Williebetmore said:
S-Star,
You, my man, are a fricking legal genius. Kudo's.
actually, i did destroy the analytical and logical sections on the LSATs a long time ago.
It would actually be interesting to get the take of some female pool players about their willingness to continue to play for someone who had been so hostile and impolite to them...it might be different for the females. There is a physical intimidation aspect for females in such situations that many of the posters may not have initially considered.
In addition, I also am struck by the extremely Christian tones of many of the posters (not you, your tone is exactly correct). Their criticism seems so aggressive that it is hard to imagine them just kindly turning the other cheek and playing for someone who insulted them. I would love to hear some examples of such passive behavior (it doesn't seem to fit well with the tones of their other posts, but I have an open mind).
I think your thoughts on the matter are more representative of the board as a whole. JMO.
You always have to look at both sides.
I just have my views from my experiences. I have seen both the good and bad of calcuttas.
That being said, i think that the introduction of calcuttas has the potential to alter the outcomes of tournaments, which is not a good thing in my opinion.
You effectively change the whole tournament format, from being a 1 man vs the room scenario, to a "team" scenario, and sometimes, those teams are not good at collaborating together. Or imagine when a scumbag guy you HATE, who knows you hate him, buys you in a tournament. (seen that happen enough times)
But ultimately, there is nothing that the player can do that is going to affect the "performance" of the buyer. It is a done deal, and they buyer can go do handstands, or go hang out on the toilet for an hour, or go pitch quarters in the parking lot.
But there is PLENTY that the buyer can do, to affect (for better or worse) the performance of the player, and i think that too many times, the buyer, either just doesn't realize it, or is just too ignorant or stupid to understand it, and they think that they make all the rules simply because they purchased someone. Like they actually OWN the player. And that's just wrong.
Bottom line is, if there were no calcuttas, you would have no problems of this nature. End of story.
Problems only happen when the calcuttas are introduced.
And, the majority of calcuttas aren't done for the players or the buyers. Most of the time, they are done, so the guy or girl doing them, can take a cut and make their 10% for simply announcing some crap over the microphone.