Jeanette Lee's version - it's different

[Williebetmore]

But Billy, when did this happen? After winning a couple of matches? That is the REAL dispute. You and I both know if you don't buy in before the first ball is hit, there is no claim to buy half of yourself after that. If the guy is nice enough, maybe. But, he doesn't have to.

Fish-man,
As JL put in her explanation, she absolutely agrees the buyer had NO obligation to sell to her at any point. He absolutely did not have to do it (but surely she can be excused for trying to follow up on what she thought was his agreement to sell half despite the later and later nature of the situation). She would have been pleased to continue had he just said no (it was the bellicosity and rudeness that caused the situation, not any dispute about his right to sell or not). I think she would agree with your principles regarding Calcutta's (and I'm sure she's very sorry not to have followed them).

 

[Bigtruck]

Just for you!

Holy crap !!!!! is that the biggest damn turkey leg you ever saw or what.=)


And they said Dwarfs were a mythical creatures.........


I told SVB to lay off the steroids......


Im thinking thats the short arm of the law in that house......


Is there any good reason this thread is still breathing. Shes a deva hes a woman beater its over can we get back too somthing important like I dont know whos got the best 6 rail aiming system....

Well crap the pitchure didnt come with his quote...I think its on page 5or 6

Yeah, I attach my photos and they don't quote that way. Here ya go.

 

[crawfish]

Lets say that it is true that Brian Gross approached the buyer and said that JL wanted to buy half of herself and he agreed. So this is now not the rules of a calcutta and how it is supposed to be run. This is now about an agreement that two people have, and should be honored. So if this is the way it really came down, then it's clear to me who's at fault.

If you read both of their versions, there were matches played before they asked the guy (or told the guy she wanted half). He offered in the beginning, she "wanted to check the payout and brackets". Did she go find him before the matches started? If I buy you in a calcutta and you don't want half, then win a few, get to the final 5 or 6, and then ask me to get in, is that right? Even the owner said that the guy wasn't heard being out of line to the point of someone stepping in. That leads me to believe "payback" for not saying yes is what went down. Maybe not. We'll never know all of this. But, if I were a juror and I had to decide on all evidence so far, he'd get my ruling. Didn't cost me a dime either way, so I'm just offering an opinion.

 

[Bigtruck]

Fish-man,
As JL put in her explanation, she absolutely agrees the buyer had NO obligation to sell to her at any point. He absolutely did not have to do it (but surely she can be excused for trying to follow up on what she thought was his agreement to sell half despite the later and later nature of the situation). She would have been pleased to continue had he just said no (it was the bellicosity and rudeness that caused the situation, not any dispute about his right to sell or not). I think she would agree with your principles regarding Calcutta's (and I'm sure she's very sorry not to have followed them).

One thing that bothers me is........it seems when he didn't surface after 2 pages, it would've been clear that he was no longer splitting. At that point, why did she even approach him except to say WTF or something.

I still say, if she had just left the $70 with The TD when she asked him to page Tompnation, we wouldn't even be having this discussion.

The GOOD that has came out of this thread is......now many more people understand calcutta procedures! LOL

I think they BOTH owe each other an apology and a hug.

Next

Ray

 

[crawfish]

Fish-man,
As JL put in her explanation, she absolutely agrees the buyer had NO obligation to sell to her at any point. He absolutely did not have to do it (but surely she can be excused for trying to follow up on what she thought was his agreement to sell half despite the later and later nature of the situation). She would have been pleased to continue had he just said no (it was the bellicosity and rudeness that caused the situation, not any dispute about his right to sell or not). I think she would agree with your principles regarding Calcutta's (and I'm sure she's very sorry not to have followed them).

I still would like to know what was said. The owner made it very clear that he heard no rudeness and the guy has always been cordial and great at every other event. Hey, I'm going only on evidence we have here. Ah, to hell with it. It doesn't affect me either way. I just hate that people think because someone is in the public eye constantly, they do no wrong or make no bad judgement calls. Without ANY of the calcutta crap, she still walked out of a tournament. If the guy, and from everyone's version, was being that terrible, he would have been asked to leave, right?

 

[ShootingArts]

great idea!!

I think they BOTH owe each other an apology and a hug.

Next

Ray

I think I'd buy Jeanette for that price and get in an argument just for the hug!

George? George? I was only joking George.

Hu

 

[wincardona]

out of here

This thread has generated a lot of interest about something too trivial to to be this overly concerned about. I have some problems that need my immediate attention and would love to have their problems in trade, but I know that can't happen. I'm out of here.

 

[Bigtruck]

This thread has generated a lot of interest about something too trivial to to be this overly concerned about. I have some problems that need my immediate attention and would love to have their problems in trade, but I know that can't happen. I'm out of here.

I vote we ALL join Billy and move on! LOL

Hope your issues work out ok Billy!

Ray

 

[Yancey]

The buyer did offer.

JL wanted to "evaluate".

She snoozed and loozed (?)

"calcutta buyer" gets RUDE (which is the issue)

JL decides that she does not have to make any asshat rich.

Which cracks me up!

 

[jasonlaus]

Daniel, with all due respect, what exactly is "erroneous" about my statement:

"When one of the most popular, successful women in pool gives her side of a calcutta incident gone awry, replete with available witnesses, who do many people side with?"

She gave her account thru Willebetmore (Don), stating there were witnesses to the agreement.

A deal is a deal in my book, period. I see other's viewpoints as well; others that have far more experience in calcuttas than I.

Then when she gets knocked out of tourney and doesn't pay it's his fault he didn't make her post right? Sorry but she's wrong and that's that.

 

[TheNewSharkster]

The buyer did offer.

JL wanted to "evaluate".

She snoozed and loozed (?)

"calcutta buyer" gets RUDE (which is the issue)

JL decides that she does not have to have to make any asshat rich.

Which cracks me up!

This is how I am seeing this situation as well.

 

[jasonlaus]

Ok I know I'm one of the Newbies around here but still and all do respect to everyone .

What is the big deal here , why do you all care about what happen to other people at this tournement , I understand that Jeanette was there and is Famous but it's her business not everyone elses .

This is the type of things that really makes my skin crawl , with some people on these forums making up there own story , It's like some of you here are the Paparazzi and have to know what's going on , personaly I say get a life I mean it's seem like that's what alot of people care about . I just don't get why some of you here on AZ act like it's the end of the world because Jeanette did something that shocked a few of you , Is it going to impact or daily life ? my answer is No it's not .:scratchhead:

If you don't care and it makes your skin crawl, then why did you read 132 posts before responding?

 

[jasonlaus]

I have forgotten what the person looked like that bought me a thousand times in calcuttas. You truly are approached by everyone when you are a pro player at a tournament (i can just imagine how it is for J). Most of the time the person that buys you WANTS you to buy half, esp if they come up and ask you. I always see how much money the calcutta produces b4 i buy to see the odds I will get on my money. When you forget who bought u the next best thing is to go to the tournament director and let him know you want half. That way someone knows and they can be found to be alerted of this. At that point they should make themselves available for p[ayment if they are sweating the player being dishonest about the money, after all it is now known that the player doesn't know what they look like. A verbal deal is a deal in my book. I promise you J is not sweating the money that she owed for half herself (she has a small fortune in nail polish in her walkin closet). Sounds to me this charactor is more likely the one that was keeping one eye on every 10 bucks he had in his wallet and was trying to not give up anything after HE saw HER doing well in the tournament. Sorry this is written so sloppy< I have a meeting in about 30 minutes and gotta go> love you azers! Thats my 2 cents!

Why should you(or JL) get to see odds on the money before you pay? the buyer doesn't.

 

[woody_968]

Why should you(or JL) get to see odds on the money before you pay? the buyer doesn't.

But the buyer does decide how high to bid up the player, the player cant stop them.

I have seen tournaments where strong players are bid up to unreasonable figures and the calcutta isnt nearly big enough to make it a reasonable bet. Especially if there is only one or two strong horses in the tourney and everyone else goes for the min bid.

I wouldnt think that would be the case here, as these tourneys draw several strong players that are capable of winning. But I wasnt there to see so I cant say that for sure.

Not saying I agree or not, but I understand their thinking.

Woody

 

[jasonlaus]

But the buyer does decide how high to bid up the player, the player cant stop them.

I have seen tournaments where strong players are bid up to unreasonable figures and the calcutta isnt nearly big enough to make it a reasonable bet. Especially if there is only one or two strong horses in the tourney and everyone else goes for the min bid.

I wouldnt think that would be the case here, as these tourneys draw several strong players that are capable of winning. But I wasnt there to see so I cant say that for sure.

Not saying I agree or not, but I understand their thinking.

Woody

Then a simple NO will have to be expected. The buyer didn't get to see pot odds so the player shouldn't either.
At this point they(players) know who else is in the tourney, they shouldn't get to wait to see the draw. The calcuttas I've been involved with we have exchanged money immediately not after the draw or pot odds were calculated.

 

[DelaWho???]

It should have been dealt with at "probably"....

I'm "probably" going to buy my half???? WTF Either you are in or you are out. It can't be that $70.00 was such a huge bankroll that she couldn't swing it. What was the total value of the calcutta?

I'll never know what was said or what happened, but personally I wouldn't have taken probably for an answer. I would have pressed her at theat point and asked her if I had made a mistake buying her in the first place if her heart wasn't in the tourney. Maybe she would have broken the cue down then and we all would be spared the drama.

I'm chalking the whole thing up to Lady Problems. The whole situation is too weird to be anything but hormones. We're talking $70 bucks and an international pool star who is doing more than just pool related things over at ESPN...

If the tourney was held a week earlier or later, we wouldn't be hearing about it, because it wouldn't have happened...


Flame on

 

[pocketspeed]

does anyone even care anymore? i was hoping that all these threads would disappear in the "upgrade".

brian

 

[SUPERSTAR]

Why should you(or JL) get to see odds on the money before you pay? the buyer doesn't.

So people should blindly invest their money with no regard on the type of return they are getting?

Most business savvy pool players i know, are adding everything up on the fly in their head, or actually writing it down on paper.
They figure out 10% typical cut, and then break down the money according to the typical % that the person running the calcutta uses, and then have to factor in if the person running the calcutta is a crook or not, and is skimming a couple of extra bucks out of the pot.

This is exactly what everyone should do.

Odds on the money is what it's all about.
Now i'm sure your going to have some players who are getting backed, that just don't care, and are trying to make every extra dime they can, but i know several high end players, and name players who will NOT take any piece of themselves if their purchase price gets out of hand, simply because they are investing too much to win a little.

I can remember several instances on the Joss tour a long time ago, where the top 5 name guys, went for $500 each, and everyone else in the tournament, went for like nothing.

THEN, the guys who bought the name guys, went and approached the players EXPECTING them to take half. They then got all sorts of salty when the player/s refused and then it was complaint after complaint to anyone who would listen.
When i asked one of the players what THAT was all about (the buyer getting all irate and angry) he said that he wasn't going to spend another $250 to win like 1K, when the $100 entry fee could win him a couple of thousand.

I then watched as the different buyers solicited the room trying to lay off some of the purchase to people who initially wanted the player, and then watched as they stressed themselves out and everyone else around them the entire tournament.

Pool is business.
Smart pool players are good businesspeople.

I can totally understand any complaints about seeing the draw first before making any type of payment as that is just completely wrong.
But a player HAS to do the math before hand before they pay.

It is and always will be, in their best interest to do so if they are putting the money out.
To not do that, is just stupid business practice.