$%^# Handicapped Tournaments!

[Snapshot9]

Basically

a lot of Pool players can not afford to play in bigger tournaments
all the time without some type of payback. I would not keep
playing in big tournaments all the time if I did not feel like I
could at least get into the money to help offset my expenses.
And better players are usually gamblers, and they view a Pool
opportunity from a monetary standpoint, not to just go out and
have fun. It is NO fun getting beat all the time. I usually have to
finance larger tournaments from smaller tournament winnings to
begin with since I am on disability now. I didn't so much when
I was working full time. When you become one of the better players,
you empower yourself some, and one of the side benefits is to make
money at a hobby you love anyway.

 

[nfty9er]

There is a difference, however

I totally agree with Fred that the 3 ball should have been placed where it was before your opponent hit it. Watch the movie "Bagger Vance" where a golfer moves some grass under his ball and the ball moves. He called the foul on himself. This is an attitude the game of pool needs more of!!

As for whether you should continue to play or not, hey, that's up to you. If you want to grow as a player and a human being, I suggest you figure out how to take more responsiblility for your life and not put it off on others. You can't control what the other player does or what the TD does so why worry about it. Worry about your abilities and integrity.

So what you are saying is to just ignore the rule the opponent has the option of leaving the ball lay or have it moved back(by him). There was no foul commited here , whereas in the golf scenario there was. Are you saying morally it should be moved back? I don't think so. As I stated earlier , you have to pay some price since it is not a foul although you moved a ball. That is the compromise for the rule in the first place, unless of course you are playing non-cueball fouls too and touching any ball is a foul.

 

[barrett9ball]

While this may be fine for a larger center, in a smaller pool location there is little choice. Around here there are perhaps 2 open tournaments a year, and the entry fees are 10x the handicapped tourneys. While it is great to say "I'd rather play a pro even", it would mean I'd play exactly 0 times a year. The weekly handicapped tournaments around here are frequented by all levels of players looking for some competition. It doesn't seem to bother the best players around to have to shoot against a C player giving them 2 on the wire (to 7) and the 7. They understand that this kind of match is a bit different strategicly than playing someone of their own skill even. They understand that it is most often the handicapping system when they loose to a C who flukes the 7 or 8 or 9 after hammering the balls (of course the C's see it differently, but who cares, as someone/Fred? said, let them have their moment of 'glory'). The A players understand that without the handicapped tourneys there would be no tournaments around here, there would be no participation. Having said all that, the better players are most often in the money, regardless of the handicaps.

Dave

Dave. I think if you have a system that is actually working then thats great. I was just giving my perspective from my area. In my area (Northern Maryland) we have a lot of problems people trying to "play the system" and it just completly took the fun and competitive spirit out of handicapping tournaments or leagues. It just seems like (and I'm generalizing from my own experience) many of the players just try to stick with that low rank even if there game does improve. I think the ranking becomes a crutch. Many of the leages make it difficult also with only allowing a total of 21 cumlative skill level to play each night. It puts many players in a position where if they start playing better and recieve a higher skill level that it could jeopardize the team as whole by making the sum of there skill levels too high to play all the matches. We did come up with something last year that seemed to make the c level players happy. We weren't handicapping the weekly tournaments. However, each week the winner would have to sit out the following 2 weeks. That way we didn't have the same 2 people in the final every week. If you or anyone else has a handicapping system that is working I think that is wonderful. My whole problem in essence really isn't in handicapping, rather the misuse of handicapping. take care Dave, Ron

 

[DaveK]

If you or anyone else has a handicapping system that is working I think that is wonderful. My whole problem in essence really isn't in handicapping, rather the misuse of handicapping.

I totally understand your position. The handicapped tournaments around here are run by people who know everyone's speed pretty well, that's the nice thing about a small city scene. There really isn't a bunch of sand-bagging or bitching by A's, B's, C's or novices. And they all show up regularly for the same weekly tournaments.

The bar leagues are another story though. Sand-bagging by some of the better players, stacking teams via ringers, etc. are all too common. I do not play those leagues anymore, rather I play in a tiered singles 9 Ball league where we play even. That's what I prefer, to play 9-Ball. I do not enjoy playing games like "How do I get a good spot", "How do we get a trip to Vegas", or "How do I play 9-Ball against a player who is playing 7-8-9 Ball" or vice versa.

Dave

 

[Rickw]

So what you are saying is to just ignore the rule the opponent has the option of leaving the ball lay or have it moved back(by him). There was no foul commited here , whereas in the golf scenario there was. Are you saying morally it should be moved back? I don't think so. As I stated earlier , you have to pay some price since it is not a foul although you moved a ball. That is the compromise for the rule in the first place, unless of course you are playing non-cueball fouls too and touching any ball is a foul.

The way we play it is the player that did not move the ball has the option of putting the ball back where it was or leaving it where it lays. The original poster indicated he wanted to leave it where it was because this gave him a better chance of running out. My point is, and it's a moral one, I think the player that has the option would impress me if he/she put the ball back where it was originally even if it impedes their chances of running out. This is called integrity as opposed to winning by using the rules to your advantage. I'm a big fan of integrity. Besides, I want to win a game because I truly deserve to win. If my oponent isn't watching me while I'm playing and I foul the cb, I'm going to call the foul on myself because I think that's the right thing to do.

 

[sixpack]

The way we play it is the player that did not move the ball has the option of putting the ball back where it was or leaving it where it lays. The original poster indicated he wanted to leave it where it was because this gave him a better chance of running out. My point is, and it's a moral one, I think the player that has the option would impress me if he/she put the ball back where it was originally even if it impedes their chances of running out. This is called integrity as opposed to winning by using the rules to your advantage. I'm a big fan of integrity. Besides, I want to win a game because I truly deserve to win. If my oponent isn't watching me while I'm playing and I foul the cb, I'm going to call the foul on myself because I think that's the right thing to do.

I understand your point about moving the ball back, but I don't think that integrity dictates to move it back. In fact, I think integrity dictates that you choose the best option for yourself. Integrity as defined in the dictionary is "firm adherence to a code of especially moral or artistic values." In the case you're describing integrity would dictate that you do as the rule states and choose where you would like it. The rule exists to keep people from arguing the finer points about where the CB was originally and to provide some penalty for carelessly moving a ball. To do otherwise would be an inconsistent application of the rules and would ultimately damage the integrity of the rules.

If someone kicks at a ball and misses, do you take ball in hand or do you shoot it from where it lies? It used to be that accidentally moving a ball was ball in hand. Would you not take BIH in that circumstance? Sometimes I would and sometimes I wouldn't, but if I was in a tournament, I would take the BIH to protect the field.

Once at a tournament I played in, a player was about 25 minutes late for his match and had been forfeited. The TD talked to his opponent and said that if he was willing, the TD would not forfeit the player, but would instead have the match. The match was played and the player that would have forfeited went on to win the tournament. To protect the integrity of the tournament and the other players, the TD should have enforced the rule. By not doing so, he hurt the players that managed to show up for their matches on time. I thought it was noble of the player to be willing to play, but it was still wrong within the context of the rules.

You are correct about integrity when you talk about calling a foul on yourself. I do that every time and I expect everybody I'm playing to do the same. You have my utmost respect for that philosophy.

Cheers,
Regas

 

[Rickw]

We could go on and on with this discussion. Suffice it to say, I just don't like winning or losing just because of the rules. If I'm playing someone who is clearly playing better than me but I win because the rules just happen to favor me, I'm not happy. I want to win because I deserve to win in my eyes not because of some rule. I played on a bar league a little while back and they have some crazy rules and many of the league players are so frigging uptight about the rules it's rediculous. If your shirt touches a ball, it's a foul (well, they changed that rule now so that the ball has to move before it's a foul). I guess I'm just more interested in who the better player really is. Of course, over time, you know who the better players are because they do win more in the long run.

I don't think we really differ that much but I just feel that the real intent of the rule when a ball is accidently touched is that it is up to the other player to put the ball back where he/she thought it was and if he/she doesn't know, they can leave it where it is. The original poster knew where the ball was and chose to leave it where it was simply because it favored him. This is wrong in my opinion even though it is "legal" to do so.

 

[nfty9er]

You mis interpreted

The way we play it is the player that did not move the ball has the option of putting the ball back where it was or leaving it where it lays. The original poster indicated he wanted to leave it where it was because this gave him a better chance of running out. My point is, and it's a moral one, I think the player that has the option would impress me if he/she put the ball back where it was originally even if it impedes their chances of running out. This is called integrity as opposed to winning by using the rules to your advantage. I'm a big fan of integrity. Besides, I want to win a game because I truly deserve to win. If my oponent isn't watching me while I'm playing and I foul the cb, I'm going to call the foul on myself because I think that's the right thing to do.

That is what I said(the opponent) the one that did not move the ball. Let me ask you Rick, as I think I answered already though. Why do you think they have that rule? If the player is moving balls he deserves to be penalized in some way since they are playing cue ball fouls only. This rule prevents people intentionally moving balls to benefit them. So your integrity is more important than playing it according to the rules and his lack of integrity will cost you the game. I don't think so. If the rule is there you are not taking advantage. You didn't move the balls. If you are in a tournament do you accept winning the game if you slop in the 9? You sure don't deserve to win in that scenario but those are the rules.

 

[sixpack]

We could go on and on with this discussion. Suffice it to say, I just don't like winning or losing just because of the rules. If I'm playing someone who is clearly playing better than me but I win because the rules just happen to favor me, I'm not happy. I want to win because I deserve to win in my eyes not because of some rule. I played on a bar league a little while back and they have some crazy rules and many of the league players are so frigging uptight about the rules it's rediculous. If your shirt touches a ball, it's a foul (well, they changed that rule now so that the ball has to move before it's a foul). I guess I'm just more interested in who the better player really is. Of course, over time, you know who the better players are because they do win more in the long run.

I don't think we really differ that much but I just feel that the real intent of the rule when a ball is accidently touched is that it is up to the other player to put the ball back where he/she thought it was and if he/she doesn't know, they can leave it where it is. The original poster knew where the ball was and chose to leave it where it was simply because it favored him. This is wrong in my opinion even though it is "legal" to do so.

I don't think we're that far apart either. I agree with everything you said about players nitting on the rules. In fact, sometimes I put it back or let my opponent put it back before I choose, and don't make a stink, usually just for fun though.

If playing league or tournament, however, you owe it to your team or the rest of the field to enforce the rules.

What I disagreed with was the fact that you said there is a moral high ground to moving it back, no matter which spot is better for you. I think that if you choose to not follow the rules to your disadvantage, that is your choice. I don't think it's fair to criticize others for making a different choice.

Cheers,
Regas

 

[Rickw]

If I'm criticizing others, then I'm sorry. I didn't intend to do that. It's just that the way the original poster described why he wanted it left was because he wanted the advantage. Personally speaking only, I would rather put the ball back where I thought it was even if that means I don't have a shot.

 

[Snapshot9]

When it is important ...

the match is played strictly adhering to the rules,
when the match is not so important there is usually
a little latitude in the rules. For instance, on many
challenge 9 ball tables when playing players will not
'cheese' the 9 by shooting an obvious combo on it.
Ever see someone do that when they are playing
a $100 set ........ no, you don't ..... then they play
strictly by the rules, and the rules state combos are
allowed. Think you would say, 'Oh, just move the ball
back" after your opponent comitted an obvious foul when
an important match is going? If you do that, you are
stupid and YOU are cheating yourself out of a FAIR game.