Hypocrites

Kid Dynomite

Kid Dynomite

Dennis (Michael) Wilson
Silver Member
When players were not paid at the open, The UPA was the bad guy. When Max, Charlie and a few others stood up they were told to quit there yapping. When it happens to 200 players and them specifically, then they come running for Union this and Union that. I really feel bad for Danny Harriman. He was looking for players support and a boycott and got BUTT KISS.

Now, those same players that refused to stand with him in solidarity are getting the IPT shaft. These same players let Earl Strickland shark the great Asian player at the Open and looked the other way. Isn't Karma something else!!! Or is this as Malcolm X put it "the chickens coming home to roost"

That's all I have to say.

Sincerely,
Kid
Dynomite
 
Kid Dynomite said:
When players were not paid at the open, The UPA was the bad guy. When Max, Charlie and a few others stood up they were told to quit there yapping. When it happens to 200 players and them specifically, then they come running for Union this and Union that. I really feel bad for Danny Harriman. He was looking for players support and a boycott and got BUTT KISS.

Now, those same players that refused to stand with him in solidarity are getting the IPT shaft. These same players let Earl Strickland shark the great Asian player at the Open and looked the other way. Isn't Karma something else!!! Or is this as Malcolm X put it "the chickens coming home to roost"

That's all I have to say.

Sincerely,
Kid
Dynomite
Click to expand...
Your points may be good but, I really don't see any since in, placing blame. Hopefully, good can come from all of this. It is important, to learn from the past, but dwelling on it, is counter-productive. This is not a good time for divisive rhetoric, but then again, is there ever a good time for it?

Tracy
 
As the great Herodotus said "the past is history." What matters now is how the players deal with the very problematic and quite disturbing present. If they focus on their differences of the past, they will be less likely to pull together to resolve the issues they face at this critical juncture in the history of our sport.
 
Hello Dynamite

I agree with what Kid Dynamite has to say, onced I was at a WPBA event and when there was a decision to be made all of the players voted on it and there was structure. I don't think that has ever been the case on the men's tours, I believe this is one reason their tour has has the success it has. I don't think karma has much to do with the players not being paid, I have a tendency to agree with Blackjack in that there has to be more structure and org. before any changes will occur. Pool is a tough sport to promote obviously, the IPT is pool's last chance and I would still like to be hopeful that it can revive with a stronger sponsor and more org.
Sincerely, Danny Harriman
 
Kid Dynomite said:
He was looking for players support and a boycott and got BUTT KISS.
Click to expand...

Maybe. But maybe what he got was bupkis.

(The word bupkiss, often also spelled bupkis, means, 'absolutely nothing'. In negative constructions (for example, "He didn't know bupkis"), it means 'the least thing; anything at all'.

Bupkis is a borrowing from Yiddish, where it literally means 'beans'. The reference is to how inexpensive and common beans are.

The word bupkis is first found in American English sources in the early 1940s, but it did not become common in non-Jewish-related writings until the late 1960s.)
 
It All Depends Where & How You Grow Up

After reading JAM's reply, I think someone should speak to Allen.
Doug
( it can't hurt to ask/talk )





.
 
Last edited:
Danny Harriman said:
I was at a WPBA event and when there was a decision to be made all of the players voted on it and there was structure. I don't think that has ever been the case on the men's tours, I believe this is one reason their tour has has the success it has.
Click to expand...
Danny, I believe the main difference is that the WPBA is run by the women players, themselves. They do not rely on outsiders to run their tour.
If the men ever get together, and trust each other enough to run a tour, they can have the same structure. As long as they sit back and rely on promoters to run the show, they will remain in the same situation they are in now. JMHO.

Blackjack has a lot of great ideas, he is well respected and is very dedicated to pool. However, if you got all the players together and took a vote on whether Blackjack should be in charge of a player run tour, whould he win? Could anyone get a clear majority of the votes? Somehow, I find it difficult to believe that the men players could agree on anyone.
 
I'm going to come out of left field and suggest Allen Hopkins as the ideal person to run a successful men's tour. He seems to ALWAYS -- and I mean ALWAYS -- have the players' interests in mind when he speaks.

On the offs, he has relayed quite a few good ideas. Hopkins to me seems very innovative, as evidenced by his annual Super Billiards Expo and co-promotion of Skins and other pool extravaganzas.

As a personal character trait I admire, he is a humble American professional player and does not need the pats on the back to make him feel whole.

Yep, I like Allen Hopkins, the player, the promoter, and the person. Whether he'd be interested in something like this, though, is another matter. Forming a legitimate governing body of men's pool is a mighty big undertaking. :o

JAM
 
http://www.imtatennis.com/pdf/IMTA_newsletter_0408_en.pdf
http://www.imtatennis.com/pdf/IMTA_issues_en.pdf

I just found these pages. This is pretty much what I've been saying. Let the players have an organization for themselves that anyone can belong to who is playing in pay tournaments. I would say it should ideally be free, and it should not have power to fine or regulate the players themselves and thereby avoid player infighting.

Picking a person to head such an organization is putting the cart in front of the horse. Allen might be a great person to run a pro pool tour, but I think a players organization should be separate and work with all of the existing tours also.

Allen would obviously be a good candidate for president of a players org or head of a tour association with his great experience as a champion player and successful promoter. His checks tend to clear, too.

unknownpro
 
Just my thoughts ....

Allen Hopkins would indeed be a good one to form such an organization, he has the respect from promoters, players, and other assiciated people and companies.

This is just my opinion mind you, but if Behrman was really a stand up guy, he would have MADE HIS SON make good on the money that is owed to Danny Harriman, even if he had to do it himself. It's called being an honorable man and father. How many of you would have let your son get away with something like that?
 
Snapshot9 said:
Allen Hopkins would indeed be a good one to form such an organization, he has the respect from promoters, players, and other assiciated people and companies.
Click to expand...

Well, he's got my vote, FWIW! :p

Snapshot9 said:
This is just my opinion mind you, but if Behrman was really a stand up guy, he would have MADE HIS SON make good on the money that is owed to Danny Harriman, even if he had to do it himself. It's called being an honorable man and father. How many of you would have let your son get away with something like that?
Click to expand...

Speaking as a parent, there comes a time when your kids' problems are just that, THEIR problems.

It doesn't do your kids any good if you clean up messes they created. As they are growing up, it is important that they learn to pick themselves up when they fall down. Hopefully, when they do fall down, they aren't in a hole so deep that they can't get out. In the long run, hopefully, children will make the right decisions in life, but as the saying goes, you can lead a horse to the water, but you can't make them drink it! :o

JAM
 
Instead of looking at the PGA as a model for a tour, they should look no further than the WPBA.

Personally, I would like to see just one organization and one tour...which was part of the allure of the IPT. I do not think that men and women players should be segregated into separate tours. There are several women players that have shown that they can go toe-to-toe with the men, and hold their own.

I think part of the WPBA's success has been that there is respect amongst the players for one another. I do not think this is the case within the men's ranks. Until everyone can learn to have respect and trust in one another, and the willingness to work together toward the common good, I don't think a unified front can ever happen.

I hope I am wrong...because the pay-off to a unified organization and tour could be just exactly what the sport has been needing. The result could be the respect that the sport has been seeking...from promoters, media, and spectators alike.

Lisa
 
Kid Dynomite said:
When players were not paid at the open, The UPA was the bad guy. When Max, Charlie and a few others stood up they were told to quit there yapping. When it happens to 200 players and them specifically, then they come running for Union this and Union that. I really feel bad for Danny Harriman. He was looking for players support and a boycott and got BUTT KISS.

Now, those same players that refused to stand with him in solidarity are getting the IPT shaft. These same players let Earl Strickland shark the great Asian player at the Open and looked the other way. Isn't Karma something else!!! Or is this as Malcolm X put it "the chickens coming home to roost"

That's all I have to say.

Sincerely,
Kid
Dynomite
Click to expand...
Your post began with a little of support until you had to attack someone.What was the purpose of attacking Earl to try to make a point?You proved to have no class at all and therefore your post deserves no support at all.
 
He Deserves it and was not "Attacked"

To Elizabeth,

Please check the Header!!! I am not alone in my feelings about the behavior of anyone that is disruptive and destroying the game. It is nothing personal to him. I would say and post the same for anyone that behaves poorly.

I question your motives to even post on the topic when you clearly do not have the moral "HIGH GROUND". He was not attacked, I commented on his lack of support for Danny Harriman and his behavior being ignored because his competition was not AMERICAN. Just like on TV at the IPT with another Foreign Player. Do you notice a trend?????

CJ Wiley and Sigel are afforded the courtesy of sportsmanship. I guess if you aren’t American why bother to be courteous??????

Please note KEY WORD "Comment". If you do not like my COMMENTS then "Don’t Read". This is a forum for comment. Quote "Comment" :eek:

Peace and Hair Grease

Kid
Dynomite
 
Snapshot9 said:
Allen Hopkins would indeed be a good one to form such an organization, he has the respect from promoters, players, and other assiciated people and companies.

This is just my opinion mind you, but if Behrman was really a stand up guy, he would have MADE HIS SON make good on the money that is owed to Danny Harriman, even if he had to do it himself. It's called being an honorable man and father. How many of you would have let your son get away with something like that?
Click to expand...

Since nobody else mentioned it, I will...Allen has already been "at the reins" of a men's professional organization (PPPA, 25+ yrs ago), and saw the same thing that exists today. He also, IIRC, was on the board, with CJ Wiley's short-lived PCA, in an attempt to bring reason and fairness to men's professional pool. Lack of cohesion among the players, and too many people wanting to "be boss" (or get their perceived "cut"), contribute to a continuing problem. It's been there for the past 3 or 4 decades, and it hasn't gone away yet. Allen Hopkins has his plate full, producing a very successful annual event, that satisfies professional players, amateur players, vendors, and fans alike. He is also very active in producing television events now. I would think he would want no part of spearheading a venture like what is needed. jmo

Scott Lee
www.poolknowledge.com
 
Rich R. said:
Danny, I believe the main difference is that the WPBA is run by the women players, themselves. They do not rely on outsiders to run their tour.
If the men ever get together, and trust each other enough to run a tour, they can have the same structure. As long as they sit back and rely on promoters to run the show, they will remain in the same situation they are in now. JMHO.

Blackjack has a lot of great ideas, he is well respected and is very dedicated to pool. However, if you got all the players together and took a vote on whether Blackjack should be in charge of a player run tour, whould he win? Could anyone get a clear majority of the votes? Somehow, I find it difficult to believe that the men players could agree on anyone.
Click to expand...

The problem is that nobody should be "In Charge" - there should be structure - but decisions should be based on the conscience and votes of the members of the tour. We shouldnt have anybody sitting in a glass tower calling the shots. That has never worked in the past and it will never work in the future. Am I the person for the job? Probably not.

There are several people within our industry that have the professional experience, education, and motivation to be able to step in and provide a tour for the players. I am one of them, but I am not alone.

The issue with Danny Harriman is one that should be left in the past. The main issue is that Brady Behrman has not paid the players - the UPA went so far as to drastically change their sanctioning guidelines in an attempt to ensure that this situation would not occur again. Danny Harriman has gone on with his life and he is back to playing pool at the world class level again. That entire situation was the fault of many different people, situations, and misunderstandings. Leave it in the past.

As far as solidarity - the players had the opportunity a year ago to demand that they have representation with the IPT system. The point was made that the IPT was KT's show and he would not allow such a thing within his organization because he was going to deliver everything that myself and others failed to deliver for so many years. The players didn't care because the IPT promised large payouts (and not much else). IMO, nothing will change at all until the players realize that their long term security is much more important than short term cash flow. That should be the lesson that was learned over the past year and a half.
 
Blackjack said:
The problem is that nobody should be "In Charge" - there should be structure - but decisions should be based on the conscience and votes of the members of the tour. We shouldnt have anybody sitting in a glass tower calling the shots. That has never worked in the past and it will never work in the future. Am I the person for the job? Probably not.
Click to expand...
David, being "In Charge" doesn't mean you have to be in a glass tower.
Being in charge simply means that you take care of the day to day business of the organization, making minor to mid level decisions, to keep the organization running. Not every little decision can be, or should be, put to a vote.
Of course, making major decisions would be up to the membership, but the person in charge could still do the research necessary to explain the options and make recomendations.
 
JAM said:
I'm going to come out of left field and suggest Allen Hopkins as the ideal person to run a successful men's tour. He seems to ALWAYS -- and I mean ALWAYS -- have the players' interests in mind when he speaks.

On the offs, he has relayed quite a few good ideas. Hopkins to me seems very innovative, as evidenced by his annual Super Billiards Expo and co-promotion of Skins and other pool extravaganzas.

As a personal character trait I admire, he is a humble American professional player and does not need the pats on the back to make him feel whole.

Yep, I like Allen Hopkins, the player, the promoter, and the person. Whether he'd be interested in something like this, though, is another matter. Forming a legitimate governing body of men's pool is a mighty big undertaking. :o

JAM
Click to expand...

As long as he doesn't insist on a two set, one rack tie-breaker match format (ex. International Challenge of Champions), I think Hopkins could do a great job.
 
Rich R. said:
David, being "In Charge" doesn't mean you have to be in a glass tower.
Being in charge simply means that you take care of the day to day business of the organization, making minor to mid level decisions, to keep the organization running. Not every little decision can be, or should be, put to a vote.
Of course, making major decisions would be up to the membership, but the person in charge could still do the research necessary to explain the options and make recomendations.
Click to expand...

Rich

I understand how all of that works. The main issue is trust. The players need to have someone leading them that they can trust. The players need to have someone that is putting there best interests at the forefront. Anything else will not work.

We also have internal issues within the issues concerning bad blood and "this person doesn't like that person" mentality. Until everybody puts aside these differences to move forward for the best interests of the sport, we will continue to be prisoners in this "self imposed sentence on an endless treadmill". I used that same phrase 10 years ago when I wrote about the Camel Tour. Hopefully I can toss that description into the trash in exchange for progress, but it takes more than my vision - it takes everybody working together for a common goal.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top