would have been OK.....but if one person disagrees then it's a "no deal".

Doc is a very nice guy and a friend of mine but.... I think he is way off base on this subject.

Oh yeah!...Allen Hopkins is one of the premier pool players not just for his pool skills but for his integrity, his code of ethics, his honesty and many other down home likable qualities.

Looks like many of his qualities were passed down:cool:
 
I don't believe Efren is selfish

Countless stories over time have come down the pike about Efren's charitable nature and how he helps others. He came from poor beginnings, and evidently, he cares about other people. There was a very good local (filipino) one pocket player in the town i lived in many years ago. When Efren visited, a match was set up and Efren gave him a tremendous spot and beat him for $600 plus. After which, as I heard, Efren gave him his money back.
I don't agree either, about advertising a certain payout, and changing it in the middle of the tournament. Some might call it false advertising.
 
allen_jr said:
I did not say there is anything wrong with a chop, but ALL parties involved must agree. If one party does not agree, then there is no deal. Otherwise, effectively, the party that does not agree is just getting robbed. Efren like his chances, and felt confident, why she have to accept less that what was offered.

This should have been done before the event, and then, if anyone disagrees, they have the option to not play. But you can't do it in the middle, or near the end. What if there were 4 players left, and 1 was an overwhelming favorite? Could the other 3 vote to "redistribute" the prize money and effectively steal money out of the winners pocket before he even got it?

I know all about the difficulties the poolplayers face, if they ALL AGREE to chop, that's fine. But when you allow the majority to change rules after play has begun, thats just wrong. They all knew the prize pool before they started playing.

And yes, settlers helped each other, and many communities help each other... (and many take advantage of the "help") I don't really see how this helps support your point.

This is a voluntary pool tournament, not frontier-ing the wild west.
Click to expand...

let me take this even a step further, it doesn't even matter if all parties agree. you know why, because a player shouldn't even be in that situation in the first place of perhaps deciding the payout for the entire tournament based on his vote. that much pressure should not be on him, period. it just shouldnt be a decision a player has to make in the middle of a tournament. he may be thinking to himself, well, everybody is going to hate me if i decide this way, or whatever, point is a player should not ever be in this position. IF YOU ARE GOING TO DO SOMETHING LIKE THIS IT HAS TO BE AN ANONYMOUS VOTE, THAT IS THE ONLY FAIR WAY.
 
Good point, I didn't think of that.... It shouldn't even be an option. This is what the players meeting is for, to make any decisions before the start of the event. I understand and empathize that the promoters did not get the turnout that they desired. That is completely fine and acceptable, but any changes should be discussed before anyone starts playing.

And people like to compare it to poker. Well, at any final table ALL players must agree to make a chop. If there is one dominating chipleader, that person must accept also... they usually agree to take a bigger portion of the money and end it right there, but I have been in tournaments where the leader refused to chop, end of discussion. Voting 9-1 in favor of changing payouts does not matter.
 
Sorry, I didn't read through all of this.....

I'm very glad that a vote was taken by the players about the payouts. This makes the event more worthwhile for all players in the money. If they would have opened it up to the full 90 players there still would have been a 99% vote for it to pass.

Doing what is "Right" for the Majority of the players is what is "Right" for the event.

Do you think Efren would really have preferred to have a $25,000 first prize and then not have another Galveston next year? Or a far less 1st place payout next year with a lower attendence?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top