Have Yale heard the WPA nonsense and the US Open?

[GideonF]

Yes, someone is. In fact there was a cue sports drug test failure five or ten years ago. I can't find any links to it which is just as well since it was some kind of prescription drug confusion, IIRC. I don't think cue sports have many PEDs available.

I think it was recently decided that WADA itself would be in charge of the testing rather than labs selected by the sports organizations. Maybe that was fall-out from the Rio Games.

In order to maintain international recognition the WPA/WCBS must have some level of testing. International competitors can potentially be tested at any time.

There has been testing (and failures) in Snooker. See http://www.independent.co.uk/sport/...-drug-tests-but-remain-anonymous-1155528.html

and http://snookerscene.blogspot.ca/2008/10/snooker-players-tested-out-of.html

My question was whether anyone was testing pool players. Is anyone actually testing pool players? Are they really paying the cost? I would like to know - I don't pretend to have the answer.

I get why they have the WADA policy, but unless they are actually doing the testing, it is window dressing (even if required window dressing).

 

[one stroke]

Promoters want players to come to their events and they get the added money together, whats the consequences if they let people play that arent WPA members and or have fines levied against them for some reason?

Why would one want to be in the good graces of the WPA anyway?

And nobody is twisting thier arms

1

 

[Celtic]

That bold part up there... Lets talk about that. If I sign a contract to work for a major or even minor corporation I get paid. If I get a sponsorship I get paid. Those professional athletes in those other sports you talk about.. They get paid.

I expect pool would compare to golf. You don't get paid a salary, you get paid for wins, by sponsors, but you are also required to act within the rules the PGA holds, even if they don't directly pay you.

 

[Poolhall60561]

Not sure about the details but I'm sure about the timing, BAD

 

[Mark Griffin]

Wpa membership

This policy has been in effect for awhile - it's just that many US players were not aware. Also, I don't know the fees the WPA gets from events, but it is nowhere near the 7.5% mentioned earlier.

I believe they ended up changing that a few years ago to mostly fees from the qualifiers.

This isn't a money- grabbing scheme. The amount are so small it is hardly worth mentioning. $15 a year and a player isn't restricted from other events. I 'think' this is more about a defense for the pressure put on the players by Chinese events.

Ask Ralf - I heard he got caught up in it..........


Markg

 

[BmoreMoney]

I expect pool would compare to golf. You don't get paid a salary, you get paid for wins, by sponsors, but you are also required to act within the rules the PGA holds, even if they don't directly pay you.

Golf may not be the best example; what is it something like you come in 100th in any given tourney and you have already surpassed the YEARLY earnings of 95% of all pro pool players???? These actual #'s may be slightly exaggerated but probably not by much lol. The scale of golf to pool payouts are not only not in the same solar system, but not even in the same galaxy! Can't even begin to compare and that's not even talking about sponsorship dollars!

This policy has been in effect for awhile - it's just that many US players were not aware. Also, I don't know the fees the WPA gets from events, but it is nowhere near the 7.5% mentioned earlier.

I believe they ended up changing that a few years ago to mostly fees from the qualifiers.

This isn't a money- grabbing scheme. The amount are so small it is hardly worth mentioning. $15 a year and a player isn't restricted from other events. I 'think' this is more about a defense for the pressure put on the players by Chinese events.

Ask Ralf - I heard he got caught up in it..........


Markg

Mark, you have brought up a good point that I TOTALLY forgot to bring up. So I do not have exact #'s of participants nor the exact entry fees but with what I do have the point will be well made. So, the WPA has these " qualifiers all over the place - across the globe basically. Everyone enters with the hopes of winning the whole qualifier and getting a spot to PLAY in one of their larger events. Absolutely ZERO ( $0.000000 ) is paid out to ANYONE in every single " qualifier that is held. So basically you have thousands of players shelling out what, on average a couple honies a piece in an effort to get to play in one of the big tourney - tier 1 or tier 2 or whatever? Not one penny is paid out to ANY of the participants of ANY qualifier. In what world exactly does that sound like it's good for or helping the players of these " qualifiers "??? Now yes, money collected from these " qualifiers " does go to the " added money used in the tiered events but would anyone like to take a guess at real #'s as far as what is collected as to what is paid out exactly???

This is not even taking into account the the players of these " qualifiers " have to spend on travel, food, and lodging ( in addition to entry of course ). I guess some could say, well it's giving the little guy a shot ". Yes, we'll the little guy a
so gets a " shot " when he pays his entry at DCC or The Open or wherever - but if he plays well and " cashes " at one of these events that exactly what he gets - CASH! Not some one in a million lottery ticket that has been cut up before he even gets it in his hands.

 

[GideonF]

This policy has been in effect for awhile - it's just that many US players were not aware. Also, I don't know the fees the WPA gets from events, but it is nowhere near the 7.5% mentioned earlier.



I believe they ended up changing that a few years ago to mostly fees from the qualifiers.



This isn't a money- grabbing scheme. The amount are so small it is hardly worth mentioning. $15 a year and a player isn't restricted from other events. I 'think' this is more about a defense for the pressure put on the players by Chinese events.



Ask Ralf - I heard he got caught up in it..........





Markg

Mark,

Thanks for your perspective. Two things.

First, players ARE prohibited from entering non-sanctioned events if they are big enough or international enough.

Second, if you paid a sanctioning fee for the US Open 8 or 10 you may indeed be right about the fees actually charged, but the 7.5 % comes straight off their website: http://www.wpa-pool.com/web/tournament_sanctioning_catalogue

"Single entry events will be subject to an entry fee. This fee is not added to the prize fund. The amount of the entry fee will be determined by the Executive Board. Team events, events that already attract an entry fee, or other events so decided by the Executive Board will be subject to a sanction fee. The total cost of sanctioning is negotiated between the WPA and organiser, but will not be less than 7.5% of total added money in all categories. There are no fees applied to any entry fee money that is added to the prize fund."

 

[jasonlaus]

Can't we just use Fargo Rate and all get along?

Top 200,300, 500 whatever are pro and don't need to qualify, everybody else needs to qualify......or better yet, a lower ranked player can call them out at $500, $1,000 or some number in a race to 15 and TAKE their spot - now we're creating interest!
Jason

 

[Mark Griffin]

WPA fees

Gideon,

They must be members to play. No different than any other event. That is not prohibiting anything.

The link I followed was from 2009. I know they don't charge anywhere near the 7.5%. Not here to argue - just telling you what actually occurs. I think you'll find the website is out of date.

Mark

​

Mark,

Thanks for your perspective. Two things.

First, players ARE prohibited from entering non-sanctioned events if they are big enough or international enough.

Second, if you paid a sanctioning fee for the US Open 8 or 10 you may indeed be right about the fees actually charged, but the 7.5 % comes straight off their website: http://www.wpa-pool.com/web/tournament_sanctioning_catalogue

"Single entry events will be subject to an entry fee. This fee is not added to the prize fund. The amount of the entry fee will be determined by the Executive Board. Team events, events that already attract an entry fee, or other events so decided by the Executive Board will be subject to a sanction fee. The total cost of sanctioning is negotiated between the WPA and organiser, but will not be less than 7.5% of total added money in all categories. There are no fees applied to any entry fee money that is added to the prize fund."

 

[Mark Griffin]

BmoreMoney

I'm not sure where your math or experience comes from, but you are not talking the same numbers I am talking. You make it sound like there are hundreds of qualifiers all over the place - not true. I was referring to the 2-3 qualifiers held at some world championships - like you I don't know the numbers or entry fee. But I'll bet the WPA makes under $10,000 ( before expenses) on a $200,000 + event.

And there are only a couple of these a year. Membership has costs. You know that snooker doesn't guarantee their prize fund? If the sponsors go away, so does the game.

So saying that WPA should guarantee the prize fund is not realistic. I think (and hope) we all want what is best for pool. Good luck to everyone.


Market

Mark, you have brought up a good point that I TOTALLY forgot to bring up. So I do not have exact #'s of participants nor the exact entry fees but with what I do have the point will be well made. So, the WPA has these " qualifiers all over the place - across the globe basically. Everyone enters with the hopes of winning the whole qualifier and getting a spot to PLAY in one of their larger events. Absolutely ZERO ( $0.000000 ) is paid out to ANYONE in every single " qualifier that is held. So basically you have thousands of players shelling out what, on average a couple honies a piece in an effort to get to play in one of the big tourney - tier 1 or tier 2 or whatever? Not one penny is paid out to ANY of the participants of ANY qualifier. In what world exactly does that sound like it's good for or helping the players of these " qualifiers "??? Now yes, money collected from these " qualifiers " does go to the " added money used in the tiered events but would anyone like to take a guess at real #'s as far as what is collected as to what is paid out exactly???

This is not even taking into account the the players of these " qualifiers " have to spend on travel, food, and lodging ( in addition to entry of course ). I guess some could say, well it's giving the little guy a shot ". Yes, we'll the little guy a
so gets a " shot " when he pays his entry at DCC or The Open or wherever - but if he plays well and " cashes " at one of these events that exactly what he gets - CASH! Not some one in a million lottery ticket that has been cut up before he even gets it in his hands.

 

[ITguy]

Gideon
Aren't we missing the important part of the fees.
There are no fees applied to any entry fee money that is added to the prize fund."

Jim

 

[BmoreMoney]

Gideon,

They must be members to play. No different than any other event. That is not prohibiting anything.

The link I followed was from 2009. I know they don't charge anywhere near the 7.5%. Not here to argue - just telling you what actually occurs. I think you'll find the website is out of date.

Mark

​

Yes we are talking about the same thing, THAT THEO DO HAVE TO BE MEYERS - and this is the crux of the issue. More or less the WPA trying to force membership while also limiting outside opportunities .

I'm not sure where your math or experience comes from, but you are not talking the same numbers I am talking. You make it sound like there are hundreds of qualifiers all over the place - not true. I was referring to the 2-3 qualifiers held at some world championships - like you I don't know the numbers or entry fee. But I'll bet the WPA makes under $10,000 ( before expenses) on a $200,000 + event.

And there are only a couple of these a year. Membership has costs. You know that snooker doesn't guarantee their prize fund? If the sponsors go away, so does the game.

So saying that WPA should guarantee the prize fund is not realistic. I think (and hope) we all want what is best for pool. Good luck to everyone.


Market

I never said hundreds of qualifiers, I said across the globe which IS accurate. and do you not know there are hundreds of players at each qualifier? More importantly is as I stated there are ZERO payouts at any of these qualifiers, all money going to WPA. You made no mention of how much of that collected money goes to prize fund and how much stays with WPA as " fees "???? I will admit I am not an expert when it comes to forensically disecting WPA books, from everything that I have recently read and seen ( all from people in the biz - promoters, to players, td's etc everyone is throwing that 7.5 around and that is on top of other claimed administrativefees or what not. I believe you have some type of personal stake in this discussion ( which obviously you do and that's cool I understand ) but the WPA is taking in ALOT of cash and truly isn't doing anything for the players other than the preexisting tournies, and believe you me what is being taken in DOES not come real close to the added money . They wanna get theirs - fine by me. really it is, just don't try to do what they are currently trying to do and squeeze everyone to death.

EVERYTHING ELSE ASIDE, WHAT I STILL HAVE NOT HEARD YOU SAY IS WHAT EXACTLY IS WPA DOING FOR THEO PLAYERS???

 

[BmoreMoney]

Can't we just use Fargo Rate and all get along?

Top 200,300, 500 whatever are pro and don't need to qualify, everybody else needs to qualify......or better yet, a lower ranked player can call them out at $500, $1,000 or some number in a race to 15 and TAKE their spot - now we're creating interest!
Jason

^^^^^ Love it J!!!! lol ^^^^^ fo wheel yo! Hey Rock season is gonna be closing, where u be now adays? up North or down south bro?lmk, I'm trying to do one more trip this season!

 

[GideonF]

Gideon,



They must be members to play. No different than any other event. That is not prohibiting anything.



The link I followed was from 2009. I know they don't charge anywhere near the 7.5%. Not here to argue - just telling you what actually occurs. I think you'll find the website is out of date.



Mark

​

Mark,

The website may indeed be out of date (although some content is recent, so they must have updated somethings and not others). I'm glad you can provide us with better info.

But I still don't see where you are coming from on the no prohibition issue. If it was just "you must be a WPA member to play in WPA sanctioned events", that would be fine. But there contract provides that WPA members cannot play (I.e. are prohibited from playing) in certain events. How isn't that prohibiting them?

 

[BmoreMoney]

Mark,

The website may indeed be out of date (although some content is recent, so they must have updated somethings and not others). I'm glad you can provide us with better info.

But I still don't see where you are coming from on the no prohibition issue. If it was just "you must be a WPA member to play in WPA sanctioned events", that would be fine. But there contract provides that WPA members cannot play (I.e. are prohibited from playing) in certain events. How isn't that prohibiting them?

^^^ this ^^^^.

BTW Mark, congrats on your new room! I hear it's awesome and look forward to checking it out sometime.

 

[Mark Griffin]

Wpa

BmoreMoney

I respectfully disagree.
The WPA is the governing body of pool. It is North America that is out of sync with the rest of the world. The WPA addresses the issue as a global situation - while many in the US look at it as a national situation.

There are very few 'high tier' WPA events every year. All other countries already require membership in their federation to be able to play - so they have basically complied with the membership policy.

I also don't know the actual numbers of qualifiers, but it is not a large number and I BELIEVE this is the method instead of assessing a % based fee. I think a couple years ago there were 60 or players trying to qualify for 4-6 spots ( at a China event).

I don't understand how any of this restricts a players ability to play. They can resign their card, it's only a yearly card. If you want to bowl, dart, golf or any other sport, you have to be a member of the organization! $15 is a token membership. Good grief - a movie ticket is close to $15.

As far as how much goes to the added money. That is the promoters responsibility. If a promoter adds $10-100,000 - that is his responsibility - not the WPA. They only get 'involved' in larger added events.

I'm not invested in this at all. I run amateur events but also really like to do pro events. I believe FargiRate is the future if pool. I want pool to get better and quit destroying itself. But it has to be a business. Membership has its cost.

I still say Mr. bond has a better grasp than most. But the savvy players will be in favor of the $15. Without the WPA, the us won't even gave a presence on the world stage.

I really don't have the time or inclination to get into multiple posts on this topic. If necessary, we can agree to disagree. But we should all be trying to improve Pool's position. Hopefully we all are going to the same destination-we just are taking different routes.

Btw- Griff's should be open in a week. It is awesome!!!!
We'll have some pictures and some video up on www.griffslv.com pretty soon.

Mark Griffin

 

[BmoreMoney]

BmoreMoney

I respectfully disagree.
The WPA is the governing body of pool. It is North America that is out of sync with the rest of the world. The WPA addresses the issue as a global situation - while many in the US look at it as a national situation.

There are very few 'high tier' WPA events every year. All other countries already require membership in their federation to be able to play - so they have basically complied with the membership policy.

I also don't know the actual numbers of qualifiers, but it is not a large number and I BELIEVE this is the method instead of assessing a % based fee. I think a couple years ago there were 60 or players trying to qualify for 4-6 spots ( at a China event).

I don't understand how any of this restricts a players ability to play. They can resign their card, it's only a yearly card. If you want to bowl, dart, golf or any other sport, you have to be a member of the organization! $15 is a token membership. Good grief - a movie ticket is close to $15.

As far as how much goes to the added money. That is the promoters responsibility. If a promoter adds $10-100,000 - that is his responsibility - not the WPA. They only get 'involved' in larger added events.

I'm not invested in this at all. I run amateur events but also really like to do pro events. I believe FargiRate is the future if pool. I want pool to get better and quit destroying itself. But it has to be a business. Membership has its cost.

I still say Mr. bond has a better grasp than most. But the savvy players will be in favor of the $15. Without the WPA, the us won't even gave a presence on the world stage.

I really don't have the time or inclination to get into multiple posts on this topic. If necessary, we can agree to disagree. But we should all be trying to improve Pool's position. Hopefully we all are going to the same destination-we just are taking different routes.

Btw- Griff's should be open in a week. It is awesome!!!!
We'll have some pictures and some video up on www.griffslv.com pretty soon.

Mark Griffin

Yes I agree, it's getting past my bedtime too lol. And yes, I'm sure we both want whatever is going to be good for pool, the players, and the spectators. I will briefly respond to your last post and that's it for me for now. In regards to them " being able to turn their card in " - yes, this is correct. However from what I've read per WPA that would disqualify them for a minimum of one year before being able to reapply and acceptance at that point would not be garanteed. I think that statement is well understood by most. So yes one could turn their card in but it would seem WPA IS saying if you do that you are no longer welcome. This isn't the end of the world but there are several really well paying WPA tourney throughout the year, hence the only reason anyone would even Co side this contract in the first place as opposed to placing it where the sun don't shine lol. Have a great night and once again good luck with your room.

 

[Fuji-whopper]

Pretty interesting that in the contract they get their own website wrong, it's www.world-billiards.com which isn't a big thing but you won't get anywhere typing in their contract specifics. Also "anti doping" or "drug testing" doesn't give you any information at all, the post/contract/announcement for the US Open doesn't exist on it either.

Edit: here is something about anti doping but it's on a different website and from 2015:
http://www.wpa-pool.com/pdf/web/WCBS_Anti_Doping_CODE_2015.pdf

The US Open isn't on their calendar:
http://www.wpa-pool.com/web/sports_calendar

And they haven't updated the "official" set of US Open rules with their contract including the Anti-Doping bit:
http://forums.azbilliards.com/showthread.php?t=437076


Neil

 

[NlceGuy]

There is only one thing that can help pool, and that is sponsorship money. The benefit of having a contract like this is that it guarantees a body of respectable pool players willing to participate in sponsored events. Sponsors working with WPA would know that all the players with membership will be inclined to show up, act respectable, and promote the event rather than jet for other events that pay well. This would give more confidence to potential sponsors with money knowing their event won’t flop due to lack of player participation.

Players themselves are shortsighted and don’t see immediate benefit, but if they look at this from the sponsorship point of view this is only a plus for them too. A more organized body of pool players means a more attractive sponsorship opportunity, not just towards existing major events, but even potential events with money. More WPA sanctioned events means more control over schedule, and with a little organization players would have less schedule conflicts. In the long run, having more events to play in, more sponsorship money and hopefully a better competitive stage would only benefit the players.

If we want the sport to grow the players must be organized and responsible for participating in sponsored events, and this WPA contract semi-guarantees that. The requirements on the players is actually a lot less restrictive than many of the other major sports (pga, atp… etc.), and to previous posters saying they pay better, that is true but they are paid due to sponsored events also, having a tour card definitely does NOT guarantee you a salary. (It just looks that way because often times these other sports have events where the last place finisher are being paid better than pool’s first :frown

All that being said, nobody can say for sure if WPA really has the right people with the right vision for the job. I do know that there are a lot of pool fans around the world, especially in Asia and the middle-east area, and those places have a lot of people willing to put serious money into the sport. There are also many companies around the world making pool products that are raking in some serious money, but they see no incentive to sponsor players or events because there is simply no set stage for these top pro players to perform on. Something needs to change and this is a logical first step, and I’m optimistically hoping that WPA sees it this way too.

 

[chefjeff]

Perhaps it is still too early for wanting one organization for all the world's pool players.

I'm kind of in the spontaneous-order camp where I like having various entities trying to do what each one can, in spite of what the rest are trying to do. I think this will yield the best outcome by having the best, most successful group winning the day via competition.

Grabbing onto the entity of the day and hoping is one strategy. But perhaps the next group will have better systems and answers. Who knows until it happens?

With that said, I'd like to thank everyone here who is working to the betterment of pool worldwide.

Jeff Livingston