JJ forfeits to San Souci in World Summit

Kerry Impson

Kerry Impson

Former player
Silver Member
Does anybody know why, in the middle of his match against George San Souci, Jeremy Jones unscrewed his cue and walked out? Seems uncharacteristic - I was just reading in Billiards Digest how he never gives up, overcoming great deficits in the Big Apple Challenge to beat the likes of Souquet and Morris. :confused:
 
I wasn't there when the match took place. I didn't hear much but I'll share what I did learn. The main order of business is the question of whether JJ forfeited in the middle of the match because of some ailment or out of disgust. I was told that after a poor break in rack 6, trailing 5 - 0, he unscrewed out of disgust. Of course, that was merely the opinion of the person to whom I spoke, but it is most likely the case.

I'm sure this absolutely deligthed the NYC locals that came because they wanted to watch popular local SanSouci play, and paid money for the privilege. Surely, in the eyes of the NYC fan Ginky vs a US Open champion is a marquis matchup, but it got cut short. In August, Ronnie Wiseman was in the draw, was sold in the Calcutta, but was not, apparently, in New York, and Ginky won that match by default, too. The locals who came to watch Ginky got the shaft that day, too.

Assuming that my friend was right and that Jeremy Jones quit simply out of disgust, shame on Jeremy! Is this really any different than a baseball team leaving the ballpark because they trail 12 - 1 in the fifth inning?

Whether it's Scott Frost, who takes showing up for a US Open match lightly, or Earl Strickland, who forfeited a tournament final out of disgust over the racks, or Jeremy Jones, who appears to take completing a match too lightly, the men pros seem to go out of their way to prove they just don't get it.

Too many men pros ignore, through their conduct, the fact that they are offering entertainment for which people are paying, and that they, therefore, have a responsibility to the game and its paying customers. When all is said and done, too many men pros are doing what they can to ensure they will never be taken seriously and that they will, far too often, alienate their fan base.

Are these men pros selfish, classless, or clueless? You make the call.
 
Last edited:
sjm said:
Jeremy Jones, who appears to take completing a match too lightly, the men pros seem to go out of their way to prove they just don't get it.

Are these men pros selfish, classless, or clueless? You make the call.
Click to expand...

SJM,
Jeremy can be found on an Accu-Stats tape bemoaning the low pay for the highly skilled players. It's obvious - they are clueless. You have to build the game before it will enrich you.
 
sjm said:
<snip>

Are these men pros selfish, classless, or clueless? You make the call.
Click to expand...

Not selfish, or they'd know that they're hurting themselves the most. Maybe classless and clueless, depending on individual circumstances.

I've never attended a pro event, and these recent shenanigans sure don't encourage me to go to one anytime soon, I'll tell you that.

It seems to me that the promoters have contracts with the players and the spectators have contracts (tickets for specified entertainment) with the promoters. This leaves the promoters stuck in the middle to solve their contract problems either way, doesn't it?

Can't the promoters create a player contract that penalizes early withdrawals? It could include exceptions for illness, etc. but to just quit without warning?--that's unacceptable, I'd think.

If I were a promoter of tournaments, I'd have to protect myself with insurance, or something that would ensure spectators (the ones who make all this possible with their money) get what they're paying for.

If I were a spectator and, in this example, I wanted to watch a pro who just up and quit, I'd demand a refund of some sort. No different than if a restuarant didn't give me what I ordered. If I didn't get it, I'd take my dollars elsewhere next time.

Perhaps the pros who quit need a lesson in business 101, because whether they know it or not, by nature they're businessmen first and players second. The Black Widow knows this well and would be someone to emulate, imho.

I forget who said it, but 80% of success is simply showing up.

Jeff Livingston
 
Thanks, sjm, your input and observations are always appreciated. I agree with you and chefjeff that there should be consequences for fofeiting a match - especially for quitting in the middle of one - and hitting 'em in the wallet might be the best way. The UPA should handle unsportsmanlike conduct the same way the WPBA does, levying fines for such behavior. (Apparently they do not currently.) Sure, it's open to some subjectivity, but I believe when the players have to consistently pay for any misconduct and are held accountable for it, they will clean up their acts. Not to mention that fining also generates money for the association. Truly a win-win situation! :p
 
The UPA points list is used to determine invites to major events like Mosconi Cup, WPC and the BCA Open. I think players who forfeit a match should forfeit any points they would have gotten from the tournament. Even if the player forfeits out of the winners side and then wins the event, there should be no points awarded. I bet the players who think twice about forfeiting matches then.

Mike
 
sjm said:
Of course, that was merely the opinion of the person to whom I spoke, but it is most likely the case.









.
Click to expand...
It's still just an opinion of one observer, right? It doesn't sound like something Jeremy would do just because he's losing, and that's my opinion. We'll soon find out.
 
Rude Dog said:
It's still just an opinion of one observer, right? It doesn't sound like something Jeremy would do just because he's losing, and that's my opinion. We'll soon find out.
Click to expand...

Crazy i can't understand why he did that.But the funny thing is that he is still in . And tryng to win the whole thing.Pool will never change ..
 
deadstroke32 said:
Crazy i can't understand why he did that.But the funny thing is that he is still in . And tryng to win the whole thing.Pool will never change ..
Click to expand...


Yeah, it's nuts. Simple way to prevent it is that if you quit in the middle of the match you are done for the tournament. You shouldn't get to go to the losers side. I wouldn't do that if the final few balls were conceded to an opponent on the hill tho. But if you quit in the middle you should be done for the tourn.
 
I agree with you, If they want the sport to be bigger, more status, more PAY, the pro players should act different. But the promotors cann't do anything about a player quits.

It's the players option. They are not baseball, football, etc..... players. The promotors don't pay them.

These players put up a couple of hundred dollars of their own money with a big chance of not winning anything.

Now if they have a sponsor, ok the sponsor has issues or rights, it's their money.

Until you pay the players, for playing, them they act anyway they want. They can quit, they can complain, I think you get the picture.

I know we all want the sport to be different but you cann't blame the players. I would never act like that. But then again, I'm not competing in mayor pro tourneys, with my own money.

Just my opion.
 
sheaprek said:
Until you pay the players, for playing, them they act anyway they want. They can quit, they can complain, I think you get the picture. I know we all want the sport to be different but you cann't blame the players. I would never act like that. But then again, I'm not competing in mayor pro tourneys, with my own money.
Click to expand...

That's the game's Catch-22. Some of them won't play until they are paid, but who will pay them if they cannot rely on the best efforts of the players in trying to entertain the paying customers?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top