**Is this CHEATING**

[Deadon]

I don't think any of this stuff about the "stigma" attached to Pool, has any bearing on securing sponsorship. Actaully Pool's image is much better today than it was 20 years ago. All the upscale poolrooms and seeing Pool in TV Ads and print Ads has done a lot to change the image.

If a prospective sponsor saw a possibility of reaching a larger share of their target audience through a Pool production (televised or otherwise), they would be interested. There is a long list of major sponsors whose Ads appear on the Asian broadcast of the WPC. All they know is that millions of people are watching.

If the ratings were higher on ESPN, more companies woiuld be interested in Pool shows. It's kind of a "Catch 22". Bottom line, what I have been saying for years is they have to improve the quality of this programming, show unedited matches (preferably full length) and put it on in a timely manner. Like how about same day coverage of a major pool tournament! Wouldn't that be something! How many people would watch the U.S. Open if you could see the Semis and Finals on the same day as it is played. LIVE!!!!!!
You know, treat Pool like a major sport, not like it's a Checkers tournament.

I have always said the audience is out there waiting for good shows. ESPN just hasn't given it to them yet. And probably never will. Notice when the Travel Channel starting getting big audiences for the World Poker Tour, suddenly ESPN woke up and began to telelvise multiple events from the WSOP and other "Circuit" events. DUH!

Just let Justin and Chad start to bring in 100,000 viewers every day to an event they are covering and watch the landscape change. All I got to say is "GO GET 'EM BIG BOYS!"

I must give credit to Rob Sykora of the Billiards Network. He has worked hard for years to do the same thing that The Action Report gang is doing now. He has had many technical problems with his telecasts but he persevered and got some good stuff on the air.

More credit to Justin and Chad for making their inaugural show come off as cleanly as it did. Of course they weren't asking anyone for money yet either. Hard to complain when you're getting a freebie.

On the contrary Jay, that exactly why Budweiser stopped sponsoring the large pool tournaments here in Sacramento.

 

[jay helfert]

On the contrary Jay, that exactly why Budweiser stopped sponsoring the large pool tournaments here in Sacramento.

You mean when the local Bud distributor added $1,000 to the prize fund? I was TD at those tournaments at Hard Times. That isn't exactly the kind of sponsorship I had in mind.

By the way, nothing bad happened at those events anyway. There was some after hours gambling, but no one got "cut up" and there weren't any altercations.

 

[td873]

In one ring game I played in, the rule was that the shot had to be passed clear around the ring for it to get back to the original fouler. That cuts down on the hard feelings and possible sharp practices.

This sounds like a good rule. Maybe they will implement it next year.

-td

 

[!Smorgass Bored]

I Like It, I Really Like It

Originally Posted by Bob Jewett
In one ring game I played in, the rule was that the shot had to be passed clear around the ring for it to get back to the original fouler. That cuts down on the hard feelings and possible sharp practices.

This sounds like a good rule. Maybe they will implement it next year.

-td

Me too. Someone should present it to Shooters for their consideration.
Doug
( that's why Bob Jewett gets paid the Big Bucks )

 

[NateSchoepf]

If you arent making an honest attempt then your cheating, I have seen this many times in ring games, guys think its ok to not make an honest attempt to pocket a ball, guess that really says a lot about them, THEY ARE NOT HONEST, don't care who you are a cheat is a cheat

 

[Bob Jewett]

... Someone should present it to Shooters for their consideration.
Doug
( that's why Bob Jewett gets paid the Big Bucks )

Already in progress, from what I hear.

I suppose my check is in the mail.

 

[cueaddicts]

To me bunting the ball up to conspire to shut out a third player should be considered cheating in a ring game. It is in any I've played in before anyway. But once you break down, you're out. A lot of times in a ring game the shot might not 100% anyway, so you end up having to play a two-way shot. However, this IMO is not the same as consipring with the 2nd player to shut out the 3rd....WAY DIFFERENT. Maybe the rules should be tweaked so this situation doesn't happen next time.

Shady happenings like this situation and worse are the reason many people like myself will no longer place wagers on a lot of these "professional pool players".....there's a perception out there that you can't trust them.

 

[cigardave]

a lot of these "professional pool players".....there's a perception out there that you can't trust them.

REALLY?!!!!!!!!

 

[qfancier]

........What happens in Basketball when the opposing team has an offensive player that you can not stop 1 on 1. Why, you double team him, of course. This doesn't happen just in sports or games, this happens out
in the business world as well.

Team sport versus individual sport. Big difference.

 

[td873]

By your own admission there are no rules preventing this. So it is definitely NOT cheating. Is it acceptable though, maybe not, but TECHNICALLY not cheating.

Ray
win if you can, lose if you must, but always cheat !

Wasn't my admission, I was just relating the facts. Sorry if you think that I made the scenario up. If you read the rest of the posts, you'll understand.

And all this talk about what the rules "allow" is just another excuse to cheat. These are the same people that would never call a foul on themselves if they fouled the cue ball before shooting and their opponent didn't see it. I say if you don't give up the ball-in-hand, you just cheated. But then again, some people have a very easy time justifying ethically questionable acts.

-td <-- always calls the foul on himself