nfty9er said:
Not if the referees are paid on a contract basis.
IPT refs and what happened to me!!!!
- Thread starter Grady
- Start date
Not if the referees are paid on a contract basis.
Oh yeah, forgot to add. Attacking Grady over his issue with the bad call by throwing his tournament record around is not only slimy, but it is a logically flawed argument as well as rude and irrelevant.
It doesn't matter if a person wins a single rack or not - a bad call like that should not be made. No one should be cheated like that, whether it be the last place finished with a horrible record, or Marlon Manalo - with an excellent record. That's bias. People tend to value the effects of a bad call so much more when they feel it is more relevant to the outcome of tournament. That isn't the right way to think. Rules are like laws - they are applied equally. They effect everyone the same regardless of status.
It doesn't matter if a person wins a single rack or not - a bad call like that should not be made. No one should be cheated like that, whether it be the last place finished with a horrible record, or Marlon Manalo - with an excellent record. That's bias. People tend to value the effects of a bad call so much more when they feel it is more relevant to the outcome of tournament. That isn't the right way to think. Rules are like laws - they are applied equally. They effect everyone the same regardless of status.
I have just read a bit of this
I haven't read every post but what the heck happened to hits that are too close to call going in favor of the shooter? This one doesn't even look like it should have been that close of a call though. I think the ref decided before you shot that the eightball couldn't be made legally. It went in so he claimed foul.
It does seem that ref's with cranial anal inversion are altering the outcome of matches. Manalo's deal in the last IPT was much the same. As softly as he shot there is no way to tell if he brushed the object ball passing by. I don't have a solution except better ref's because of bloom and glare even overhead cameras would not solve these issues much of the time. Manalo was taken completely out of his game. I haven't looked at the scoring if it is available but would he even had to win the match with Efren if he had won the one with Bustamonte?
Grady, it surely looks like you got the gooey end of the stick. I try to dodge judged competition just because of incidents like this but of course that isn't always possible. I'm not real confident that the IPT will be around long but I am sure hoping you take a chunk of change out of it before it dies, of course if it dies.
Hu
I haven't read every post but what the heck happened to hits that are too close to call going in favor of the shooter? This one doesn't even look like it should have been that close of a call though. I think the ref decided before you shot that the eightball couldn't be made legally. It went in so he claimed foul.
It does seem that ref's with cranial anal inversion are altering the outcome of matches. Manalo's deal in the last IPT was much the same. As softly as he shot there is no way to tell if he brushed the object ball passing by. I don't have a solution except better ref's because of bloom and glare even overhead cameras would not solve these issues much of the time. Manalo was taken completely out of his game. I haven't looked at the scoring if it is available but would he even had to win the match with Efren if he had won the one with Bustamonte?
Grady, it surely looks like you got the gooey end of the stick. I try to dodge judged competition just because of incidents like this but of course that isn't always possible. I'm not real confident that the IPT will be around long but I am sure hoping you take a chunk of change out of it before it dies, of course if it dies.
Hu
ShootingArts said:
There are very few shots that can be too close to call. I think the shot illustrated is not one of them.
If the shot shown on Grady's page is possible with a foul (hit the 14 first), then it is also possible without a foul.
I wonder how you know what the referee was thinking.
Bob, read what you just quoted . . .
I plainly said that this is what I think happened. This is my thought based on my past experience. I do know what I was thinking. Nobody knows for sure what the ref was thinking or if he was even thinking or observing. He was there. Was he paying attention? What was he paying attention to, if anything?
I have seen ref's decide that there is no legal way to do something and then call a foul based purely on where the balls go. I think this is what happened in Grady's case too.
Hopefully you have been able to better follow this reply where I incorporated visual aids.
Hu
I plainly said that this is what I think happened. This is my thought based on my past experience. I do know what I was thinking. Nobody knows for sure what the ref was thinking or if he was even thinking or observing. He was there. Was he paying attention? What was he paying attention to, if anything?
I have seen ref's decide that there is no legal way to do something and then call a foul based purely on where the balls go. I think this is what happened in Grady's case too.
Hopefully you have been able to better follow this reply where I incorporated visual aids.
Hu
Bob Jewett said:
Bad idea. I'm betting that few of those people have ever been a ref or understand what a ref has to do. And they probably don't know the rules. They would just make things worse.cigardave said:
Well ma'am
Wow, quite a launch off of a two line quote. Actually I have been an official at a variety of events including pool tournaments. It is a thankless job and one I have always done without pay. I do occasionally tell a ref "good job" or "good call" even when it goes against me. I also have been known to tell them to their face that they blew a call when there is no doubt in my mind that it was a bad call. I do wait until after the event to tell them they had their head in their rear however unless the problem is that they didn't understand a rule.
I have been on both sides of the issue, or I should say all sides: I have been the player that was the victim of a wrong call, I have corrected bad calls by a ref that helped me, and I have been a ref.
Calls that were impossible to judge always went to the shooter when I was the official. That doesn't appear to be the way some of the IPT ref's are calling things.
"Grady, it surely looks like you got the gooey end of the stick." My quote makes it plain that I said it looked like he got the gooey end of the stick. Did he really? I don't know and you don't know. Because of video bloom and glare even an overhead shot doesn't necessarily tell the truth with light colored and shiny balls when things are very close.
I had an disagreement with an opponent at the pool hall recently. I had to pass extremely close to another ball to make a shot, too close for me to tell if I could make it legally but I went for it with both of us watching the shot closely. When I shot I called foul and came off of the table. My opponent disagreed, saying the ball didn't move. I was the one with the focus on the shot with the three balls close together and I saw the illegal ball rock the tiniest fraction of an inch and settle back exactly where it had been. Two possibilities exist. Either I touched it with the cue ball in passing or the ball considerately dodged that few thousandths of an inch.
Which do you think happened ma'am? Often only the shooter knows for sure.
Hu
Wow, quite a launch off of a two line quote. Actually I have been an official at a variety of events including pool tournaments. It is a thankless job and one I have always done without pay. I do occasionally tell a ref "good job" or "good call" even when it goes against me. I also have been known to tell them to their face that they blew a call when there is no doubt in my mind that it was a bad call. I do wait until after the event to tell them they had their head in their rear however unless the problem is that they didn't understand a rule.
I have been on both sides of the issue, or I should say all sides: I have been the player that was the victim of a wrong call, I have corrected bad calls by a ref that helped me, and I have been a ref.
Calls that were impossible to judge always went to the shooter when I was the official. That doesn't appear to be the way some of the IPT ref's are calling things.
"Grady, it surely looks like you got the gooey end of the stick." My quote makes it plain that I said it looked like he got the gooey end of the stick. Did he really? I don't know and you don't know. Because of video bloom and glare even an overhead shot doesn't necessarily tell the truth with light colored and shiny balls when things are very close.
I had an disagreement with an opponent at the pool hall recently. I had to pass extremely close to another ball to make a shot, too close for me to tell if I could make it legally but I went for it with both of us watching the shot closely. When I shot I called foul and came off of the table. My opponent disagreed, saying the ball didn't move. I was the one with the focus on the shot with the three balls close together and I saw the illegal ball rock the tiniest fraction of an inch and settle back exactly where it had been. Two possibilities exist. Either I touched it with the cue ball in passing or the ball considerately dodged that few thousandths of an inch.
Which do you think happened ma'am? Often only the shooter knows for sure.
Hu
PoolChick said:
Bola Ocho said:
I agree that winning percentage doesn't matter. Far and away, the refs did a fantastic job of reffing over the long, arduous days. But the 2 botched calls against myself and Mike Z. (and Grady's if it was a foul) were very apparent. As far as I know, there was only one other call like this.
You can say it should be very easy to shake it off, but when it means the difference of going on or losing that match or even that round, or when it happens in the first match of your round, and you are playing back to back to back matches, it is very difficult to shrug off a hard loss like that, especially given the prize money at stake.
Once you lose due to a faulty call, it is not just one game, but a 2 game swing; that is difficult to overcome, score-wise. If you are feeling low or dejected, it is not easy to shake it off and not take it in with you to the next match, especially when the next match is right away.
Who knows what the players' scores and statistics might have been without the bad call? Myself, personally, I may never have won against Mike Sigel, but I also may not have felt pounded all day going into my next matches either. The same with Mike Z and Grady. So I submit that lowered statistics may be a result of the bad calls, not in spite of them.
Have all 3 of us learned from these incidents? Absolutely! As everyone is quick to point out, it is only one game - and being paid as pros, we need to muster up the fortitude to put it behind us, no matter what happens and play our best pool. If something occurs which feels unfair, well, hey, life is unfair and we just have to work that much harder to get where we want to go.
It was a valuable lesson for me.
Blue_chalk
Registered
rackmsuckr said:
Linda, I have respect for you but to call a missed shirt call a "botched call" is duplicitous. It SHOULD have been called, I agree. However, the fact of the matter is that you are not skilled enough to beat Mike nor almost any other pro player on the table. If a shirt foul is all you have to blame your poor performance for the ENTIRE tournament on...I think you're kidding yourself. This was my point with Grady too.
If a bad call is made on a pro player (no matter the sport) it inspires the heart of a true champion. If a bad call were made on Efren Reyes would he go on to lose four consecutive matches because of it...I doubt it. He would redouble his efforts and increase his determination.
Blue_chalk said:
It was a botched call. And it did affect my performance. I learned from it, I am over it. I feel I am skilled enough to beat just about anyone, just not consistent enough (read missed shots), especially in long races, because pool is not my day job.
In my last match, I was down 3-7 to a qualifier. I took a break and said to myself, "Listen, you have dragged around here all day. Get up off your a$$ and play like you can!"
He broke dry. I ran out. I then broke and ran out the next 2 racks, came up dry on my next break, he made a few balls, then I ran out an incredibly tough rack that had John Schmidt cheering. That makes 4 games in a row I ran out.
When I broke dry next game, my opponent ran out down to the 8 and missed. I had the opportunity to run out for the win. I rushed up to the table and was so excited. I should have taken a drink or something, but I rushed and botched the runout. More experience and consistency would have let me finish the job.
No, I am not blaming my stats on anything but my own poor performance and I am realistic as to where I stand. I probably would have lost all my matches anyway. But I know they could have been a lot closer, as I had chances many times.
In fact, for the shirt foul, it would have been 6-4 with me breaking instead of putting Sigel on the hill, which pumped him up and deflated me. Why do you think Sigel started talking so much when it was 2-2?
Also, the post you are referring to was also referencing my husband, who had an equally horrendous call on him, and it did affect his performance in the first match of the 2nd round. That he can play should not be in dispute as he was the leader out of his first round that included Keith McCready, Cliff Joyner, Warren Kiamco and Brian Saleh.
Last edited:
Bob Jewett said:
Bob, I believe there is a middle ground. I would rather have a 10 to 12 excellent referees who each worked (oversaw) a portion of the tournament floor, as opposed to dozens of unqualified referees who are liable to miss calls and make errors that affect the outcome of matches.
Even in a tournament of this size, a few well qualified individuals could have handled most of the calls on close hits etc. I've run very big tournaments (with hundreds of players) and rather than get volunteers to ref, I hire four or five good referees. You know, guys like you!
When I heard Charlie called Deno on the phone to make a call, my head started spinning. If you can't make the call, you shouldn't be out there, plain and simple.
At the last U.S. Opens that I worked with Scott Smith (1998-9) there were fields of 256 players. I was personally responsible for watching as many as eight or more tables at a time. No problem and once or twice where two tables demanded my attention, I asked players on one table to hold up until I made a call on the other table.
There are always racking wars that have to be handled, but there are solutions for them too. I won't go into that now. If I could have four or five guys like you and Pat Fleming and Tom Suarez and Evelyn Dysart, there wouldn't be any squawking about the refs. There are probably only about 15 to 20 well qualified referees in the whole U.S. No offense to the BCA program, but there is nothing like 15-20 years of experience to learn how to offiiciate Pool.
The only ref I saw out there (in the brief time I was there) at the Venetian, that I knew was good was Ken Shuman.
jay helfert said:
Most of those criticizing the referees are comparing this event to a typical weekend double elimination tournament. This event is completely different in almost every way. The demands on the referee staff for the IPT tournaments are very different from what others have had to referee under. You can find some of those differences in my previous posts on this subject.
ineedaspot said:
I think "ineedaspot" brings up a valid point. In your opinion, Grady, would that have been a physical possibility? I'm not trying to be disrespectful. On the contrary, I have tremendous respect for you.
Its just that, looking at the diagram, it seems possible to thin the 14, then hit the 8, then bump the 14 over to the X. If only the "paint" of the 14 was thinned, it might have been easy not to notice it move before hitting the 8.
Just bringing it up for your consideration. If that was possibility, it might give you closure.
Either way, you're right, the ref should have been standing over the shot, not behind you, as you said. Also, if the ref saw it hit 14-8-14, he should have explained that that was the reason for his call. Although its possible he was shook up and not thinking completely clearly if it escalated into a controversy.
Anyway, hope you don't take this as me being against you. I hope the whole thing turns into a positive motivation for you, and you snap off the next one.
Blue_chalk said:
Blue Chalk,
What does your statements in bold have anything to do with the discussion? A players performance has ZERO to do with the performance of the officating. Is that so hard to understand?
If we applied your rationale, then the referees should take note of a persons win percentage and factor that into their decision making. Sounds absurd doesn't it?
If this were a court of law (which it isn't, but the method by which you should argue is the same), a statement like that is totally irrelevent.
It is like saying that a woman who got raped can't really complain all that much because she was wearing a slutty outfit. Same exact mentality.
Now, if the player in question goes around saying "omg - I lost the $350,000 because of a bad call in round 1, match 2, game 3" then that statement is out of line, but whatever. And no, I don't think that statement is absurd because I don't think the player has a legitmate chance to actually advance to the $350,000 (that would be bashing the player's skill to make an argument against the relevance and importance of the bad officating, that's called a straw-man argument)...I'd find it absurd for anyone to say that in an early round, including Manalo, Hohmann..you name it. No one can really say that. It would be nutz for anyone to claim.
