John Schmidt BANNED from Viking Tour

[Flex]

I'm willing to assume John Schmidt honestly did not intend to harm anyone when he didn't show for his match but regardless of his reasons for not being there, his actions resulted in such.

Sounds to me like the problem started when he asked to have his match scheduled for later in the day, and gave his reason for the request. Might have been smarter to not have said anything and just called in sick, taking a forfeit. Asking for a rescheduling invested Mike Janis with too much power in this situation. Who is this Mike Janis anyway?

Flex

 

[j_kronz79]

r u serious

has gambling been legalized in Georgia?

banning someone for not committing an illegal act appears odd to me

for anyone that is signed up for a tourney and doesnt show without prior acknowledgement they owe any money due throughout the calcutta and entry, regadless of the legality issue, otherwise dont call and ruin it for other people such as myself that travel hundreds of miles to get involved. i myself have been forfeited by the midwest 9-ball tour and i excepted the punishment. players, especially above average, should recognize their benefit ad either call and canel or confim

 

[RSB-Refugee]

Ask it it again when pool is as big as football. When pool players make football players salaries.

The football players get paid, even if they lose. That makes a big difference IMO.

Tracy

 

[Ky Boy]

Serious Player?

FWIW, John is definitely in the wrong. I think we all understand the lacking of funds to professional pool players. However, the professional knows there is no money when they enter pool professionally. No one can make a living playing pool on tour. Except maybe Efren. And that's because he is so consistent. John made a very poor decision to blow off the match for a golf game. And no offense John but to come back and say that the bidder would not have given you any of it was, to me, a pathetic excuse. You didn't shoe up for your match so instead of taking it like a man you turn the tables on some poor gent playing it out to be his fault. And also taking a whack a Mike Janis saying he is making money off pool players. Are tournament promoters supposed to work for free and give YOU the players all the money? I used to respect you John Schmidt for alot of different reasons. I thought you were going to be one of the GREATs that would help turn the scene around by attracting more fans thus attracting more money but now I believe you are another NIT!!!!!!! We all wonder why pool will not take off and pay big dividends. Now we know that so many players don't take it seriously enough to draw big sponsors. John, I am not using this thread to take a shot at you but rather hoping you will take note of this and other replies on this subject to see what a mistake you made. If pool doesn't pay enough to hold your attention maybe you should quit and take up golf full time. It does pay more!! But golf payouts are so large because of the crowds they draw and in turn bringing in big sponsors. I hope you will take note of this!!!! Gary Gullett

 

[frankncali]

I am surprised that anyone thinks its okay for someone to tell me what I can do on MY OWN time.

The Viking Tour can be compared to other Pro tours but not justly. Players
on the PGA tour and Tennis Tour and others are bound by a contract that they signed stating what they can do.
The Viking Tour is a small regional event priced for the average ball banger not a Pro. As long as you have money you can play.
Theres a huge difference in comparing Pro sports to the Viking Tour.

While I think the above is correct it does not excuse Johns actions but I dont think Janis or anyone can do anything to a guy for simply not showing up. I mean what if he just did not feel like playing. He is not
bound to even appear for his entry but rather only to pay it.

Calcuttas(player auctions) are a gamble and I have been to many that if I player did not show for his first match then the money was returned in
full and simply deleted from the fund.
John is on his own time at this weekend OPEN event. I don think it was a good decision but then again he has that right. Mike has a right to ban him basically because he runs or owns the tour and can do what he wants. I think its nuts to forfeit both matches due to just missing the first
one.
All this could have been handled by simply giving the money back and let people think what they want about John and his reason.

I do believe that on the IPT or a Pro event of any kind where players are bound tighter with restrictions that there should be penalties but to the tour not to a spectator that made a bet on the outcome of a tournament.

 

[john schmidt]

heres what i think

boy people sure are quick to rag on me even though they were not there.if janis could not have auctions he would not have tourneys you think he just loves pool,he does them because he makes a percentage .auctions do guys like me no good because we go for high amounts so its a bad move to buy halve ourselves because we are not getting much odds on the money.then some guy who cant play and is jealous and probably hates good players anyway buys you and then acts like he owns you,it cracks me up.and for the record helfort you were not putting me in the tourney and neither was anybody else so whats with you chiming in oh thats right your a td so of course your going to take janis side because you make money off auctions too,and another thing you do not need to speak on my behalf about me expecting a piece when i win a tourney.as a matter of fact ive won around 20 tourneys that had big auctions and got jellied twice so no i dont expect shit. and as far as me acting like a professional southpaw if that was actually what i consider a pro event than maybe i would not have brought golf clubs.another thing southpaw you keep saying derogatory things about me but it seems out of the norm for you are you sure someone is not using your keyboard someone who maybe got banned from this forum .huh just something to think about.people told me years ago that wannabe nobodys who have never been able to be great at too much will secretly hate and be jeolous of people who are im starting to see what their talking about,now that ive pissed off guys like southpaw watch how much crap they bring up now bravely behind their keyboard. john schmidt

 

[Tbeaux]

Just to let you know,
If it were not for player auctions, football pools, & nascar pools I would have to apply for food stamps.
Lamar

Hey Lamar,

First regarding your football question. The advertisers and network would own that team after they sued.The fans would never attend a game again.
The players and/or owner would be banned for life and no "Hall of Fame".

Given this statement above by you I'd like to hear your thoughts. What would you think if a player you put your money on walked? Who's responsibility would you think it is to make it right, the player or the tour?
Do you think you take your chances and "oh well" this time I picked a lame horse?

I think Mike J. has been put into a difficult situation. It is bad for him, bad for the tour (and their willingness to continue having a tour), bad the backer, bad regarding the willingness of the pool room and maybe other rooms to have events, bad for John S.'s reputation, bad for the fans.


Terry

 

[watchez]

As much as I hate to say it, I totally agree with Mike Janis on this one. His ban for a player not showing up & being in a player auction/calcutta is standard practice in tournaments. Maybe Timberly never heard of this but I am sure if she took the time to ask other tours & tournament directors she would find out this is true. I am sure John Schmidt who has played in 100's of tournaments realized this before the ban. The point that Janis makes 10% off the calcutta has no basis either. Janis makes money off the tournament too. It is all part of it. John Schmidt, yes is a great player, but his playing ability should not be a factor in the decision either. If you want to compare it to other sports, Rafael Palmeiro didn't get any leeway on his illegal act just because he was a future hall of famer. Breaking a rule (and there are many unwritten ones) is still something that should be penalized. Sorry John, that you feel the whole world is jealous of your playing ability. You may play great but that doesn't make you free to do as you wish. You know why the NFL, Golf, etc are more successful sports than pool? The fans. Plain & simple. Barry Sanders quit the NFL and it still went on. If players keep doing the fans wrong then pool will never get anywhere.

 

[Ky Boy]

I did forget to mention, JMHO, that John should not be responsible for paying back the $400.m The TD or tour promoter should have given the money back. It is not John's responsibility to pay it back. But there needs to be something some kind of contract drawn up for whichever tour stating the rules while playing it that said event, not the tour. I think this would help with any players not showing up to take some heat from the people bidding on calcuttas to know that they won't lose their money if the player doesn't show. And one more thing people will stop bidding on players that show a track record of not being reliable. As long as there is some kind of measures in place to protect the player and people bidding.

 

[DaveK]

boy people sure are quick to rag on me even though they were not there.if janis could not have auctions he would not have tourneys you think he just loves pool,he does them because he makes a percentage .auctions do guys like me no good because we go for high amounts so its a bad move to buy halve ourselves because we are not getting much odds on the money.then some guy who cant play and is jealous and probably hates good players anyway buys you and then acts like he owns you,it cracks me up.and for the record helfort you were not putting me in the tourney and neither was anybody else so whats with you chiming in oh thats right your a td so of course your going to take janis side because you make money off auctions too,and another thing you do not need to speak on my behalf about me expecting a piece when i win a tourney.as a matter of fact ive won around 20 tourneys that had big auctions and got jellied twice so no i dont expect shit. and as far as me acting like a professional southpaw if that was actually what i consider a pro event than maybe i would not have brought golf clubs.another thing southpaw you keep saying derogatory things about me but it seems out of the norm for you are you sure someone is not using your keyboard someone who maybe got banned from this forum .huh just something to think about.people told me years ago that wannabe nobodys who have never been able to be great at too much will secretly hate and be jeolous of people who are im starting to see what their talking about,now that ive pissed off guys like southpaw watch how much crap they bring up now bravely behind their keyboard. john schmidt

Is this (the bolded part) a common sentiment amongst professional pool players ?

Dave

 

[JAM]

boy people sure are quick to rag on me even though they were not there....

Hey, John Schmidt, if they didn't rag on you, then you'd not be worthy of mention. However, the opposite is true. You do have a fan base which stretches from coast to coast, AND that's a good thing.

I can understand both views on this matter. Mike Janis is running a regional tour which is enjoyed by many a pool player, fans, and railbirds alike. Some regional tours will not hold calcuttas, but there's a whole bunch of people who enjoy them. It gives the railbird spectators a chance to root for their favorite horse and get in on the action, so to speak. I actually know of folks who just travel the tournament trail for the sole purpose of betting in these calcuttas or player auctions.

John Schmidt is a prominent pool player, one who has gained quite a following. He's been on TV, won several championship titles, and has the capability to be a tournament soldier AND an action player. Who can forget John playing Alex Pagulayan in 14.1 at the DCC?! He is, by all accounts, a very talented player of all games. However, in this day and age, being a good pool player does not pay the bills; that is, unless you're sponsored by one of the few industry members out there who can afford it. As an independent entity, John Schmidt is entitled to do whatever he deems is in his own interests; that is, unless he is a paid participant/competitor.

FWIW, as I was reading this thread, my counterpart told me the EXACT SAME THING happened to him in Georgia, ironically, many moons ago. He was due for his match, but for whatever reason, unbeknownst to me at the time of this writing, he was a no-show. He ended up paying the calcutta bidder a whopping 400 bucks. Though he wasn't happy about it, he received a lot of heat and decided this was the right thing to do in this instance.

Maybe in the future when these calcuttas or player auctions are in force, the player should be asked whether or not they want to be included in it. This may help to eliminate any problems.

I must say, though, that MANY, MANY, MANY tournament competitors actually count these calcutta monies as a means of income. They bid on themselves or buy half of themselves. If they are given this option, I think they should also be given the option to opt out of the calcutta altogether. Tournament directors are the ultimate authority for sure, but players do have rights, too. They are not bound by any agreement to remain throughout the duration of an event. Just a little food for thought to enter into the fray on this fine Monday morning.

John, you're still tops in my book, and, Mike Janis, you're the best.

JAM

 

[chefjeff]

Who started this problem? That is, there wasn't a problem with anyone until ________did _________. There's your answer right there.

Jeff Livingston

 

[CaptainJR]

This surprises me a little. I'm not saying that I am on anyone's side. I'm just a little surprised that a "tour" would have a Calcutta. I know that Tiger Planet Pool doesn't and they don't just do it for fun either. So it isn't like a Calcutta is a requirement to make enough money to hold the tournaments. Yes, I'm using the term Calcutta. A Calcutta is a slang term for players auction. They are one in the same.

I think it is legal in most stats as long as it is only the players making the wager. Can't have spectators bidding. I only heard of players auctions a more private tournaments, not tour events. Maybe it is more common that I know about.

They might consider one thing though and I pointed this out at an event a while back. I was at an event that had a Calcutta. A few days later a friend and I were discussing the tournament and he mentioned about how well the youngster had done and he was only 13 years old. I said, yes he did well, but, not that I care but if I were you the next time I would exclude him from the Calcutta.

So if a tour is going to have a players auction, I would hope they remember to exclude anyone from that auction that is under 21. It may be legal to have a player auction, but I'm pretty sure it is not legal to have someone in it that is under 21 years old.

 

[PROG8R]

redefined gambling

I played, (almost), once in a tournament that got shut down by the cops. They came in and said if the tournament started they would arrest the promoter. As far as they were concerned it was gambling with the players competing for a pot they had put up, (Gambling). IF the money was a prize with no entry fee it would be OK. (Not gambling). By the strictest sense most local pool tournaments are not legal. They even said something about the pool room owner not being a licensed sports promoter. They had all kinds of reasons why the tournament couldn't be played and most sounded pretty solid. We all just left. That is why you always see when a place like Burger King is having a contest it says, "No purchase necessary". If they require you to buy something to play it is a lottery, gambling.

Look here:
Pool as weird as it sounds is not a game of chance (not gambling). Calcutta is a bit of chance ina bizzaro world sort of way. The 400$ should have been taken form the calcutta pot and then readjusted the payout. John is a player and they don't have to finish crap if they don't want to. He paid his entry fee and his greens fee and completed his obligation to Mike janis when the cash transfered hands. He definitely should not be banned, all though he may not want to play on that tour anymore now that he has much bigger fish to fry.
JMHO

 

[Mike Templeton]

Maybe in the future when these calcuttas or player auctions are in force, the player should be asked whether or not they want to be included in it. This may help to eliminate any problems.

JAM

Hey Jam,

Mike does ask if a player wants to be included. At the beginning of every auctions, he states that if a player does not want his (or her) name included int he calcutta, let the TD know, and the persons name will be taken off the list and not included. At least that is the way it was done at every Viking event I have attended.

I agree that this is unfortunate for all parties. I saw the same thing happen a couple of years back where Earl was taken for $1200 (I believe) by a person that I know in a player auction. Earl lost a close match during the tournament, got pissed for some reason, packed his stuff and left, not showing up for, and forfeiting his one-loss side match. This auction participant was out $1200 when the field was not that tough, and Earl had a good chance to come back through the field.

Although he was upset, the bidder stated, "I guess you need to be careful who you bid on".

I don't buy the "exclusive golf course" story. John makes his living winning money. From pool, golf, and probably other areas of "gambling" expertise. He didn't go just to play golf at an "exclusive club". I don't know, but I would bet that there was a chance to win more money playing golf than there was playing pool. Otherwise, John would have been at the Pool Room 2.

It's hard to blame John for trying to make as much money as possible. He maybe should have taken his name off of the calcutta list if he knew that he would not be there for his matches. There's also nothing wrong with Mike Janis doing whatever he thinks is right, since he is the director of the tour.

The person who bought John in the auction is out $400. It's sad that it happened the way that it did, but the guy had to know that he was taking a chance of losing the cash. What if John had gotten beat his first two matches? It was not probable, but it could have happened.

Like the person who bought Earl said, "You need to be sure of who you are bidding on whe you buy someone in the calcutta". How true.

Mike

 

[macguy]

Look here:
Pool as weird as it sounds is not a game of chance (not gambling). Calcutta is a bit of chance ina bizzaro world sort of way. The 400$ should have been taken form the calcutta pot and then readjusted the payout. John is a player and they don't have to finish crap if they don't want to. He paid his entry fee and his greens fee and completed his obligation to Mike janis when the cash transfered hands. He definitely should not be banned, all though he may not want to play on that tour anymore now that he has much bigger fish to fry.
JMHO

That incident took place in Florida. Although I don't know the exact details, I believe the Florida tour today has to do something like give a percent of the money to charity to make it legal to even hold a tournament. Although small potatoes and who really cares, to the best of my knowledge they can shut down most pool tournaments based on a host of legal issues.
One being in most cities or counties you have to pull a permit to put on any kind of public event such as a small carnival or art show, what ever and forget about a calcutta. I wouldn't want to be Mr. Janis trying to explain to a states attorney or judge the difference between a calcutta and a players auction and why it isn't gambling add to that the fact that he takes his act from state to state triggering I would guess a few federal issues.
Again, it is small potatoes and no one cares.
The IPT is another thing though. I would expect to see people who have it in for KT to be looking at what he does very closely and if any of what goes on around the everyday pool tournament, Gambling, callcuttas and so on go on there, it may bring down a lot of grief on them.

 

[ScottW]

My $.02 -

Full disclosure - I'm I suppose a "wannabe newbie" as far as this level of pool goes. The little local tournaments I've played in don't run calcuttas, so I have no real experience with'em.

That said - if a player enters an event and agrees to participate in a function of said event (calcutta) that affects *other people* - i.e. the spectators buying in - and then bails on said event in a way that affects his standing in that side function - that's not good. It sounds to me like everyone knows the score when they agree to participate in the calcuttas. If Mr. Schmidt did indeed skip his match, knowing that his actions would cost some other individual his buy-in - not good.

Beyond that - a player bailing on an event due to the calcutta affects the calcutta as a whole, does it not, as it well could affect the end rankings of the tournament. Player X is set to play Player Y, and the winner of that match, Player Z. X, if he played, could well beat Y and Z. But X bails - letting Y play Z, etc. The end results of the tournament could well be different than if X had stuck it out. (And yes, they could be identical - X could have played and lost, and every other match come out the same way). So players bailing don't just affect the folks who bought in for them - they very well could affect many other people, those folks who bought-in on people who lasted through later rounds. THAT'S not good either.

I don't know Mr. Schmidt and I'm not going to rip on him (except for maybe, use some punctuation! Your posts are hard to read ), and I barely know Mike (three or four conversations in person recently). But it sounds to me like Mike made the correct call, in general. I don't know that banning Mr. Schmidt from his tour was over-the-top or not - but it's not my call, it's not my tour.

I do wonder, though, whether how calcuttas are run should be looked over and revised in some way, to better protect against situations that spawned this ginormous thread. Some folks suggested that the calcutta fund simply refund the buy-ins to the folks affected - and that sounds like a reasonable policy to me. BUT - I don't know enough about how these systems are run to say whether or not it's a workable option. If anyone wants to PM me (or even, just start a new thread, for everyone's benefit) with the details on how calcuttas are run, I'd love to get a better understanding. I would wager (har! puns), however, that this situation is nowhere *near* a new situation, and that people have wrestled with this issue many times in the past and have considered many variations of the system - and that the current model, however flawed and vulnerable, may be the best-of-breed. *shrug*

 

[Southpaw]

boy people sure are quick to rag on me even though they were not there.if janis could not have auctions he would not have tourneys you think he just loves pool,he does them because he makes a percentage .auctions do guys like me no good because we go for high amounts so its a bad move to buy halve ourselves because we are not getting much odds on the money.then some guy who cant play and is jealous and probably hates good players anyway buys you and then acts like he owns you,it cracks me up.and for the record helfort you were not putting me in the tourney and neither was anybody else so whats with you chiming in oh thats right your a td so of course your going to take janis side because you make money off auctions too,and another thing you do not need to speak on my behalf about me expecting a piece when i win a tourney.as a matter of fact ive won around 20 tourneys that had big auctions and got jellied twice so no i dont expect shit. and as far as me acting like a professional southpaw if that was actually what i consider a pro event than maybe i would not have brought golf clubs.another thing southpaw you keep saying derogatory things about me but it seems out of the norm for you are you sure someone is not using your keyboard someone who maybe got banned from this forum .huh just something to think about.people told me years ago that wannabe nobodys who have never been able to be great at too much will secretly hate and be jeolous of people who are im starting to see what their talking about,now that ive pissed off guys like southpaw watch how much crap they bring up now bravely behind their keyboard. john schmidt

So basically you are saying that TDs like janis should travel on the road for 6-8 months at a time, away from family and friends and life as they know it, to hold these tournies for guys like you and them do it for free? You would really love that huh John? You cry and whine all the time about your integrity and credibility and how "professional" pool players dont get paid enough or get the respect that the sport deserves....well guess what buddy...this kind of crap is why! If you were a top "professional" in any other sport and pulled this little no show game....you would have been fined a hell of a lot more than $400. What you did was just a complete lack of respect for another person. You knew what you were doing and you knew that some poor soul was gonna suffer. Maybe you just thought that janis would refund his money to him, but you still knew that your decision and lack of "professionalism" would have an affect on another person. As for me, well maybe i am a pool player wanna-be, but its people like me that want to play and see the game played correctly that keep the game going in small towns and pool rooms....not guys like you that think since they are on top of the sport that they can do whatever the hell they want to and everyone is just supposed to kiss their ass and forget it. It all comes down to one word..."PROFESSIONAL". Are you one or not??

Southpaw

 

[Southpaw]

Also john, no one else is using my keyboard. i was at the tourney when you pulled this stunt.

Southpaw

 

[jjinfla]

I suppose the only way to settle this is for someone there to forward this thread to the local Detectives with the dates of the next tournament. Then they can come and watch and you all can get a professional opinion.

If it is illegal then Mike Janis is not only putting himself in jeopardy but also the owner of the pool room.

Most likely the police do not want to bother with it but if someone files a complaint then they will be forced to take some action.

As MacGuy said, if there is 100% payout of the calcutta money then it is most likely legal. Or, at least, not illegal. But if the person running it keeps $1.00 then it most likely is not legal. I don't know.

The real loser would be the owner of the pool hall. He could find himself shut down for a week or two pending a hearing.

Jake