How should the IPT deal with gambling on pool?
- Thread starter breakup
- Start date
Sweet Marissa
www.Bella-Muse.com
Where there is pool, there will be gambling. If the IPT wants to play it smart, they should have no opinion on it publicly.breakup said:
let me expand on my thought a bit
If the brass ring is to have a successful professional tour, the integrity of each match should be beyond reproach ( I guess?). Players involved in gambling on matches could ( and has ) lead to dumping/savers which I believe could be detrimental in the long run.
On the other hand much of the entertainment value for the spectator is seeing after hours matching up and big $$ matches.
It's kind of a double edge thing. I believe the WPBA had some sort of position on gambling. Gambling almost killed baseball long ago.
If the brass ring is to have a successful professional tour, the integrity of each match should be beyond reproach ( I guess?). Players involved in gambling on matches could ( and has ) lead to dumping/savers which I believe could be detrimental in the long run.
On the other hand much of the entertainment value for the spectator is seeing after hours matching up and big $$ matches.
It's kind of a double edge thing. I believe the WPBA had some sort of position on gambling. Gambling almost killed baseball long ago.
T
Timberly
Guest
East coast:::::::same thing::::::::::West coastRude Dog said:
Not the same thing. John, you know what road we're headed down right? It's going to be me, you, & a few others saying they're not the same thing... it'll be us against the world... I've seen the threads of the past on this.
We can say they're not the same thing until we're blue in the face but people aren't going to believe us.
Any player found gambling on any IPT events or involved with gambling on IPT events should lose their tour card for a determined amount of time depending on the situation.
All other gambling outside the IPT tour should be ignored.
All other gambling outside the IPT tour should be ignored.
Rude Dog said:
that was rude ...dog
I am not saying they are in any way the same thing. They both however have the potential for problems.
dumping = losing on purpose
saver = spliting prize money from more than one position
Dumping is generally frowned on. Often savers are done openly and whether done in the open or behind the scenes they still affect the integrity of the match in my opinion.
Last edited:
I apologize if I offended you. I DO agree with this post though. Except for the savers affecting the integrity of the match. The 2 players involved in a saver are still trying to win the match they're playing. That's where it gets mixed up for some people who see a post like the one you wrote earlier. They are just insuring themselves a small payoff if they happen to lose because they are playing against a friend. With the entry fees at $500 and you're playing a match against a friend to see who gets in the money, what's wrong with a $100 or $200 saver? Would you just let your friend win? If so, that's not a dump, that's plain stupid. I'm not directing this toward you breakup, I am writing this for others who feel that this is dumping. JMO, peace, John.breakup said:
Rude Dog said:
A fine analysis, IMO. It is impossible for both players to win the given match- why not let them choose to provide the loser with a bit more. Hell, the loser might even end up better placed in the end and end up coming out of his pocket for the other.
Last edited:
Rude Dog said:
When I reread my original post it does appear that I am using the two words (dump/saver) synonymously. Not what I had intended. That would be confusing for someone. Thanks for pointing that out and helping me clarify my position. I was a bit cranky, I am the one to apologize.
cheers
Not to beat the horse too much. The reason I believe savers change the dynamic and possibly ( I should change the word to possibly) the integrity of the match is the old rule of thumb. “never bet more on the side than the match is worth” that is when savers and dumping become cousins.
The IPT should ban players betting on the matches, savers, and dumping. The only justification for savers (which I don't agree with) is a dearth of prize money and having roommates split winnings, etc... Well, the IPT is trying to get prize money to the point players should have to do cheap savers. So the IPT should ban betting on the IPT matches and savers. If a player dumps a lifetime ban is obviously in order. What players do on their own time in terms of matching up is their business. But when it affects, or APPEARS that it COULD affect the outcome of a tournament match, it is the IPT's problem. I think that competition is about standing on your own and playing as hard as you can to win. Dumps, savers etc... clearly undermine the nature of competition.
Some have mentioned poker in this thread. When the WPT started there was talk from people who knew what went on about the rules for tournaments. Some things have gone on for years in poker tournaments that led to some questionable things. People swapping pieces with fellow competitors, playing out of the same bankroll, playing on a team and such. Forget open deals for a minute. Deals in poker make more sense because of the random outcome of a tournament. But for the event to be popular, everybody knows you don't want the public to know the majority of the money was chopped up before the final hand. Still though, the swapping pieces, last longer bets, etc... were a problem for popular poker. Pool has less credibility and less popularity so it needs to adress things that WILL affect the perception of the integrity of the event.
P.S. The other difference is that in poker the prize money all comes from the players. In fact, the casinos take a cut of the money. This is used as a justification by the players to make deals; after all it is all their money. In the IPT the money surely isn't coming from the players.
Some have mentioned poker in this thread. When the WPT started there was talk from people who knew what went on about the rules for tournaments. Some things have gone on for years in poker tournaments that led to some questionable things. People swapping pieces with fellow competitors, playing out of the same bankroll, playing on a team and such. Forget open deals for a minute. Deals in poker make more sense because of the random outcome of a tournament. But for the event to be popular, everybody knows you don't want the public to know the majority of the money was chopped up before the final hand. Still though, the swapping pieces, last longer bets, etc... were a problem for popular poker. Pool has less credibility and less popularity so it needs to adress things that WILL affect the perception of the integrity of the event.
P.S. The other difference is that in poker the prize money all comes from the players. In fact, the casinos take a cut of the money. This is used as a justification by the players to make deals; after all it is all their money. In the IPT the money surely isn't coming from the players.
Last edited: